| PieterMC 24.11.2007 12:02 |
Ummmmm..... Is this a contender for worst website redesign? link Horrible fonts, over lapping text, mis-aligned elements on the page... It's like they just took a leap backwards. On the plus side at least they don't have frames anymore. |
| pittrek 24.11.2007 12:05 |
To be honest, it looks like an average fan site. But the red is TERRIBLE . |
| Crazy LittleThing 24.11.2007 12:39 |
I saw it yesterday and conjectured that it MUST be a transition page until the real new site is up. It MUST be. |
| Haystacks Calhoun II 24.11.2007 13:17 |
That's pretty poor.... |
| Erin 24.11.2007 13:35 |
pittrek wrote: To be honest, it looks like an average fan site.That's exactly what I thought. :-S |
| Tero 24.11.2007 13:40 |
At least the forum looks better right now. And the content has improved as well. ;) |
| PieterMC 24.11.2007 13:47 |
I love the new look forum. Very plain and simple. |
| hillerqueen 24.11.2007 14:28 |
Pure Awful...a band like queen should have the best website going, this looks like something someone designed on the back of an envelope. I think Jacky in the fan club should be given more staff and should take over the "official" Queen website - she has the passion to do whats right. |
| Benn 24.11.2007 15:03 |
Pieter MC, re: >>Horrible fonts, over lapping text, mis-aligned elements on the page... It's like they just took a leap backwards. >>On the plus side at least they don't have frames anymore. For someone that's been resident here for a LONG time, I'm shocked that you seem to be surprised. What do you expect from a "set of people" that can't even edit a live CD set to have the songs in the correct order that they were played. |
| Dan C. 24.11.2007 15:57 |
I can't get to the new forum... |
| Gr8 King Rat 24.11.2007 16:47 |
wow, that is pretty bad. |
| DavidRFuller 24.11.2007 16:51 |
I didn't know Richard Gray did websites. :p |
| _Bijou_ 24.11.2007 17:24 |
I don't like the new site layout. I don't think there was anything wrong with the old one. Bring it back. The forum isn't working either. :( |
| Erin 24.11.2007 18:03 |
Benn wrote: Pieter MC, re: For someone that's been resident here for a LONG time, I'm shocked that you seem to be surprised.He didn't say he was surprised. ;-) It's a pity it doesn't look better. I wonder if the forum will have to start from scratch, since it's been down for so long. |
| Tero 24.11.2007 18:34 |
Erin wrote:I wonder if the forum will have to start from scratch, since it's been down for so long. That would probably be for the best, all things considered... Wipe the old post(er)s away and it should stay nice for a few weeks at least. ;) |
| Pim Derks 24.11.2007 19:00 |
It's not the worst site I've ever seen. For an official site it's too basic though. Look at what kind of websites other artists have. A lot more could've been done with all the Queenartwork (albumsleeves etc). Still, it's not bad. |
| The King Of Rhye 25.11.2007 02:08 |
yipes....that is VERY basic, isnt it? |
| Barbie Jupiter 25.11.2007 05:13 |
Well for me personally the earliest version was worse than presentXD At least the first impression is better, i like the colors, though it cannot compete with Queenzone.... Guys that made this site, I'M TRULY PROUD OF YOU!!! Thank you so much!!! It's so simple, tidy and interesting. Bravo guys!! |
| Gr8 King Rat 25.11.2007 10:23 |
I think its time for Queen to think about making some changes to thier creative staff. Poor album sleeves (ROTC & QRM) and now a bad design on an offical website. Everything seem so amateurish... |
| cmsdrums 25.11.2007 10:45 |
I think the new website can be summed up by the fact that on the Videography section, they have details of the "Freddie MURCURY Tribute Concert" What an absolute disgrace..... (p.s. In addition, the tribute concert is also missing from the DVD section of the videography) |
| Tero 25.11.2007 11:18 |
Gr8 King Rat wrote: I think its time for Queen to think about making some changes to thier creative staff. Poor album sleeves (ROTC & QRM) and now a bad design on an offical website. Everything seem so amateurish...That sounds like a good idea... The new colour scheme was supposed to have been personally approved by Brian himself (if I remember correctly that's what was posted QOL), so he should start by dropping out of the business himself. I'd like to replace him with somebody who actually cares about what they release, and would preferably release a series of low-profit products for the fans as well, instead of going for the lowest common denominator. I think we can find an adequate replacement here at QZ. ;) |
| Zak Royen 25.11.2007 11:38 |
excerpts from the (apparently) official biography, as featured on QOL: "Queen formed in 1971 [...]" "Brian and Roger take Queen back onto the touring circuit for the first time since 1986 this Spring, joined by former Free/Bad Company singer, songwriter and musicial Paul Rodgers playing concerts across the UK and throughout Europe. The tour covers over a dozen countries over a six week period, followed in July by 4 major outdoor concerts including London’s Hyde Park on July 8, a venue they last played in September 1976 when playing a free concert, they attracted a record audience of 150,000 to the Royal Park." i like the fact that it's accurate, up-to-date, and well-written. |
| Erin 25.11.2007 12:09 |
cmsdrums wrote: I think the new website can be summed up by the fact that on the Videography section, they have details of the "Freddie MURCURY Tribute Concert"That's pathetic. I could understand having a typo, but that's just stupid. |
| Queenrockyou 25.11.2007 12:31 |
I heard it was John Deacon who was back ito business and created this website... 'thought he stopped drinking too much... He is better in electronics though, so hey, he can't be good in everything ! Really bad looking, hope it is just a transition thing too, really. I had difficulties to find the queenzone news link too on the first time, and that's what I used to read on Queenonline, official news and "gossip"... No, for me, it is worse than it was previously, it was even quite great before. let's hope it won't stay this way ! Olivier, France. |
| Pim Derks 25.11.2007 14:26 |
I think the QOL website looked at it's best in 1999, around the release of GH3. After that it got worse and worse and worse. However, I do think that the current version is a lot better than the old one. That one didn't even correctly work in Firefox. |
| Mean Mr. Ketchup 25.11.2007 15:53 |
Pim Derks wrote: However, I do think that the current version is a lot better than the old one. That one didn't even correctly work in Firefox.I like that version, and it seemed to work ok for me (a Firefox user) what didn't work for you? |
| Pim Derks 25.11.2007 16:22 |
Well, for example some of the forms didn't display correctly (white fonts on white background). The frames also had some problems I think - but it's been a looooong time since I was on QOL :D |
| PieterMC 25.11.2007 16:23 |
Pim Derks wrote: However, I do think that the current version is a lot better than the old one. That one didn't even correctly work in Firefox.Perhaps, but this new one does not work in IE properly. It's a crying shame that this is what the official site looks like. It's not just the way it looks that is the problem though. |
| Mr Faron Hyte 25.11.2007 16:26 |
Crazy LittleThing wrote: I saw it yesterday and conjectured that it MUST be a transition page until the real new site is up. It MUST be.Well, there *is* a comment saying "We have a few more features and tweaks to make, so do bare with us" - but, of course, they did use the word "bare" instead of "bear", and I don't feel comfortable taking my clothes off with them. Not unless they buy me a nice dinner and drinks first. |
| Barbie Jupiter 25.11.2007 16:36 |
AHAHAAaaa Freddie MURCURY WAHAAaaaaXDDDD they really need to change the creative staff!! It's too unserious!XD but funny indeedXD Freddie Muuuuurcury....XD It's maybe the new Freddie nickname because of his cats? |
| PieterMC 25.11.2007 17:37 |
Mr Faron Hyte wrote:As far as I am concerned the #1 rule of professional website design is do not launch a site unless it's finished.Crazy LittleThing wrote: I saw it yesterday and conjectured that it MUST be a transition page until the real new site is up. It MUST be.Well, there *is* a comment saying "We have a few more features and tweaks to make, so do bare with us" - but, of course, they did use the word "bare" instead of "bear", and I don't feel comfortable taking my clothes off with them. Not unless they buy me a nice dinner and drinks first. |
| lillian hillier 25.11.2007 23:20 |
I dont like the lok of it myself,hopefully things will improve. Sooner than later I hope! |
| gnomo 26.11.2007 06:28 |
... at least, from their css, they seem to have discarded that horrid Garamond, and kept to a sans-serif family, as their default font. I suppose that might be the reason for the delay with the message boards: chances are, the templates needed being re-written all over again to match the styles. ... *sigh* ... |
| Mr. Scully 26.11.2007 07:31 |
It looks quite okay although the design is very simple - it looks more like a fan site. I didn't check the validity but the html code looks good. I never liked QOL but I think this is slightly better than the previous version - not graphically but at least it's more "accessible", especially from other browsers. |
| pittrek 26.11.2007 08:27 |
Yes, lynx rules ! |
| Ian-Highlander 26.11.2007 09:23 |
gnomo wrote: I suppose that might be the reason for the delay with the message boards: chances are, the templates needed being re-written all over again to match the styles. ... *sigh* ...Regretfully not, there are some "issues" with the database that Outside Line are trying to resolve with EMI at the moment. I can't say any more than that right now, but it isn't a new forum, it isn't anything major and there's certainly no conspiracy theory style issues going on. As for the new forum template. I will be adapting the fonts on it to match the website once it's back up and running, it appears they listened to the complaints on the forums and changed the main fonts on the site before going live (although didn't mention it to me) so I'll re-adapt the template to match, but that's not a major job and can be done once it's up and running again. My understanding is the new site design was approved by Jim Beach and Brian before going live, I have my own opinions on the site that I have made clear before now on QOL and will leave it at that. Hopefully the forums should be back up and running again soon. If I get any more info I will pass it on. Cheers |
| g_pretender 26.11.2007 09:39 |
Mr. Scully wrote: It looks quite okay although the design is very simple - it looks more like a fan site. I didn't check the validity but the html code looks good. I never liked QOL but I think this is slightly better than the previous version - not graphically but at least it's more "accessible", especially from other browsers.I've been checking the concertography that was added. There are some inconcistencies with your own. I spotted the Puebla dates for one. Do you see any others? It also apears that Canada is now in South America:) Concerning the new design. It does look basic, but I never realy liked the old design. it just looked to elaborated and no to practical to me. Sure there is room for improvement and i'm sure we'll see it in time. |
| gnomo 26.11.2007 09:49 |
Ian-Highlander wrote: there are some "issues" with the database that Outside Line are trying to resolve with EMI at the moment.Ian, thank you very much for the update and the work you're doing. And - no conspiracy theories here: of that, you should know I am innocent ;-) _X// (fingers crossed for you) |
| PieterMC 26.11.2007 09:53 |
Ian-Highlander wrote: Regretfully not, there are some "issues" with the database that Outside Line are trying to resolve with EMI at the moment.Did QOL not pay their bill? :-) |
| Penetration_Guru 26.11.2007 16:24 |
No, they just want to make sure they've got as many email addresses to spam as possible...otherwise they might need Jacky back... |
| lillian hillier 26.11.2007 18:45 |
This board on the other hand lookes like a blank sheet of paper boring :P |
| saltnvinegar 26.11.2007 20:27 |
lillian hillier wrote: This board on the other hand lookes like a blank sheet of paper boring :PSurely it's the quality of the comments that make a board worth visiting, not the colours and layout.... |
| lillian hillier 26.11.2007 23:23 |
Yes you are right.I was teasing which is why I used :P. |
| Gr8 King Rat 26.11.2007 23:31 |
Someone want to tell me what the hell they did to John's face in pic number 10 of 18 in the QOL Gallery....?? lol link |
| Lester Burnham 26.11.2007 23:41 |
Gr8 King Rat wrote: Someone want to tell me what the hell they did to John's face in pic number 10 of 18 in the QOL Gallery....?? lol linkI didn't know Bruce Campbell was in Queen... |
| lillian hillier 26.11.2007 23:43 |
I shall pretend that I am not laughing. |
| write your letters in the sand 26.11.2007 23:56 |
Mr Faron Hyte wrote:I think you should hold out for chocolates, flowers, and a ring, but then I'm hopelessly traditional . . .Crazy LittleThing wrote: I saw it yesterday and conjectured that it MUST be a transition page until the real new site is up. It MUST be.Well, there *is* a comment saying "We have a few more features and tweaks to make, so do bare with us" - but, of course, they did use the word "bare" instead of "bear", and I don't feel comfortable taking my clothes off with them. Not unless they buy me a nice dinner and drinks first. |
| Mr. Scully 27.11.2007 03:23 |
g_pretender wrote: I've been checking the concertography that was added. There are some inconcistencies with your own. I spotted the Puebla dates for one. Do you see any others?Nope, I couldn't be bothered to check :) I'm pretty sure there must be more mistakes since it does happen 2-3 times every year that a date/venue is corrected by a visitor of my site. I did offer a cooperation (they could read the dates online from my database) but they weren't interested so I don't care... As for other corrections, well for example Queen didn't really play in Rock In Rio on 12th and 19th January but in fact on 11th and 18th...(technically they did because it was after midnight but they were billed for 11 & 18). That's quite a significant change :-) I'll correct it on my website within a few days. |
| cliffhowell 27.11.2007 03:44 |
PieterMC wrote:Could it possibly be co-incidence that roughly at the same time as they put on the news page of "some exciting Q+PR news to come" that the forum goes down.Ian-Highlander wrote: Regretfully not, there are some "issues" with the database that Outside Line are trying to resolve with EMI at the moment.Did QOL not pay their bill? :-) |
| Ian-Highlander 27.11.2007 03:56 |
cliffhowell wrote:As I mentioned in my other post, yes it is an unfortunate coincidence, anyone expecting anything amazing when the forums come back up are in for a massive disappointment. There is some Q+PR news coming at some point in the very near future, there is no way I can say what it is, but lets say there are a lot of very high hopes on this forum and others that are going to be dashed a tad ;o)PieterMC wrote:Could it possibly be co-incidence that roughly at the same time as they put on the news page of "some exciting Q+PR news to come" that the forum goes down.Ian-Highlander wrote: Regretfully not, there are some "issues" with the database that Outside Line are trying to resolve with EMI at the moment.Did QOL not pay their bill? :-) |
| PieterMC 27.11.2007 08:07 |
My guess, album yes, but no large scale tour. Just a few dates here and there. |
| pittrek 27.11.2007 09:14 |
Mr. Scully wrote:Don't forget to add the Brixton video recording :-)g_pretender wrote: I've been checking the concertography that was added. There are some inconcistencies with your own. I spotted the Puebla dates for one. Do you see any others?Nope, I couldn't be bothered to check :) I'm pretty sure there must be more mistakes since it does happen 2-3 times every year that a date/venue is corrected by a visitor of my site. I did offer a cooperation (they could read the dates online from my database) but they weren't interested so I don't care... As for other corrections, well for example Queen didn't really play in Rock In Rio on 12th and 19th January but in fact on 11th and 18th...(technically they did because it was after midnight but they were billed for 11 & 18). That's quite a significant change :-) I'll correct it on my website within a few days. |
| Erin 27.11.2007 10:34 |
Gr8 King Rat wrote: Someone want to tell me what the hell they did to John's face in pic number 10 of 18 in the QOL Gallery....?? lol linkLOL! |
| fairydandy 27.11.2007 11:35 |
Pah. |
| Erin 27.11.2007 12:19 |
fairydandy wrote: Pah.Oh shit, not you! Get the QOL forum back quick! ;-P |
| gnomo 27.11.2007 12:22 |
fairydandy wrote: Pah.<3 <3 <3 I love you, fd!!! |
| Tero 27.11.2007 14:59 |
cliffhowell wrote:Of course it's not a coincidence.PieterMC wrote:Could it possibly be co-incidence that roughly at the same time as they put on the news page of "some exciting Q+PR news to come" that the forum goes down.Ian-Highlander wrote: Regretfully not, there are some "issues" with the database that Outside Line are trying to resolve with EMI at the moment.Did QOL not pay their bill? :-) It's a way for Brian to put his head in the sand and say there was no negative reaction to the "exciting Q+PR news". ;) |
| Broooklyn 27.11.2007 16:22 |
Page 404 has been found! News at 14. |
| _Bijou_ 27.11.2007 17:03 |
I've never missed the QOL board so much! |
| lillian hillier 27.11.2007 17:09 |
I miss it dreadfully but there is the chatroom...no one there at the moment:-( |
| _Bijou_ 27.11.2007 17:12 |
Chatroom isn't really the same. The QOL board is SO much better than this one. On here you get your head bitten off for asking a simple question. 'Use the search button!'. What if it doesn't work? |
| lillian hillier 27.11.2007 19:20 |
This place isnt the same as Qol.As someone told me they both have their pluses and minuses. |
| fredswife 28.11.2007 15:17 |
Dashed hopes, eh? Interesting, very interesting. *Puts credit card and travel books away* |
| lillian hillier 28.11.2007 15:27 |
^Pardon? |
| ElleInnuendo 28.11.2007 15:32 |
PieterMC wrote: My guess, album yes, but no large scale tour. Just a few dates here and there.I tend to agree with this thought. |
| fredswife 28.11.2007 16:29 |
Ian-Highlander wrote: As I mentioned in my other post, yes it is an unfortunate coincidence, anyone expecting anything amazing when the forums come back up are in for a massive disappointment. There is some Q+PR news coming at some point in the very near future, there is no way I can say what it is, but lets say there are a lot of very high hopes on this forum and others that are going to be dashed a tad ;o)Lillian, I was referring to this post. Sorry, I'm used to QOL and couldn't figure out how to quote. |
| fairydandy 28.11.2007 16:50 |
ElleInnuendo wrote:He's probably fed up again. Does anyone in their right mind, seriously think that Paul Rodger's wants to sing Queen songs?PieterMC wrote: My guess, album yes, but no large scale tour. Just a few dates here and there.I tend to agree with this thought. 'Any Port In A Storm'..good name for the new album. |
| Ian-Highlander 28.11.2007 17:51 |
I got fed up with waiting, for anyone that would prefer the QOL forums, I've brought my "test" boards online for anyone who wants to use them. This is a complete replica of QOL but empty, people will need to sign up again if they want to use it and any posts made on it will probably not be carried over to the live site when it does eventually come back. link For what it's worth I agree with comments that have been made about this getting ridiculous. |
| fairydandy 28.11.2007 18:13 |
Ian-Highlander wrote: I got fed up with waiting, for anyone that would prefer the QOL forums, I've brought my "test" boards online for anyone who wants to use them. This is a complete replica of QOL but empty, people will need to sign up again if they want to use it and any posts made on it will probably not be carried over to the live site when it does eventually come back. link For what it's worth I agree with comments that have been made about this getting ridiculous.Yeah, I'm going, that microwave person is being really nasty. Boohoo. |
| Ian-Highlander 28.11.2007 18:38 |
Ummm, I meant about how long it's taking to "fix" lol, I'm a member here too and have been for years, no complaints about QZ from this corner :o) Mind you that lot over at that other site what's it called? QOL I think it is, well... :P |
| Erin 28.11.2007 18:55 |
Ian-Highlander wrote: Ummm, I meant about how long it's taking to "fix" lol, I'm a member here too and have been for years, no complaints about QZ from this corner :o)I'm glad to see that one person from QOL doesn't hate it here. :-) |
| lillian hillier 28.11.2007 18:59 |
I dont hate it here..just wish people were nicer.QOL usually is :P |
| YourValentine 28.11.2007 19:06 |
It's been cool to have all these crazy QOLers here at Queenzone. Hopefully, some of you stay/come back :) The user IDs show that some of you are long time Queenzoners just as many Queenzoners are also long time QOL members. |
| Erin 28.11.2007 19:11 |
YourValentine wrote: just as many Queenzoners are also long time QOL members.I am, but no one knows who the hell I am there. Oh wait...Dan Corson, Lester Burnham, and Bauer talk to me there. ;-) |
| lillian hillier 28.11.2007 19:14 |
^I have seen you there Erin,and its all cool. |
| fairydandy 29.11.2007 00:14 |
Erin wrote:I certainly don't hate it here Erin. I do think it's a bit of an aggressive and intolerant message board for new people though.Ian-Highlander wrote: Ummm, I meant about how long it's taking to "fix" lol, I'm a member here too and have been for years, no complaints about QZ from this corner :o)I'm glad to see that one person from QOL doesn't hate it here. :-) I have been a member here since 2001 I think it was. |
| cliffhowell 29.11.2007 03:35 |
Ian-Highlander wrote:Yes I know, its just a free download of the new studio version of Say its not True.cliffhowell wrote:As I mentioned in my other post, yes it is an unfortunate coincidence, anyone expecting anything amazing when the forums come back up are in for a massive disappointment. There is some Q+PR news coming at some point in the very near future, there is no way I can say what it is, but lets say there are a lot of very high hopes on this forum and others that are going to be dashed a tad ;o)PieterMC wrote:Could it possibly be co-incidence that roughly at the same time as they put on the news page of "some exciting Q+PR news to come" that the forum goes down.Ian-Highlander wrote: Regretfully not, there are some "issues" with the database that Outside Line are trying to resolve with EMI at the moment.Did QOL not pay their bill? :-) |
| Ian-Highlander 29.11.2007 03:52 |
Heh, apparently Brian has let the cat out of the bag. Oh well, at least people can see I was telling the truth and it's not anything imense if nothing else now. :o) Personally I look forward to hearing it, but it's certainly not the huge news it's being made out to be IMHO. |
| Erin 29.11.2007 10:47 |
fairydandy wrote: I certainly don't hate it here Erin. I do think it's a bit of an aggressive and intolerant message board for new people though.I can't argue with you there. |
| Lester Burnham 29.11.2007 13:47 |
Ian-Highlander wrote: Heh, apparently Brian has let the cat out of the bag. Oh well, at least people can see I was telling the truth and it's not anything imense if nothing else now. :o) Personally I look forward to hearing it, but it's certainly not the huge news it's being made out to be IMHO.Ian, I've tried to log into the new QOL forums, and every time I do, it asks for a username and password for EMI staging server authentication (stage.coldplay.com ???). I've tried to put in my QOL username and password, but it doesn't seem to work. |
| Erin 29.11.2007 14:49 |
Lester Burnham wrote: I've tried to log into the new QOL forums, and every time I do, it asks for a username and password for EMI staging server authentication (stage.coldplay.com ???). I've tried to put in my QOL username and password, but it doesn't seem to work.It prompted me for that, too. Then it took me to a screen saying I wasn't authorized, but when I clicked back to the forum I was logged in. |
| Ian-Highlander 29.11.2007 14:55 |
They've sorted it, there was a minor misconfiguration when they brought it back up. (I suspect someone left a .htaccess file where they shouldn't have) ;o) It's fine again now give or take the change of address to link |
| Lester Burnham 29.11.2007 16:29 |
Ian-Highlander wrote: They've sorted it, there was a minor misconfiguration when they brought it back up. (I suspect someone left a .htaccess file where they shouldn't have) ;o) It's fine again now give or take the change of address to linkAwesome, thanks! |