Website changes: Feedback requested!

[Moonchild]

EDIT: I've decided against making this radical change, in the end, it simply doesn't work -- I will, however, look into making the serif font more readable - probably as simple as enlarging by 0.5 pt; sans fonts always take more space.

---

All right, with some help of our new forum user mathewshanley I've come up with some changes to the website.

The preliminary result can be seen here:
http://www.palemoon.org/v2/

I want feedback!

Please let me know what you think, is it better/worse? is the new font choice making things easier or harder to read for you? etc.

[Night Wing]

I like the new "proposed" look. The Pale Moon logo in the clouds looks nice. Like the darker font black color too of the main body text and slightly bigger text. Other than these subtle changes, the website "design" is basically unchanged from the original website. But, in the end, it's your website and you're ultimately going to go with what pleases your eyes which I think you should.

[Moonchild]

Like the darker font black color too of the main body text and slightly bigger text.

Actually, the darker appearance is because of Cleartype/font smoothing working better for san-serif fonts. Both the old and the new font used black as a color.
The point size of the font is actually reduced the type of font is simply inherently less compact so in the end it results in a slightly larger text.

Thanks for the feedback - it's something I want to make sure works for the users before putting it live.

[satrow]

Viewed from my main monitor and also my netbook (1280x1024 and 1024x600), overall readability with the proposed new landing page is noticeably improved .

From a 'Martian' point of view, it's now more difficult to work out what kind of website/product page I've landed on with the proposed version.

I don't like the way the new banner is 5-6x 'heavier' on bandwidth than the old one.

For users of 'widescreen' (read: restricted height, 600-768px high), consider rescaling the banner height to 225-230px?

[Moonchild]

Graphic sizes aren't optimized yet - that will be done before it's put live.

Your "Martian" point of view is important though. I'll have to think about that. I want to keep the main title graphic clean though.
The tagline can have a second line added to clarify that it's a web browser, either direct or implied, but I'll have to brainstorm about what to put there then. Something clear an concise. Any suggestions? Slogans and shouts have never been my strong suit

[JWvanLohuizen]

Why the awful color shift from blue to purple?

I can't stand the new fonts. If you just bold the regular page font and leave the rest, it will be easier to read. Never change the font in the header!!!

And what does optimized, fast and efficient really mean? I read this as a piece of software put out in a small 3rd world country by high school kids. Leave it alone!!! The current page looks like a well engineered replacement of the weaker Firefox program!

If these changes go into effect, I will be too embarrassed to tell anyone I use it. That is why I refused to use Firefox in the beginning and why I was forced to dropped Mozilla Application Suite when it became Seamonkey. I moved to Thunderbird after that because I always got a stupid (are you in kindergarten) look when I told people I used Seamonkey. (Also the engineers were arrogant and saw people asking questions that didn't know every programming known to man as stupid and a waste of their time)

Don't change a great thing like the fast 64-bit version that Firefox still is too afraid to bring out of nightly's.

I want my great Palemoon 64-bit - "Custom-built and optimized Firefox-based browser for Windows Operating System".

Thank You

[Moonchild]

Why the awful color shift from blue to purple?

Just working with what I was given in the graphic.

I can't stand the new fonts. If you just bold the regular page font and leave the rest, it will be easier to read. Never change the font in the header!!!

Making all text on a page bold is NOT a good idea, ever. If the font is not readable enough as-is, then the base font needs to be changed, not the weight. I've been letting the new layout soak a little and I agree that the sans font in the new header really doesn't work. No offense to the artist who submitted the file.

And what does optimized, fast and efficient really mean? I read this as a piece of software put out in a small 3rd world country by high school kids. Leave it alone!!! The current page looks like a well engineered replacement of the weaker Firefox program!

Taglines were never my strong suit it's too "marketing-hype" and not informational enough. I've tried to add more info but it throws the balance off completely.

Don't change a great thing like the fast 64-bit version that Firefox still is too afraid to bring out of nightly's.

I want my great Palemoon 64-bit - "Custom-built and optimized Firefox-based browser for Windows Operating System".

Thank You

The proposed website change has nothing at all to do with the content of the project or the direction it is going in. Please don't confuse the website presentation with what happens behind it.