PF Style 2026

[Greg Bernhardt]

I am getting more used to it. One minor request would be to have to forum name bolded so it stands out a bit more on the active posts that proceed the forum name.

I'm not completely sure I understand. Can you rephrase and tell me what page template you're talking about?

 

[A.T.]

Disagree that it looks modern. More like early 1970s or retro sci-fi.

This. The previous style looked much more modern and clear.

 

[A.T.]

Have people tried night mode? I like that better than the day mode (the same was true with the old style).

I use the dark mode, and the old style had a better one: Dark gray background is better than blue, because it is more neutral.

 

[A.T.]

I think monospace fonts in general are a bad choice except for very specific applications, like terminal windows or displaying and editing source code, where exactly lining up characters in columns is important.

Even in those applications, I wouldn't use the monospace font used here, because it is too narrow.

 

[PeterDonis]

Even in those applications, I wouldn't use the monospace font used here, because it is too narrow.

My usual choice for those applications is Courier New (the TrueType version). I think at least some of the monospace in the new style is that font. But when I use it for the applications I named, I do so in a fairly large point size. It seems to have a smaller size in the new style here.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Even in those applications, I wouldn't use the monospace font used here, because it is too narrow.

We use it very limitedly and intentionally

My usual choice for those applications is Courier New (the TrueType version). I think at least some of the monospace in the new style is that font.

The font is Jetbrains Mono

 

[symbolipoint]

I'm not completely sure I understand. Can you rephrase and tell me what page template you're talking about?

In trying to guess that meaning, the top panel of links shows "Physics Forms", seeming to be bold-letters, a bit bigger font size, at the far left side. That seems adequate for my senses.

 

[robphy]

Some suggestions (assuming full-screen on a WIndows desktop):

• I think Latest activity's width should be shared with Today's signal so that this is immediately visible without having to scroll down the page, when logged in.
  It seems when not logged in, Today's signal is already near the top.
• I think the "Browse by field" section should be three columns wide. I like that the viewer count moves to the next line if the browser-window is narrowed. Is the word "threads" needed? It takes up valuable real-estate. If needed, could "threads" be a column heading instead?
• I miss the title and link to the latest entry in each subforum.
  One has to visit each field to see what is going on.
• With each field, could there be a color-code based on the number of viewers or maybe the number of threads with activity in (say) the last few days? At a glance, I would like to see where there is activity.
• There is no logo at the top (like there is at the bottom).
  The new favicon does not match the logo.

 

[Ssnow]

I like it!
Ssnow

 

[Frabjous]

There needs to be more differentiation between read and unread threads, particularly in dark mode.

Overall, I like the new look.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

There needs to be more differentiation between read and unread threads, particularly in dark mode.

I made a couple tweaks. Let me know if you think it's better.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I think Latest activity's width should be shared with Today's signal so that this is immediately visible without having to scroll down the page, when logged in.
It seems when not logged in, Today's signal is already near the top.

This is under consideration.

I think the "Browse by field" section should be three columns wide. I like that the viewer count moves to the next line if the browser-window is narrowed. Is the word "threads" needed? It takes up valuable real-estate. If needed, could "threads" be a column heading instead?

There isn't enough width for 3 columns given the table names. An unlabeled number becomes meaningless. The forums are actually not even tables but div cards.

I miss the title and link to the latest entry in each subforum.
One has to visit each field to see what is going on.

This was a philosophical change I wanted to try to break from legacy forum days. The activity rests above in the latest activity. That is what is new across the forums. The gap is new posts as we only show new threads atm. I am chewing on that.

With each field, could there be a color-code based on the number of viewers or maybe the number of threads with activity in (say) the last few days? At a glance, I would like to see where there is activity.

I'll chew on this. Seems like it could get noisy.

There is no logo at the top (like there is at the bottom).
The new favicon does not match the logo.

I decided on a more mature wordmark over a generic logo. Yes the atom is at the bottom, but it's not official.

 

[CrysPhys]

* When I came across this new look last night, my second reaction was, "Here we go again!" My first reaction can't be posted on a public forum.

* Developers of commercial software like to change things up to sell new product (or to show their management they're working on something). PF does not fall into that category. Functional changes should be introduced to address deficiencies in the old software or to introduce enhanced useful features. In the absence of compelling reasons for functional changes, I'm still OK with cosmetic changes for a fresh look ... as long as those changes do not reduce existing functionality, following the "First Do No Harm!" principle.

* I too find the new font and color scheme *much* harder to read; hence reduced functionality.

* I typically follow a limited number of categories and sub-categories; although a stray thread in a category or sub-category of secondary interest will catch my eye now and then. A great feature of the old software was that under the heading of each sub-category was a listing of the title of the most recently active thread (either new or updated), along with the name of the poster and the date and time of the most recent post. I could readily skim categories and sub-categories to determine whether there were any new posts of interest. That has now disappeared. I now have to open each sub-category of interest to find whether there have been any new posts. Again, reduced functionality.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

* I too find the new font and color scheme *much* harder to read; hence reduced functionality.

Can you be specific?

I could readily skim categories and sub-categories to determine whether there were any new posts of interest. That has now disappeared.

I acknowledge this and working to provide a solution. One of my principles was to try to break from legacy forum homepage format by providing activity signals outside of the forum cards. I still think that is possible and worthwhile. I am working on a homepage revision atm.

 

[PeroK]

Definitely looks like something from the 1980's. I'm getting IBM mainframe green-screen vibes.

 

[A.T.]

Definitely looks like something from the 1980's. I'm getting IBM mainframe green-screen vibes.

It's like the evolution of the Google logo, just backwards, with serif-fonts in the headings now. But also sans-serif-fonts in thread titles, and monspace-fonts in thread info. Like a ransom letter.

 

[FactChecker]

Some area may be technically smaller and tighter. Still accessibility compliant.

I don't know about the compliance standards, but the new format is harder to read. I have run into this before.

After a couple weeks I can adjust if we're still feeling like areas are too small. Post content font should be the same if not larger.

Here are before/after snapshots of the styles. IMO, it is undeniable that the font is smaller. Just compare some of the number sizes. I also think that a lot of the text is dimmer, but it is difficult to measure that.

 

[A.T.]

Here are before/after snapshots of the styles. IMO, it is undeniable that the font is smaller.

Looks like the overall ratio of text-area to total-area has decreased. So if you zoom in to have the previous font-size, you see much less entries and have to scroll more.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Here are before/after snapshots of the styles. IMO, it is undeniable that the font is smaller. Just compare some of the number sizes. I also think that a lot of the text is dimmer, but it is difficult to measure that.

Sure, I assumed you meant post content. I can keep adjusting. I'd like to find a min to keep the interfaces clean and not noisy/crowded with visual tension. Let's find that min.

 

[FactChecker]

Sure, I assumed you meant post content. I can keep adjusting. I'd like to find a min to keep the interfaces clean and not noisy/crowded with visual tension. Let's find that min.

Thanks. Yours is a thankless job. I appreciate your work. Just remember that old farts like me are desperately clinging to being able to read text and anything that makes it smaller or dimmer can be hard to deal with.
:-)

 

[FactChecker]

Thanks. Yours is a thankless job. I appreciate your work. Just remember that old farts like me are desperately clinging to being able to read text and anything that makes it smaller or dimmer can be hard to deal with.
:-)

An earlier post recommended using Ctrl++ to zoom in. I didn't know it was that easy. It works well.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I've been shipping a number of default improvements this morning.. Hoping it's all moving in the right direction.

 

[symbolipoint]

Much to prefer the Active Discussions section and the New Discussions section to be at either the left or the right sides near the top. NOT in the bulk of the middle at the top.

 

[robphy]

Much to prefer the Active Discussions section and the New Discussions section to be at either the left or the right sides near the top. NOT in the bulk of the middle at the top.

One of the motivations for my "third column" suggestions above was that I feel like there is a lot of space
where there could be more data.

Many of the fonts are small and dim (as if I'm about to get an alert for low printer toner).

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Much to prefer the Active Discussions section and the New Discussions section to be at either the left or the right sides near the top. NOT in the bulk of the middle at the top.

I am interested to hear after a week or two if you still feel this way. This was an intent to try and break from the legacy flow of clicking into forums to see what is new. What is new is in those sections (for the most part).

One of the motivations for my "third column" suggestions above was that I feel like there is a lot of space
where there could be more data.

"More data" is a choice I made not to force. I am trying to provide a cleaner interface with less noise.

Many of the fonts are small and dim (as if I'm about to get an alert for low printer toner).

I have made some small adjustments this morning and can continue to do so. These were also design choices. Small or dim fonts are a signal. Maybe you don't need to use your attention all the time to read it. Again, it's about cognitive load. My choices aren't perfect, but you can understand the why and from where on out it's about tweaking.

 

[robphy]

I can appreciate managing "cognitive load".
It's overwhelming when it's too much.... too many signals, with a lot of background noise.
Right now, it feels underwhelming.... too few signals in a vacuum.

Under Browse by field,
I'm glad the latest-updated thread is back. I wish there was a date and time, as before.
On my browser, I have a browser extension that highlights words like "today" and "yesterday".
While it's good that these are in Active discussions and New discussions, I wish it were back in the "Browse by Fields".

When I'm shopping for a place to eat, it's not enough for me to see the names of the restaurants.
I want to get a glimpse from the outside that indicates there is activity inside.
I suggested color (like a heat map) as way to indicate this [without using text].
It could be associated with the color of the light-bulb, or its background.

The current value of the number of threads is an indicator of the long-term history of activity.
It might be nice (as an option?) to have a number indicating the recent-short term history of activity (e.g., number of active threads in the past week).

 

[lemonfrostt]

+1 for color scheme
-1 for activity/promotions on the forum list page (two clicks to see forum list)
+1 -1 for text readability

Nitpicks:
- Every category still has the same, generic icon (I'd be fine with no icons)
- The most recent post in a subforum is shown on the forum list, but not clickable
- "More Sciences and Computing" forum is in the right column (otherwise subjects are left-side and extra discussion is right-side)

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

- Every category still has the same, generic icon (I'd be fine with no icons)

I considered this. It is a core new activity indicator though.

- The most recent post in a subforum is shown on the forum list, but not clickable

I can look into this

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

The recent post in forum cards is now clickable

 

[Halc]

Didn't read this whole thread, so maybe this is a dup.
I frequently hit What's-new -> New-Posts and get a list of all topics that have action since the last time I did that.

It used to precede each post with an avatar of the OP, but far more usefully, it would drop a teeny avatar of me in the corner of the OP avatar to show that I have contributed to the topic.

That's gone. I can no longer at a glance find topics in which I've been active. Sure, I get notified of somebody directly responds to me, but I rely on the symbol to get to topics I'm interested in without reading each of the titles.


2nd gripe, discovered while composing this post. I highlight a bit of text and cannot tell the difference. It's there, but barely different. For the record, I'm using dark mode, white text on all variations of dark blue everything. Highlighting text makes it a slightly different white with no change in background.