Well, the new LQ is great. However, a few old friends were lost in the transfer- list them in this thread.

The thing I miss most are the "navegation" links (for lack of a better name) located right below the last post on a page in a thread. It would say *linuxquestions.org* *Linux-Newbie* so you could easily jump to the forum or even to the forum list. These haven't gone completely in the upgrade, I just miss them in their old location.

titanium_geek

I kinda miss not having the "0 reply threads" link at the top of the forums, but meh, I'll get used to it .

titanium_geek, you mean the "Forum Jump"? It should be in nearly the same spot.

Nylex, it's in the "Quick Links" menu. Enough people seem to miss it that I may add it back to welcome panel also though.

Is there anything else that people miss? If so, please do post in this thread - it's removal may have simply been an oversight. We've caught one of these and re-added it already.

--jeremy

Ahh, I never even thought of looking in there. Cheers Jeremy!

no, not a drop down box like the forum jump, the "navegation tree" is the closest thing to it.

sorry about the typo in the title- there should be a "miss" in there somewhere.

titanium_geek

Ahh - now I know what you mean, and that was indeed removed. I've edited the thread title for you. If anyone notices something missing that they really miss...post it. Thanks.

--jeremy

I am suffering serious withdrawal symptoms since the advent of the new LQ: Nobody sends me any email ('0 relies email') and not only that I no longer learn from others' trials and tribulations, nor am I able to get my daily high from helping others less fortunate than me (mostly with respect to specific distro installations).

On a more serious note: I have been reading some of the old threads on the subject of the daily 0 replies email, and I would submit the following suggestion (although I appreciate that it might require a great deal of effort to make it work):

Would it be possible for a potential recipient to chose the forums, from which 0 reply threads are posted to, to be included in a specific number (say, a choice of between 10 and 50) of the most recent 0 reply threads. Staggering the transmission of the selected 0 reply email, dependant upon time zone of the email recipient, might, and/or would, avoid all of us getting the same selection. I would note that in my particular case I always received my 0 repies email at 06:03 local time (presumably the same as 01:00 LQT).

The reeason that I make this suggestion/request is that I am a member of http://www.experts-exchange.com and there I have the choice upon setup of the forums in which I have an interest and/or a modicum of expertise. However, I am somewhat disappointed in the lack of response to a number of questions that I have posted, but that maybe that it is difficult in the area of a closed and proprietary OS, no-one knows, or is prepared to admit that they know, the answers to my problems.

Anyway, I await, with bated breath, for the new and improved replacement for the old 0 reply email and/or its equivalent. Bring it on!

Cheers
Richard

Man, thanks for this thread titanium_

I'm really really really missing the 'exact phrase' search
option in advanced search. If anyone knows the new location
please let me know, I have looked but I can't find it.

Thanks.

_West

surely with the new boolean search, you could just put "quotes" around the phrase you want to seach for (a la google)

hey, I really like the staggered zero reply option.

titanium_geek

the old envelope style! i hate those cartoony ones. and i miss the black dot showing that you've posted in a thread. that checkmark thing is too light, it's hard to even see.

everything else seems great so far. maybe the search time quota could be reduced? was that tested somehow and found to be the best performance cutoff time, or was it just chosen more or less arbitrarily? i understand the need to reduce server load, but maybe 30 seconds would even be better, from a user perspective at least.

thanks, great site.

I also miss the 0 replies thread at the "forum" main. Somewhat, I found the old spellchecker much more practical too. I'm currently not using the spell check in the new forum, and God knows I should

another thing i'm just noticing is that the convenient "un/subscribe to this thread" link is gone from the bottom of the page. i see that it's now in the Thread Tools at the top, but when you're reading the last post you're usually at the bottom of the page. so it's not the greatest usability to have to scroll all the way back to the top to subscribe or unsubscribe.

exactly- I miss the stuff at the bottom of the page.

i totally agree with you, it would be much better to have those at the bottom. if space is a concern, i would suggest removing the "previous thread | next thread" links and replacing them with the LQ > forums > etc. type of navigation.

who ever uses previous thread | next thread anyway? i'd bet almost no one, as who really wants to waste time going to a thread when you don't even know what the topic is?

Thanks for the feedback - do keep it coming. In reply to a couple of the comments:

0 replies email - the functionality we are working on is more more powerful than the old one. Think things like being able to get a list of threads that have no replies and mention the word nVidia.

Spell Checker - The new one really is nicer from most perspectives, but I really think you should be using the one in your browser. It has flexibility that a web based one can't possibly have, doesn't put load on the server - it's just a better option all the way around.

Bottom Links - I tried removing the "previous thread | next thread" once and was *amazed* how many people use them. The nav link doesn't add anything over the forumjump, which is already at the bottom. I appreciate that things like subscribe/unsubscribe would be nice at the bottom also, but having multiple ways to get to everything really is bad design and a lot of links on the old design were just thrown places they really didn't belong. Trying to learn from past mistakes here.

--jeremy