I've just logged on this afternoon and what a shock - it has all changed! I knew that the new logo was on it's way, but wasn't prepared for the new website this soon. I think it's not bad and quite easy to navigate, but I really don't like the new certificates now I've seen them and I'm pleased I did Grade 8 theory last time round!

What does everyone else think?

there's a couple of threads on this already... here and here.

Okay - I'm sorry

Yes, there have been previous threads about the new logo, but I think Appassionata was specifically referring to the new website design.

(FWIW - it's OK, but the logo jarrs dreadfully... )

yes--the threads i linked were about the new website design :-)

Yes, I agree about the logo - the whole think looks uuurgh. I really dislike the grey too.

On a quick look I think the exams section appears much simpler and better to find your way around.

My turn to go , then...

aw, i didn't want anyone to go :-(

i just thought it'd be easier to put all the discussions in one place!

You're quite right - my stupid fault for reading this forum before going to the Café, and for not clicking on your links but assuming that they were links to previous threads regarding the logo, rather than the website design!

Durrrr.....

Why all the white space?

Yes, took me by surprise just now as I had already logged on earlier in the afternoon. Does anyone know exactly what time it went up?

You're right about all the white space, do you think they could adjust the 'frames', I think that is what web techie people call it.

Just chosen a preloaded avatar but it doesn't seem to appear anywhere. Is the avatar feature new ?

Avatars have always been disabled on these forums, even though the option is available on My Controls.

Car Expert

Yuck.............. what was wrong with the old website?

I must admit, I like the new website. It looks more modern, and it's easy to find the information you want. The only thing I find odd is that the red used for lettering on the site is much pinker than the red of the logo.

I've just shown my husband the new logo, and he quite likes it. Because in the Cof E choirs scarlet may only be worn by choirs in churches with a royal connection, he thinks it's a great choice of colour!

Although I hate the new logo and I think that the forum design doesn't go at all (why is the top and bottom new and clean but the rest of the 'frames' stay blue - it looks so mish mashed!), I actually really like the design and layout of the ABRSM website - so much easier to navigate, a lot cleaner and much more appealing. I think they did a good job on that aspect.

It's too white and the red is intrusive. I think it's hard on the eyes. I also think itè terribly "ordinaire".

And like everything else I suppose we'll have to get used to it.

I haven't yet had time to navigate around but if it is easier all to the good though I didn't think the previous site was too bad on that score

Thank you Car Expert for the reply . (I'd not noticed the avatar option before)

I hate the new website for one big reason - it doesn't actually fit into my obviously-smaller-than-average screen! So if I want to read anyone's post I have to continually scroll from left to right

I've been logging in less and less often for various reasons recently, and this will probably be the final straw.

Ed has already given you a personal explanation on that front!

vvv



I'm very relieved and grateful that it's stayed blue - thank you mods!



I get a slightly different layout in Safari to Firefox. In Safari, the logo rests on the grey band beneath it, which reduces the amount of scrolling. In Firefox there's quite a wide gap between the logo and the grey band beneath it.

The new web site is not perfect (fixed width display, foisting a shopping basket on us, ...) but on balance it is an improvement an improvement ... except for that dreadful new logo.

The big red monstrosity at the top left takes half the fun out of logging on to the forum

From the home page of the new site:

"The new-look ABRSM

We have introduced our new visual identity in 2009 to reflect what we have been told by teachers, students and all other groups during the course of extensive worldwide research."


So who exactly were these teachers, students, and other groups? The overwhelming majority opinion on this forum (comprising teachers, students, and others!) is that they new logo is naff, cheap and tacky.

The home page says:

"All ABRSM stakeholders wanted us to retain our fundamental values, such as reliability, rigour, quality and friendliness. Alongside this wish, we recognised two further strands: first, that we should become a more integrated operation, effectively joining up our range of services, whether exams, publications, courses, seminars or online facilities; and secondly, that we should strive to be more outward-looking and engaging, with a bolder approach to all our communications.’

Our new logo aims to encapsulate these ideas in a simple and strong visual image. It also makes clear our royal patronage and ongoing association with four Royal Schools of Music, reflecting the importance attached to that by so many."

Well, it may aim to do that, but it fails.

It certainly does not shout "quality".

On the other hand the old logo, now discarded, already embodied exactly the image of reliability and quality that the board says it wants to uphold.

Last week I saw a make of canned vegetables which had virtually the same logo - though it was green, not red. Can"t remember the make at the moment but whenever I see the red monstrosity I now think of canned peas.

My brother, who is red/green colour blind would probably get very confused!

I agree with you on this one, Mad Tom.

W

Yes.... I'm using IE at uni and it looks different to how it does on firefox at home...

It's AWFUL-looking!!

I have now used the new web site on a PC with a smaller screen than that of the Mac I have at home - and removing the ability for the user to resize the width is a more serious mistake than I first thought.

Why do web designers these days ignore the classic texts on interface design, and fail to check the latest statistics and findings on usability at http://useit.com ??

The new logo gets worse the more I see of it

Just a bit of a surprise. It's my first visit in two days. Doesn't seem to make much difference.

I just zoomed the page to 125% and that seems frame it better!

Pleasantly surprised : agree with you Appassionata.

As far as the forum goes : it doesn't feel an awful lot different to me than before. I'd still like the events forum to be on the front page of the forum rather than as a sub-forum, but that's not really a design thing. Overall, it's not a bad effort, and the logo isn't nearly as obtrusive as I feared it might be. Though it is still a red logo , and the design of the logo still leaves something to be desired, in my opinion.

Perhaps someone has already commented on this somewhere, but it occurs to me that as well as being a crown and therefore having royal connotations, the logo is a double bar line and stave turned through ninety degrees... I think it's quite clever..

But no, I don't like the colour.

and so far as the new website is concerned, is it just me or has everything got really slow?

It was OK here last night, this morning it's a bit slow. I'm putting it down to teething problems with the new site : and I suspect the ABRSM were fully expecting to find the odd glitch etc. to what is a fairly radical change.

It is certainly clever. No dispute there. But it also looks horrible, and cheap.

Yep, I did.

Show off!

I can't say I like it or think it's particularly clever. So I've blocked the image using Adblock Plus (if you don't use Firefox already, there's reason enough.) That has the advantage of moving everything up a bit in the browser window. Now if only I could work out how to get rid of the text block listing all the forum rules on each page ...

For my sins, I am a programmer. The fixed width display is supposedly good programming practice. Personally I think the fixed width is too wide as not everybody has a big enough screen to fit it all on.

Actually I quite like the new website design. It looks fresh and modern. I understand why it's been done, but having the new header and footer on the old-style forum pages looks incohesive.

As for the logo, it's undoubtedly very clever if you are a graphic designer and can appreciate these things. To me it looks simple and clean and striking - though sadly not very distinctive or distinguished. And unfortunately for me, the ABRSM website no longer looks like the sort of website that I could legitimately be looking at while I'm at work!!

Says who? I am also a programmer. Obviously we have been brought up differently. Sometimes fixed width is a good solution, sometimes not - it depends. My education taught me (and my experience confirms it) that if you can give the user more control over their application, without adding too much complication then you should do so. This forum is a case where adjusting the display to the user controlled width worked just fine, and should not have been changed.

Hi Tom.

Note I used the word "supposedly". Fixed width layout is one of many things that have been imposed on me from above, and must be applied throughout our organisation (whether or not it is appropriate to the particular use). I'm sure this can't only happen in my organisation. Personally I don't think it makes best use of the screen, but it does ensure that we can control exactly how our pages look, i.e. so that they appear the same on different users' systems. I was perhaps too hasty to extrapolate that just because my organisation insists this is good practice that the rest of the world also thinks so. Incidentally I was not educated as a programmer, so I shall concede on this one.

Fixed width was a stupid idea when the web was getting started, now it is even sillier: this laptop is a 16:9 screen, my desktop has a 4:3, both different sizes, then there are people accessing websites on their phones. How can trying to force a fixed screen layout possibly be a good idea?

Thanks to YAP's script, I can at least miss out all the fluff at the top of the page: the white sides bother me less - I find busy-ness in webpages annoying, as I prefer to see where everything is.

Firefox lets you zoom out until the page fits the width of your screen. However, the downside of that is that the characters get smaller, and with grey characters on a light blue background the contrast is poor, so I agree: the greater width is a pain.

Another change that I have noticed is that Firefox no longer puts my user name and password in the boxes for login. Could that be the result of a change to the web site also? I don't think I have changed anything.

The Firefox extension 'Secure Login' still works fine on the site for me - it's a handy little add-on, I've found.