If the big change over at Last.FM was any indication of what the new trend is I'm a bit worried too. At least Last.FM can be cured with Firefox and a Stylish script. However, it may just end up being really neat as well.
Just out of curiosity, what is it about the new version of Last.fm that has so annoyed so many people?
I've never used it enough to work out what all the different bits are for anyway, so for me the new look is a HUGE improvement as it almost makes sense now.
But it is a bit plainer and duller looking.
Now that I'm figuring out where everything is and what they've changed their names to it's not as bad. The two things I used the most "Reply Tracker" and "Recommended Reading" haven't been added back to the format yet. My biggest complaints over all would be the lack of a wide screen compatible format and the emphasis placed on my favourite artists, and recommendation instead of my recent plays, charts, and journals.
What do others here think of the 'improvements' made to emu's site recently? I've already posted on this on their message board, just thought it might be worth pursueing on this one too. At first look I liked the new layout and features for the artist pages, but after a few days use of them I'm really sick of lots of extra scrolling. I know the mouse wheel makes it fairly easy to do, but, this new layout seems to have pushed the real reason that I use and subscribe to emu, to download music, is becoming a lower priority in the way that the pages are laid out. Much more emphasis being given to the increased interactivity, which I don't care about but accept that some users will do. If you minimise the discover, explore and other similar boxes, some artists' material will be about 3 times longer sections than all this extra stuff we now have on emu's site.
Yes, I agree. It's all very well adding new 'interactive' type features but as usual the implementation and the design are, at best, poorly thought out. It's like they've employed designers(?) who have never actually used the site or bothered to ask anyone who has - even if just internally. Somebody's just decided it all needs to be a bit more 'web 2.0' regardless of functionality.
As I've said before, I'll stick with them while it's still the best deal around, but the site goes downhill every time they 'improve' it. If there was a serious competitor, I'd be off like a shot.
Comments
I've never used it enough to work out what all the different bits are for anyway, so for me the new look is a HUGE improvement as it almost makes sense now.
But it is a bit plainer and duller looking.
It's like they've employed designers(?) who have never actually used the site or bothered to ask anyone who has - even if just internally.
Somebody's just decided it all needs to be a bit more 'web 2.0' regardless of functionality.
As I've said before, I'll stick with them while it's still the best deal around, but the site goes downhill every time they 'improve' it.
If there was a serious competitor, I'd be off like a shot.
Ooooops, No
I was testing how it looked before fixing the trunctuated post on the C. N&N thread..
I wasn't even aware that i hit the post button.
- Sorry . . .