Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

change the colours.. grey is bad.. but it was looking promising..

Looks like it will give some good structure and things to the trading process. Not sure about the auction idea but some people will be up for that I guess.

Hey Dude, is there a login button?

Nope. No button. However there is a small text hyperlink that now allows me to login to the classified. :P BTW the link did not do that before.

d00d - love the site, I couldn't survive without it :love: (and was a tad frustrated last night after trying to fit these f*n turbos again and finding out my o2 sensors were stuffed), so my abruptness was not intentional (and apologise if offence).

But many times do I need to be authenticated? From a useability perspective, why would anyone think they would need to login to the classifieds separately when they are already logged into SAU?

hey mate,

thats completely not supposed to happen - all sections will use the same cookie, so you *should* only have to log in once.. i will look into why you are having to log into the different sections seperately.

And dont worry about abruptness mate, tis cool.

Christian

I think a few people are having problems coming to terms with the fact that you need to login in again into the Classifieds section before they can make a post. It took me a while to work it out. A few things I've noticed:

- the layout of the advert needs some work. Once you start putting images in (at least under Safari for Mac OS X) everything starts to get squashed up.

- A feature lost from the main forums is the ability to format the text in the body (or in this case 'Description') of the advert, that was a very handy feature to highlight particular parts of the advert.

- Only 3 images can be uploaded rather than 10 or so for the previous for sale section.

- I much prefer the previous For Sale section as the interface is the same as for the rest of the forums, it's easy to use because most are already used to it, and it seems there's a fair amount of functionality lost, for little (what seems to me) gain.

- The placing of thumbnails is nice, but not too practical as the page scroll will be fairly long in comparison to what people had previously.

- The adverts in the classifieds don't seem to be picked up under the rest of the site search and visa versa.

Any chance we can go back to what we had? It worked well, and wasn't much (if anything) wrong with it. I'm not knocking the intention of it either, so don't get me wrong. The rest of the forums seems to be going ahead in leaps and bounds.

Cheers

Brendan

Man I dont know how to word this the best way,

But. I really hate the new section. the old style was MUCH more easyer to navigate and use.

I think the forums have got too many sections and with this addition it takes alot more time and effort to have a look in the classifieds section that i now choose to skip it on my daily browsing.

Sorry, But i just had to get it off my chest.

some people might like the new section, I however stongly dislike it :rofl:

Thanks anyway :D

Essential.

hmmm :P

I definately thought this would be better, its virtually no different to use than the forums and makes finding info about the product easier... its also picked up by the search engines too... (and it cost moulah!! :( )

Is there anything I can do to make it easier to use? what if i integrated it into the current forums so it lists down the page like them?

a few of the section will be removed soon (actually tonight) so it will be easier to navigate then.

Christian

Christian dont get me wrong, your doing an awsome job.

Maybe you should try intergrating it, i mean it just may work?

the worest that can happen if people not like it, which by the sounds of it the current setup isnt that much better.

Im unsure but are you able to reply to the posts in the classified, a i couldnt find a reply button?

Thanks,

Essential

hmmm :P  

 

I definately thought this would be better, its virtually no different to use than the forums and makes finding info about the product easier... its also picked up by the search engines too... (and it cost moulah!! :( )

 

Is there anything I can do to make it easier to use? what if i integrated it into the current forums so it lists down the page like them?

 

a few of the section will be removed soon (actually tonight) so it will be easier to navigate then.

 

Christian

Consistent look and feel is very important. If you could integrate all the posts into ONE column, then have a "type" field which could contain say WTB, Auction, Fixed Price, it would have the best of both worlds. The hyperlink then sends the user to the post - which means you have all the parts in one list.

The mouseover brief descriptions were great.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah i found that alot of parts can be wrong or "very" hard to get the real right one. I already bought some brakes years ago on me "old" GT calipers and they were wrong too 😄  I told them too. Even send them pictures...but they said "EBC catalogue has them on my car... So i dont know what their answer will be. I call monday them and let them know that they are really not on my car. If they were they would be already on a car...
    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
×
×
  • Create New...