OK {click}, I tried not to jump on the bandwagon {click}. I was willing to give
the changes a chance, but this {click} is getting very frustrating. In addition
to the pointless {click} relocation of essential functions and myriad
other dis{click}orienting site changes {click}{click} that have already been
pointed out, I've encountered two more annoying bugs {click}:
1) The wanted list no longer uses my default settings. I can see that it is
set to show only US stores in my wanted list settings, but when I go to the "Buy"
section of the wanted list, it shows all stores (but only after I {click} all
wanted lists and then {click} "Apply" ).
2) When I'm in a store and I type a part number into the search bar at the
top and press "Enter", the search invariably returns no results and takes
me to the "Page not Found" page. At this point, I can input the exact
same keystrokes into the search bar and it returns valid results. What gives?
I'm not one to fret over dwindling orders or to confuse coincidence with
causation, but since these new changes have been implemented, I've had one
middling order. That is about the slowest it ever gets for me, and it rarely
gets that slow. After spending some time today trying to relearn the wanted
list so I could make a few purchases for a MOC, it doesn't seem implausible
to me that the recent changes may have cooled the commercial aspects of this
site a bit (I did manage to get one order placed).
Again, I'm not someone who's against change, but I am bothered by pointless
change. I'm not seeing any improvements here, just an unpredictable, new
navigation bar with fewer features than the previous incarnation, and I'm
asking, "why?" I'd love it if someone (user or admin) could elucidate
the intended benefits of this most recent transmutation.
asking, "why?" I'd love it if someone (user or admin) could elucidate
the intended benefits of this most recent transmutation.
most likely backend changes, as many know, bricklink has lots of spaggeti code
and they are trying to fix that and the header/footer is a solid place to start.
as they had to rebuild it from scratch they went with a more modern design but
as many have noted it still has issues and bugs to be fixed
asking, "why?" I'd love it if someone (user or admin) could elucidate
the intended benefits of this most recent transmutation.
most likely backend changes, as many know, bricklink has lots of spaggeti code
and they are trying to fix that and the header/footer is a solid place to start.
as they had to rebuild it from scratch they went with a more modern design but
as many have noted it still has issues and bugs to be fixed
I can accept a need to rebuild, even from scratch. But if that is the explanation,
why are they building a
Surely rebuilding something from the ground up doesn’t preclude that thing from
emulating or evoking the earlier structure. Why not rebuild BrickLink from this
asking, "why?" I'd love it if someone (user or admin) could elucidate
the intended benefits of this most recent transmutation.
most likely backend changes, as many know, bricklink has lots of spaggeti code
and they are trying to fix that and the header/footer is a solid place to start.
as they had to rebuild it from scratch they went with a more modern design but
as many have noted it still has issues and bugs to be fixed
I can accept a need to rebuild, even from scratch. But if that is the explanation,
why are they building a
Surely rebuilding something from the ground up doesn’t preclude that thing from
emulating or evoking the earlier structure. Why not rebuild BrickLink from this
they went with a modern look to make the site more friendly and welcoming for
new users (which personally I like the look of it and many new users probably
do as well) however since they rebuilt it, they couldn't have everything
that exact same as before, they removed pages they thought people never used
and similar, some things are broken such as the CSS which needs adjusting and
some links are broken and the like but they have already fixed multiple things
and they said they plan to continue to do so. hopefully, they fix everything!
however since they rebuilt it, they couldn't have everything that exact same as before
Huh? How do you know this? You seem to be implying that 2024 software is somehow
inferior to year 2000 spaghetti code—so much so that it can’t take on a modern,
refreshed appearance without sacrificing existing levels of functionality. That’s
silly. They could easily add new features and refresh the interface while emulating
or retaining useful legacy features, they just don’t seem to want to. I just
wish we knew why. The cynical pragmatist in me says it’s probably due to
(You probably thought I was going to go with the obvious “Tile 1x2 with Currency”
macro. Heck, no! I’m all class! I’m so damn classy I’ve got a diamond for
a monocle!)
however since they rebuilt it, they couldn't have everything that exact same as before
Huh? How do you know this? You seem to be implying that 2024 software is somehow
inferior to year 2000 spaghetti code—so much so that it can’t take on a modern,
refreshed appearance without sacrificing existing levels of functionality. That’s
silly. They could easily add new features and refresh the interface while emulating
or retaining useful legacy features, they just don’t seem to want to. I just
wish we knew why.
Spaghetti!!!!!
I meant “couldn’t” in a more figurative sense, they were redesigning the header
and I highly doubt any higher ups would want the new header they are working
on from scratch to look and feel just like or similar to the older version. Don’t
get me wrong tho, I 100% agree they should have included some of the features
that were on the old one but on an overall level, most links are still there
and hopefully the other ones that are being requested will be added back as well
(i severely miss the working uninvocied orders link 😭)
The cynical pragmatist in me says it’s probably due to
(You probably thought I was going to go with the obvious “Tile 1x2 with Currency”
macro. Heck, no! I’m all class! I’m so damn classy I’ve got a diamond for
a monocle!)
USA, Minnesota
Canada, Ontario
