• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

the underlying force behind the change to the site

.....The theme that sits on top of the software is designed for today’s mobile generation, yes. To do otherwise would be committing to a slow death.

I used the 2014 Black theme on my phones for years, never had any issues with It.....2014 White for the laptop.

Nothing about the upgrade is a deal-breaker for me....Cheers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Patrice B
I get that younger people want shorter-form content,

IOW the TL:DNR instant gratification crowd.

Since so many can't take the time to keep their attention span up on a long post. I often wonder how they'll be able to get through a tune that's long and has multiple time changes and other stuff going on?

Here's the deal with us old farts:

1) we were programming on punch cards when the latest generation of code monkeys' PARENTS weren't even a glint in the milkman's eye, so it's not easy to pull the wool over our eyes.

2) We can recognize change for the sake of change (99% of UI "updates") versus change for functional reasons.

3) We know that efficiency in carrying out any task is to develop "muscle memory" for keystrokes or other routine rote actions, and 99% of UI "updates" take this principle out, tear it into shreds, stamp gleefully on it, then urinate on the concept and tell everyone who has anything negative to say about it that they're "old men yelling at clouds".

4) We don't see "new! as advertised on Fakebook!" as a value in itself. If the new thing works better and more simply (hah! fat chance!) we'll adopt it wholeheartedly, but new for the sake of being new doesn't wash with us.

So when you (not YOU, personally, probably, but whoever decides to change not just the stuff back there in the engine room but also to put the clutch on the right, gas in the middle, brake on the left, and make it so you turn the steering wheel left to go right ) change up the user interface, which did not need to be changed, yep, we get a bit salty.

Of course this here is an entertainment website, no one's going to get hurt. But I use a variety of commercial software for a living, doing important things (like stress analysis of mission critical hardware...) and those software companies are just as addicted to changing stuff. "How the hell do I do X, it was over here last week and now it's freaking disappeared!" and almost universally it's more keystrokes and even less-intuitive command names than it was, with a couple new bugs introduced as well.

Now here's how you can mitigate this (not that any IT or SW entity cares, because customer satisfaction is down around priority #33,000 in that industry).

1) Tell us up front that there'll be changes to the way the thing looks and operates, because the company that owns it has changed a bunch of stuff and we can't do anything about it.

2) When something's worse than it was before and there's not a thing you can do about it, don't try to make us believe S$%^ is chocolate pudding. Own up to it. "Yeah, we're sorry that sucks worse than it did, but it came down from Corporate and we're stuck with it" is a hell of a lot more palatable than "Oh, no, it's not worse than it was, you're just a bunch of old technophobe folks yelling at clouds while you wait for lunch to be served at the nursing home, and if you were young and hip and intelligent like us, you'd realize it and thank us with tears in your eyes, for making the operation that used to take 2 keystrokes and 4 seconds require 15 keystrokes and two minutes and fail every 16th time or so."

"....We know 90% of the negative feedback come from resistance to change..." No, 90% of the negative feedback comes from resistance to UNNECESSARY change that makes our tasks harder, more time-consuming, and buggier.

How many people out there you know still making engineering calculations on a slide rule? Not very damn many. That's a change that actually improved operations. How many people do finite element analysis by hand, taking days to do one matrix operation? How many people refuse to drive an automobile with computer control of fuel-air mixture and ignition?

No, the oldies will rush to adopt change when it is actually change for the better. Just fiddly-dicking around with stuff so it looks different and works different? NAAAAHHHH.
As another "old guy" I 100% agree with all you said. I've been around since the early days of the internet. When everything was text based and we had to use modems to connect. Many of us ran DOS based "Bulletin Boards" off servers in our homes and used Usenet to get info and advice from other users. Mozilla and Netscape changed all that. The end result is what we have now. Access to the greastest depository of knowledge the world has ever seen. However, along with that there is the good and the bad.

Nowadays, programmers seem like they're getting paid by how many new clicks they can create. Or how many more steps we need to do something. Smartphones are even worse. Oh well, I digress. As humans we either adapt or die.
 
Here's the deal with us old farts:

1) we were programming on punch cards when the latest generation of code monkeys' PARENTS weren't even a glint in the milkman's eye, so it's not easy to pull the wool over our eyes.

2) We can recognize change for the sake of change (99% of UI "updates") versus change for functional reasons.

3) We know that efficiency in carrying out any task is to develop "muscle memory" for keystrokes or other routine rote actions, and 99% of UI "updates" take this principle out, tear it into shreds, stamp gleefully on it, then urinate on the concept and tell everyone who has anything negative to say about it that they're "old men yelling at clouds".

4) We don't see "new! as advertised on Fakebook!" as a value in itself. If the new thing works better and more simply (hah! fat chance!) we'll adopt it wholeheartedly, but new for the sake of being new doesn't wash with us.

So when you (not YOU, personally, probably, but whoever decides to change not just the stuff back there in the engine room but also to put the clutch on the right, gas in the middle, brake on the left, and make it so you turn the steering wheel left to go right ) change up the user interface, which did not need to be changed, yep, we get a bit salty.

Of course this here is an entertainment website, no one's going to get hurt. But I use a variety of commercial software for a living, doing important things (like stress analysis of mission critical hardware...) and those software companies are just as addicted to changing stuff. "How the hell do I do X, it was over here last week and now it's freaking disappeared!" and almost universally it's more keystrokes and even less-intuitive command names than it was, with a couple new bugs introduced as well.

Now here's how you can mitigate this (not that any IT or SW entity cares, because customer satisfaction is down around priority #33,000 in that industry).

1) Tell us up front that there'll be changes to the way the thing looks and operates, because the company that owns it has changed a bunch of stuff and we can't do anything about it.

2) When something's worse than it was before and there's not a thing you can do about it, don't try to make us believe S$%^ is chocolate pudding. Own up to it. "Yeah, we're sorry that sucks worse than it did, but it came down from Corporate and we're stuck with it" is a hell of a lot more palatable than "Oh, no, it's not worse than it was, you're just a bunch of old technophobe folks yelling at clouds while you wait for lunch to be served at the nursing home, and if you were young and hip and intelligent like us, you'd realize it and thank us with tears in your eyes, for making the operation that used to take 2 keystrokes and 4 seconds require 15 keystrokes and two minutes and fail every 16th time or so."

"....We know 90% of the negative feedback come from resistance to change..." No, 90% of the negative feedback comes from resistance to UNNECESSARY change that makes our tasks harder, more time-consuming, and buggier.

How many people out there you know still making engineering calculations on a slide rule? Not very damn many. That's a change that actually improved operations. How many people do finite element analysis by hand, taking days to do one matrix operation? How many people refuse to drive an automobile with computer control of fuel-air mixture and ignition?

No, the oldies will rush to adopt change when it is actually change for the better. Just fiddly-dicking around with stuff so it looks different and works different? NAAAAHHHH.
First I've got nothing to do with the TB team, I just made a comment as a pro web designer (I can put myself in their shoes).

I'm annoyed to be forced to change my habits too, just like you. That's what "resistance to change" is mostly.

But if you think about each of these changes individually like if you were a new visitor, with no prior habits, most of the time it's better, or equal, very rarely worst IMO.

They didn't change for the sake of change. They had to upadate the underlying platform for security reasons. And they worked hard to make the new one look and feel as close and possible to the old one. But they hadn't updated the platform for such a long time that the gap was too big.

To you and all the raging users: be nice, you are using a free service, and you have no idea what efforts they had to put into this.

To the Talkbass team: you should consider updating the platform more often in the future. In my experience of web designer, it's easier for the users to get used more frequently to smaller changes. And if you really have to make big updates, communicate more upfront.

To all: be patients, users will get used and remaining bugs will be fixed.
 
Last edited:
@turf3 , you make some good points, and I agree with a lot of what you say. I want to offer a different perspective on some points.

2) We can recognize change for the sake of change (99% of UI "updates") versus change for functional reasons.

I’d put it more at 50%. Maybe less, the line between the two isn’t always clear. But more importantly, keeping up with modern UX design and software functionality is in itself a valid reason for change. You have to think not only of existing users, but also future users. What may seem as impractical from the perspective of a longtime user because of familiarity may make things easier for new users. The difficult thing is to strike a balance between the two.

In my opinion, the Talkbass team and the people who make the forum software have done a pretty good job of finding that balance, but this is of course subjective.

The old software was starting to feel dated to me, and I’m 46 and have been using forums for over 20 years. Imagine how it must have felt to a teenager who’s just starting out playing bass. So even if this update were just about the UI (it wasn’t), I think it would have been justified. If anything, Talkbass has been very conservative in pushing changes.

2) When something's worse than it was before and there's not a thing you can do about it, don't try to make us believe S$%^ is chocolate pudding. Own up to it. "Yeah, we're sorry that sucks worse than it did, but it came down from Corporate and we're stuck with it" is a hell of a lot more palatable than "Oh, no, it's not worse than it was, you're just a bunch of old technophobe folks yelling at clouds while you wait for lunch to be served at the nursing home, and if you were young and hip and intelligent like us, you'd realize it and thank us with tears in your eyes, for making the operation that used to take 2 keystrokes and 4 seconds require 15 keystrokes and two minutes and fail every 16th time or so.

I agree in principle, but only if the new software is objectively worse. I don’t think that’s the case here. Is the new design really that different from the old one? I just don’t see it, but again, that’s subjective.

Also, the staff have made it clear that this update was absolutely necessary. But there’s nothing to apologize for, IMO.

"....We know 90% of the negative feedback come from resistance to change..." No, 90% of the negative feedback comes from resistance to UNNECESSARY change that makes our tasks harder, more time-consuming, and buggier.

Agreed, but I’ve only seen other users use that argument, not staff members.

And while I don’t think that it is wise to say it in those words, there is a lot of truth to it. I’ve learned not to trust my first reaction to a change, but to give it at least week. I’ve gotten used to the forum in less than a day, because it honestly doesn’t feel that different to me. My guess, based on similar situations in the past, is that in a month time, most of the people who complain now will have forgotten this whole thing even happened.

Just as you should always ask yourself if you want something just because it’s new and shiny, you should also ask if you think the old thing is better than the new one just because you are familiar with it.

In short, unnecessary change is a thing, but so is resistance to change. And what is necessary, is debatable.
 
You mean the generation that takes selfies whilst walking off a cliff. No thanks. Common sense change = Good. Change to attract the most narcissistic lemmings in human history = bad. I guess I should put on my flame resistant gear he he

I'm looking at your avatar. That's the damnedest-looking butterfly I've ever seen.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Patrice B and Ewo
All forums like this are skewing older. Younger players are few and far between. There is no need to practice when I can fix the mistakes in 30 seconds. Those that want to talk about playing online are even fewer.

Well, all forums are skewing older. It's a format that just isn't used as much anymore.

There are a lot of younger bass players/musicians of all kinds, but they have more resources available now and other ways of talking to each other. They practice, they ask for tips and learning materials, they record themselves and share videos within those places for critique, all kinds of stuff.

Plus this forum, in particular, has a rep as being full of stodgy old people. The sort who are resistant to change, complain too much, trash talk anything new in music/production/etc, and so on. You get the idea. Depending on who you ask, mentions of this place will induce eye rolling, warnings about picking through the crap, even advice to stay away and go somewhere more useful. It's not 100%, but it's there.
 
it's all about demographics. the owners know the site has been skewing older. that is NOT the direction they want to take things, thus this attempt to attract and retain younger viewers, even " influencers. " so we get this levels and achievements stuff. the most glaring tell, of course, is the " create " button. really guys? hilarious!
This is the worst take I've seen on this update yet. Congrats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flojob

Latest posts