jump to last post 1-31 of 31 discussions (98 posts)

Who wants the new HP profile? Get it here.

  1. Melch-i-zedek profile image64
    Melch-i-zedekposted 5 years ago

    I already have it. big_smile You can have it too.

    1. IzzyM profile image88
      IzzyMposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I'm not sure I'm going to like the new profile page sad

      1. Melch-i-zedek profile image64
        Melch-i-zedekposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I hope you will like it, Izzy. And if there are specific changes you would like to see made, suggest them to the Hub team now, cuz sooner or later everyone will have it. smile

        1. IzzyM profile image88
          IzzyMposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          I take it you are staff, under your own username.

          I have no idea about what suggestions to make to staff, at this moment, but I am assuming these changes are being made for a reason.

          Guess I'm just going to have to trust staff to have got it right. In fact, it is their site, not mine! So, it is entirely up to them.

          I can't complain - they made this platform powerful, which it is still is, despite my own Google slap, which by the way, happened exactly one year ago today.

          I have other subdomains which prove the power of this platform, so at this stage I'm going with the flow.

          I'll let you know if I can't navigate the new profile page when I get it.

          1. Melch-i-zedek profile image64
            Melch-i-zedekposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            No, I'm not staff. Just an average Hubber.

            1. IzzyM profile image88
              IzzyMposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              An average hubber that has been here 5 minutes yet knew how to access the new profile, and knew that is was a new profile and that it will take a little persuasion to get us to change to it, until it becomes compulsory.

              Yeah OK, I've got a zip up the back, can you see it?

              1. Melch-i-zedek profile image64
                Melch-i-zedekposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                I can't see it, and I can't see why you need to be antagonistic. I have been here 5 days and I happen to have read the blog post about the new profile.

                1. Sally's Trove profile image86
                  Sally's Troveposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  No one's being antagonistic. This change was a big surprise to some of us who have been here for a long time. Good for you that you got it so quickly. You hadn't been using the other format for four or five years. But if you had, you might be a little disconcerted now because of the changes that will have to be made.

                2. IzzyM profile image88
                  IzzyMposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Sorry if I came across as antagonistic. I didn't mean to be.

              2. EmpressFelicity profile image78
                EmpressFelicityposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                lol lol lol

                Funny, the first thing I thought when I opened up this thread was, "If the OP's just been here a few days, then I am one of the Cheeky Girls."

      2. profile image0
        Sophia Angeliqueposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Wizzley and a few other sites have already changed to this format. After I got used to it, I liked it. However, I think this particular one looks a bit washed out.

    2. J.S.Matthew profile image84
      J.S.Matthewposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I just upgraded to the New Profile and I love it! I have been waiting for this for a long time! We can now use our own images for the background! Nice job HubPages Team!

      JSMatthew~

      1. Anamika S profile image74
        Anamika Sposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I have done it too! However I dislike the fact that I can no longer use HP referral trackers and my own links on the Profile. I don't mind the followers but I don't want the world to know who I am following. I also think the latest images and Others you might like. However, I like the social networking sites link, featured hubs and option of changing backgrounds.

    3. 2uesday profile image84
      2uesdayposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I think it is confusing for us that the link in the OP is to a member of HubPages staff.  Only by clicking on your profile image did I see your profile page and not hers.

      1. Melch-i-zedek profile image64
        Melch-i-zedekposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I linked Simone's profile because you can only update yours by visiting someone who has already done so. I can't link my own as that would be self-promotion.

    4. Marisa Wright profile image95
      Marisa Wrightposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I'm going to delay as long as possible.  My profile has pagerank, so the links on it to my blogs are valuable.

      If I switch to the new profile, I lose those links.  So not in a rush.

    5. Jenn-Anne profile image92
      Jenn-Anneposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I was pleased to see that some of the concerns originally expressed about the new profile have been addressed.  In general I like how it looks but will probably wait a little bit longer until some of the glitches have been fixed.

  2. 2uesday profile image84
    2uesdayposted 5 years ago

    I think that the background makes it look like a blog page.

    1. Melch-i-zedek profile image64
      Melch-i-zedekposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      It seems to be optional at the moment. But beware, there is no returning to the old profile once you've opted for the new.

  3. rebekahELLE profile image90
    rebekahELLEposted 5 years ago

    I think I do, I'm kind of nervous to click that update button.  Who else has updated theirs?

    Did we hear feedback from HP about any changes they may have noticed with traffic, PR, etc?

    1. Melch-i-zedek profile image64
      Melch-i-zedekposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I don't know. I just saw the blog post as soon as it came out and kinda rushed to it. Because I think the new profile is awesome!

  4. Aficionada profile image89
    Aficionadaposted 5 years ago

    Moving in that direction.....

    I hope someone (staff? engineers?) will pay attention to the fact that the Featured Hubs are still scrolling unevenly.  One of the series barely flashed in the box, not allowing enough time to read it, while the others scrolled through at a more appropriate, leisurely pace.

  5. Uninvited Writer profile image82
    Uninvited Writerposted 5 years ago

    I just changed mine. I wish I could link to more sites though.

    1. rebekahELLE profile image90
      rebekahELLEposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Yours looks nice.  Are there many backgrounds to choose from? 
      I may find one of my own images.

      1. Melch-i-zedek profile image64
        Melch-i-zedekposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        There are four backgrounds to choose from, if I remember correctly. Plus the options to have no background or to upload your own.

        1. brianlokker profile image94
          brianlokkerposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Is there a recommended image size if you use your own background image?

  6. Sally's Trove profile image86
    Sally's Troveposted 5 years ago

    Now I have to completely redesign my profile text to fit with this format. I hate that I can't embed links. Officially from me, I hate this change. Not just because of the changes I have to make, but because of the effort my readers have to go through....selecting hubs or forum posts, categories. None of this is intuitive to readers.

  7. Marisa Wright profile image95
    Marisa Wrightposted 5 years ago

    The big thing for me is the fact that my backlinks will disappear.  I'm surprised no one else is worried about that?

    1. Melch-i-zedek profile image64
      Melch-i-zedekposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I think a lot of people are worried about that, but there is just not a thing that can be done about it.

      1. Marisa Wright profile image95
        Marisa Wrightposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        .....except not switching over before you have to, so you keep your links as long as you can smile

    2. profile image0
      Sophia Angeliqueposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Marisa Wright - first thing that occurred to me was that all the work I had done linking my profile to various hubs would disappear. I never really did much back linking though, relying more on keywords.

    3. MyWebs profile image81
      MyWebsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I totally hate the fact I will no longer be able to link to a couple of my own sites. I have external accounts where I have a PR4 and I link to my profile to pass on some Google juice to my profile here that is a PR3. It's no fair that I can't use some of that link juice as I see fit. It's mostly because of my efforts my profile has that PR3 . I'll probably remove every link that I can to my profile and point them to my own website if HP doesn't change their stance on this issue.

      I can see something needed to be done with some profiles just full of links, but now they have went to the opposite extreme.

      Another thing, several of the links on my profile actually link to my better hubs using my main keywords as the anchor text. If I lose those links those hubs authority most likely will be diminished some effecting traffic and earnings.

      7 links go to my hubs, 4 links go to my social networking accounts,  2 links go to my own websites and 1 link is a HP signup link. 4 of my hubs I link to are some of my higher traffic hubs. This is bad in my opinion. Most websites give you at least one do follow link in your profile. New profile = 0 do follow links!

      1. profile image0
        Sophia Angeliqueposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Mywebs, might not happen. I never invested in links but had a PR3 for a while. Not sure what it's dropped to now. Just checked again and I still have a PR3 and I have never bothered with backlinks - ever.

  8. prairieprincess profile image97
    prairieprincessposted 5 years ago

    I think the inability to see the niches on our page is a big weakness. I have switched over, and love the look, but I think there should be some kind of categories on the hubs, rather than just showing them by order written. Showing the categories on our profile pages really plays into the idea of niches, and the lack of this on the new pages takes away from this.

    1. Melch-i-zedek profile image64
      Melch-i-zedekposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      You can sort by category if you click "Show: All."

      1. prairieprincess profile image97
        prairieprincessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Wow, that is good. I never saw that. Thanks!

  9. Aficionada profile image89
    Aficionadaposted 5 years ago

    I discovered a couple of little glitches in the new profile, and I have opened a separate thread for reporting them.

  10. Scribenet profile image87
    Scribenetposted 5 years ago

    Updated to the new profile after seeing this thread. I like the look!  There is a section for "links" on the bottom of that edit page ( I haven't used them yet)...you can check to see what is available by checking any new profile page, you do not need to convert yet, but it gives you an idea what is available and gives you time to plan ahead smile.

  11. profile image0
    Arlene V. Pomaposted 5 years ago

    I'm going to wait this one out because I'm in no rush to do this transition.  The way the Hubs are listed looks a little too busy for me.

  12. Lisa HW profile image81
    Lisa HWposted 5 years ago

    I switched.  I like it OK.   I couldn't get the featured Hubs thing to work right, so I have a horrible picture from a recent Hub as my "featured" - but, whatever.  I'll so some finishing touches another time.  (That "can't-switch-back" thing is a little scary, though, isn't it...    smile  )

  13. Mark Ewbie profile image83
    Mark Ewbieposted 5 years ago

    I switched.

    The featured hub pictures is not working for me.  How can my pictures look so rubbish?  Given that it is like a DUHHHHHH - selling point - I would be grateful if someone could sort it out.

    Why does a picture that looks OK on a Hub not look OK in a feature?

    The background thing doesn't work either.

    Apart from that - I like the idea of bombarding a reader with 250 hubs to scroll through.

    1. Lisa HW profile image81
      Lisa HWposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Except for the one I saw with the top of the stick-lady's head cut off, I think your profile looks really nice with all your stick art on one page.   smile  (My images don't look like rubbish.  They ARE rubbish.  smile   In fact, now that I see all my Hubs in one place, most of them look like rubbish too.

      Word to anyone reluctant to make the permanent switch:  The new profile no longer allows us to leave a lot of Hubs just kind of buried somewhere unless someone eventually scrolls through a zillion of them (the way they are with the old profile).  But I think, cosmetically, it looks nice.   smile  Not everyone is as horrified by as many of their own Hubs as I am.   I have to either shape up or ship out. now that I have the shiny new profile.  hmm    roll

      1. Mark Ewbie profile image83
        Mark Ewbieposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Well thanks Lisa!  Now I've calmed down slightly - yes I like all the other pages (mostly).  It's just that the feature pictures are cut off - and considering they are the FEATURE pics - I'd especially like them to retain the same characteristics as when they are displayed elsewhere.

        Otherwise it makes me look like I don't care - sling the pic up and cut most of it off.  Not a good way to feature something.

        And...

        Yours looks pretty good too.  It's nice to see ALL the hubs.  But you have the same cut off feature pic problem as I do.

  14. Mark Ewbie profile image83
    Mark Ewbieposted 5 years ago

    AND... has anyone from HP sat through the featured hubs (with the garbage picture display) and seen what happens when you get back to the first one?

    The screen then displays blanks with a brief flash of the featured hubs.

    THIS IS ABSOLUTE RUBBISH!!

    TEST, TEST AND TEST AGAIN.

    Why are computer people incapable of checking before they release their stuff.

    So pretty please, with sugar on top,  how about someone from HP responsible for this spends half an hour testing today and then fixes the problems.

    Meanwhile someone else can spend 30 minutes drafting a message of explanation - sorry for the teething trouble  - we are fixing it and will have it solved by close of play.

    Then someone more senior organises another 30 minute meeting and says why the F--- are you guys releasing software that isn't working correctly?  Lets' find a way to make sure this NEVER EVER happens again.  It is embarassing and damaging to our image - not just for those idiot authors but more importantly for our search customers and our advertisers.

    Better NO CHANGE at all - than change that does not work correctly.

    ....

    I'll take this feeling with me to work today.  I'm surrounded by morons there as well.

    1. Glenn Stok profile image95
      Glenn Stokposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Mark,  I'm just as upset as you are. Anyone who already claimed Google Authorship will lose it when they switch to the new profile. This bug has not been fixed yet since the initial release to the staff. Google's Rich Snippets Test program clearly shows that it fails. sad

      1. Mark Ewbie profile image83
        Mark Ewbieposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I understand your anger / annoyance.  Hubpgaes is a business and given that it's business is the site and the software they need to up their game.

        IF it was my responsibility there would be a meeting first thing to decide on a course of action to address these problems TODAY.

        Next week would be a follow up to find out what needs improving in terms of releasing inadequate poorly tested code.

        Did the early adopters, who work for HP, not notice these issues?

        1. Glenn Stok profile image95
          Glenn Stokposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          I guess they didn't notice. My bug report post a month ago didn't help. I see what they did. They thought they fixed the code by adding "Google+" to the anchor. But this only works when you have Google Plus, which is the full social network. It DOES NOT fix the problem for Hubbers who chose to use the regular Google profile, as I do. And I see others do too.

          Not everyone wants to be forced to update to Google Plus when they don't need another social network. that. If you only have the regular Google Profile then the code HubPages is using fails the authorship markup test. Google provided that Tool. I guess they haven't used it to test their code in all cases. I'm a programmer system analyst and I don't release code until I test ALL CASES!

          I tried the markup test with "profiles . google . com" as soon as I saw that HP still had the bug in the code, and it fails.  Anyone who upgraded to Google plus is okay, however.

          I don't think it's fair that HubPages is forcing us to use Google Plus when the regular Google profile is acceptable.  I can't switch to the new HP profile until they fix this.  I don't need to be on another social network. Too much to keep track of. I don't know what they are thinking.

        2. profile image0
          writeronlineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Totally agree with you, Mark. Aspects like page layout and visual style will always be open to subjective/creative differences of opinion.  And the new layout does offer individuals the chance to personalise their page to some extent. But site functionality, over which we as contributors have nil control, but from whose malfunction we suffer directly (nothing drives a page visitor away faster than a page not loading accurately) on a platform claimed to be world class, should be faultless. As you say, did the early adopters/pre-testers not notice the basic, annoying, potentially fatal flaws(ie; click aways) that you and others are pointing out? And just as importantly, what of the in-use examples? The OP links to Simone's page. Head of Outreach. Important, senior staff member. Her page malfunctions begin with the profile copy. Intended I'm sure to be in one panel. Unless SS intentionally laid it out so the "By night, I'm Batman" resolve is hardly noticed two lines down, and flush left, vs the rest being set solid, and indented..? Likewise, her featured hubs suffer from the randomised delay upon returning from elsewhere, with the effect that white space is the most predominant feature. In adition, 'recent images' aren't contained within the display box when enlarged, and instead bleed half-in, half-over the toned-back content from the previous page imagery/content. Does Simone also not see or care about these fundamental errors, which detract so badly from the site's intended class-leading profile?

          Worse, these are the errors clearly visible to 'the ordinary person' which is all I am. The  code issues identified by Glenn Stok also show a disturbingly cavalier attitude on the part of HP management towards the 'rights' (I know,we have none really) of contributors.

          I agree with yours and Glenn Stok's view that something so important that works so poorly should not yet have been released, and I'm amazed and disappointed that it has been.

    2. Shadesbreath profile image85
      Shadesbreathposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      ROFL. I love you, man. Just, lolololol(I wish there was a way to exponential numbers here).

      Hey, you have to admit, that unending scroll really works for you. Your pictures rock, and people with an eye for humor are going to figure it out INSTANTLY.

      If HP can figure out how to make the new hub hopping system work for stuff like ours (and right now the ranking choices are awful... my tags are all intentionally awful just as a place to start, and all that scanning stuff etc. is going to require people crap on my stuff ... by design?), this whole thing could be cool. Imagine if they had a progressive system of moving good stuff like yours towards the top based on read times and ratings. They might actually create an author base for ebook publication that they could do for people, make money, and, for the first time since the beginning, they could make bank off of the creative stuff instead of the yanking the SERP algorithm chain (which than also do).

      I'm hopeful here (though not really looking forward to putting in the time to design my new profile and build graphics, etc.).

  15. Glenn Stok profile image95
    Glenn Stokposted 5 years ago

    I see that the bug I reported a month ago is still in the new profile that causes us to lose our Google Authorship. So I'm going to have to wait before I switch over to the new profile.

    Many Hubbers have already claimed their Authorship in the past year and I am sure they don't want to lose it. I hope this simple fix gets taken care of soon.

    I posted an update for Micki in the other forum at http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/100457#post2171760 since she said it would be fixed before releasing the new profile.

    I am sure this just got lost among all the other important issues. So I'll wait. roll

    1. Melch-i-zedek profile image64
      Melch-i-zedekposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Are you sure about this? I've just google'd "how to make people uncomfortable" and there is the authorship.

      Edit: Sorry. I've just seen the other post.

      1. lobobrandon profile image84
        lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Hmm why did you google that particular phrase?? You planning on making people feel uncomfortable here? tongue

        Anyway, I want the capability to link from the profile back! It's been just 2 days since I link to my blog and I won't be able to do it for much longer?? Looks ok but there are some changes that I'd love, just as with everyone else here.

        1. Melch-i-zedek profile image64
          Melch-i-zedekposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Yes, I'm always trying to find new ways to make people feel uncomfortable.

          You can still link to a personal website or blog, you will just miss the anchor text.

          1. lobobrandon profile image84
            lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            big_smile just kidding. Btw Melch you can just link to one website/blog as I see it. But, what if you've got more than that? Also, the anchor text is really important.

            1. Melch-i-zedek profile image64
              Melch-i-zedekposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              LOL I know. Me too.

              I had never really linked to any one site from my profile, so I kind of don't feel the pain of those who have this issue. But my most sincere condolences to them. And here is a sad face: sad

              Btw, I love it when people shorten my username like that. It just kinda feels right. wink Did you know that by calling me Melch you have literally called me "My king"?

              1. lobobrandon profile image84
                lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                Oh did I lol

    2. soni2006 profile image49
      soni2006posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      But Glen can you please explain to me that if I have google plus and I have submitted the link for my G+ profile to my hubpages new profile, then will I lose my google authorship or not? Please shed some light on this.

      1. Glenn Stok profile image95
        Glenn Stokposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Soni,

        It works fine if you are using Google+ but the problem is that HP is using "nofollow" and that makes the Authorship fail for people who only have the regular Google Profile. I don't know if HP is intending to force us to sign up for Google+ or if they just never tested their coding.

        I see other posts that some people don't know about Google+ and Authorship. So for those, I'll explain briefly. Google+ is like Facebook, it's Google's social network. In order to claim Authorship of your Hubs with Google, all you need is a regular Google Profile, as Google explains in their Authorship instructions. But the bug HP has in the new HP profile forces us to use Google+.

        As long as you have either one, you can link to it from HP and back to HP from Google as a reciprocal link. This proves your authorship and provides the advantages of authorship. As long as HP doesn't fix the bug, you will need to sign up for Google+.

        1. Horatio Plot profile image83
          Horatio Plotposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Hi Glen,
          Sorry to be as thick as a brick, but what, briefly, are the advantages of Authorship and am I OK without it? I mean what will I lose without it.
          Thanks in advance.
          Horatio

          1. Glenn Stok profile image95
            Glenn Stokposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Horatio,

            I wrote a hub about it over a year ago but I can't self-promote here. So I'll give you a link to Search Engine Land, which is a great resource of information to answer your question about the advantages of Google Authorship ...

            http://searchengineland.com/the-definit … kup-123218

            1. wordscribe43 profile image94
              wordscribe43posted 5 years agoin reply to this

              I'm not particularly happy I adopted the new profile without knowing it would blow away my authorship...  If I would have known, I would have waited until HP worked out all the kinks until using it.  Oh well... hopefully it won't have any adverse effects.  I do hope they take this on as a priority on Monday, however.

              1. Glenn Stok profile image95
                Glenn Stokposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                Laura,

                I just checked your wordscribe43 profile with Google's Rich Snippets test. Your authorship markup is verified because you signed up for Google Plus.

                The bug HP has in the new HP profile only makes it fail for those who have a regular Google Profile. Google+, as you know, is Google's version of Facebook. I hope HP is not intending to force all of us to sign up for another social networking site.

                1. wordscribe43 profile image94
                  wordscribe43posted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Oh, thanks Glen!  I checked last night and it wasn't working.  It must have gotten fixed... big relief since it's been nagging me.  Thanks for taking your time to help everyone with this issue.  smile

                  1. Glenn Stok profile image95
                    Glenn Stokposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                    Yeah, I guess they secretly fixed it between my first post and now. But funny thing is that they didn't fix it for staff profiles.  I didn't realize they fixed it until I looked at the coding of your profile.  So I went ahead and created my new profile too.

                    But now I found another BUG.  They don't allow use of "profiles.google.com", which is the regular Google profile URL. This brings me back to my original concern that HP wants to force us to sign up for Google's social network.

                    Nevertheless, Google does a 301 redirect from "plus.google.com" to "profiles.google.com" so I was able to do it that way and it works.

                    Anyone who has a regular Google account needs to know how to do this. Unless they fix THAT bug too.

              2. Glenn Stok profile image95
                Glenn Stokposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                Laura,

                I was just checking the coding in your profile and discovered that HP did not use "nofollow" for your Google link. So I thought they fixed it and just didn't tell anyone.

                But then I checked a few other profiles. Robin Edmondson and Simone Smith both still have "nofollow" as I have been going by all along to discover this bug. But when I checked several other Hubbers who are not staff, they all have the correct authorship markup.

                Thanks to you I did more digging and found this Interesting discovery!  The bug is only on Staff members profiles. And they all seem to have Google Plus anyway, so it doesn't matter for them. Which is probably why they never discovered the bug on their own.

                So, assuming it's correct across the board for non staff, I'm going to switch over to the new profile now myself.

            2. Horatio Plot profile image83
              Horatio Plotposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Thanks Glen, much appreciated. Take care.
              H

  16. rebekahELLE profile image90
    rebekahELLEposted 5 years ago

    I think I'm going to hang on until some of the glitches are fixed.  Those that I looked at look nice.  I saw one that looks quite busy, it might be distracting.   HA, it will be fun looking at everyone's new profile page.  Looking at who people follow is kind of interesting.  big_smile
    I'm not thrilled about losing that sign up tracker on our profiles.

    I do have to say, Mark, your page looks great.  It just gave me my morning chuckles before leaving for work. lol

  17. Mark Ewbie profile image83
    Mark Ewbieposted 5 years ago

    Hey thanks Rebekah!  I kind of thought that too, all those stickmen in one place.  So despite my moaning - I'm pretty pleased with it.  It's like a mini Pinterest board.

  18. SimeyC profile image91
    SimeyCposted 5 years ago

    I just found a workaround for the 'blank' featured articles! Click on Q&A or Forum - it quickly shows your Q&A or Forum entires then reverts back to the Hubs very quickly and refreshes the featured articles.

    Design Feature or Design Flaw?!?!?! big_smile

    1. Aficionada profile image89
      Aficionadaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      This was one of the first things I noticed when I checked out a new profile, and I created a thread for reporting glitches with the new-pro.  That problem seems to be specific to IE8 - maybe. I didn't encounter it with my iPad. Which browser are you using? (I'll add the info to the other thread.)

  19. FatFreddysCat profile image91
    FatFreddysCatposted 5 years ago

    The new profile is OK I guess... the only thing I don't like is that the pictures/thumb nails for your scrolling "featured" hubs are HUGE so only a small part of the picture is visible. Can this be fixed?

    **EDIT** Whoops, nevermind...the problem I described was going on when I switched the the "new profile" last night ... now that I've logged in this morning I see that they must've addressed it, as the images are more properly sized now. See, this is what happens when I do forum posts before morning coffee.

  20. soni2006 profile image49
    soni2006posted 5 years ago

    I think losing google authorship with the new profile update is the biggest concern here as told by Glenn Stok.

  21. profile image0
    Sophia Angeliqueposted 5 years ago

    Okay, here are my thoughts.

    I'm a little tired of the presumption amongst website owners that everybody out there wants their private information hanging out for everybody to see. If I write on the forum, it's for HP writers, not for the world outside. Nor do I particularly want people to see who I am following. Also, while it's fun to answer questions, I really don't want search engines to pick up those answers. I think it's fair to say that if one has to sign into a website, that some sort of privacy is respected. I'm a writer. I want my articles to be exposed, not anything else.

    Next, I rather liked the what's hot, what's best, what's latest feature. When looking at hubs, that's where I went first. Now I can't see that. Also, I'd like to know, if possible, how HP selects what is featured. At least I knew that what's latest was the latest thing I wrote, what's hot was the hub that had the most views, and what's best was the one that had the highest hub score.  Now I'm clueless.

    Also, I think the formatting is a bit flat for lack of a better word. It would look better if it had a more magazine feel with three articles in one row, two in the next row, etc. It just looks very rigid as it.

    While I appreciate that HP is doing their best to get us readers, it seems that every time there are changes, some good things go and some bad things go. Can't we have a vote on what the best features are so that they are always retained.

    Thanks.

  22. paradigmsearch profile image86
    paradigmsearchposted 5 years ago

    This cracked me up, ""Others You Might Like" Blacklist. You can add up to 3 usernames to a blacklist. Users on the blacklist are not going to be displayed in the Others You May Like Box."

    So  far, my list remains empty... big_smile

  23. MyWebs profile image81
    MyWebsposted 5 years ago

    I think the new profile looks great. The size of these web pages is beyond crazy.

    Holding CTRL and hitting F5, which forces my Firefox browser to download everything as if I had never been on this website before gives me these results for this profile http://brett-tesol.hubpages.com/. This profile has 107 published hubs. I'm not sure if a thumbnail is loading for every hub, but it sure appears that way below as you will see.

    3.9 MB of data downloaded!
    34.07 seconds to load!
    YSlow score of 77 "C"
    Google PageSpeed of 68/100 "D"

    Why in the world is HP scaling images in either HTML or CSS code? You don't upload a 1MB picture then resize it in HTML code to display at 250x250 pixels. Why make the user download the huge version only to show a much smaller version? (which is exactly what HP is doing here) You don't! Instead you resize the picture smaller and use that version to save bandwidth.

    Page Speed - Serve scaled images - Score 0 out of 100
    The following images are resized in HTML or CSS. Serving scaled images could save 1.5MiB (72% reduction).

        http://s4.hubimg.com/u/6050051_f496.jpg is resized in HTML or CSS from 496x372 to 320x240. Serving a scaled image could save 56.0KiB (58% reduction).
        http://s1.hubimg.com/u/6801216_f248.jpg is resized in HTML or CSS from 248x504 to 124x252. Serving a scaled image could save 36.4KiB (75% reduction).
        http://s3.hubimg.com/u/6414190_f248.jpg is resized in HTML or CSS from 248x331 to 124x165. Serving a scaled image could save 36.1KiB (75% reduction).
        http://s1.hubimg.com/u/5193376_f248.jpg is resized in HTML or CSS from 248x331 to 124x165. Serving a scaled image could save 33.9KiB (75% reduction).
        http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6779237_f248.jpg is resized in HTML or CSS from 248x365 to 124x182. Serving a scaled image could save 30.7KiB (75% reduction)......................

    Listed above are only 5 of the 110 instances of scaling an image in HTML or CSS. This is, a HUGE waste of bandwidth and an impatient surfer's time. So 38%, 1.5MB of that 3.9MB, is unnecessary!  Totally crazy!

    Page Speed -  Remove unused CSS - Score 37.8 out of 100 - 58.5% of the CSS is unused for another wasted 113KB of 193KB of CSS code. This isn't so bad really as it's simpler to just throw all the CSS code out there than have many different CSS code files. But when coupled with the wasted 1.5MB of image data it just makes matters worse.

    Page Speed -  Defer parsing of JavaScript -  Score 1 out of 100. 554.8KiB of JavaScript is parsed during initial page load. Most if not all of that JavaScript code could be moved from the HEAD to the bottom of the page to possibly  increase page rendering times. Yet another fail.

    HP does Minify their HTML, CSS and Javascript code and Gzips and gets 99 - 100's here. But with all the wasted image data it matters very little really.

    Page speed matters a lot to Google and clearly the new profiles fail beyond belief for a major website like this. If these new profiles are to be forced upon us eventually I sure hope HP puts forth the effort to fix these obvious mistakes before it becomes mandatory.

    Even if HP were to fix the 1.6 MB of wasted data I point out here that still leaves this profile page weighing it at 2.3MB! Still an epic fail speed wise in my opinion. Sure it looks nice, but is almost 4MB of data a good trade off? I suppose when we all have a fiber optic connection these issues won't matter, but we don't yet.

    "How well does your site perform? Are the slow pages affecting your conversation rates or driving away potential visitors and clients?"  Make the Web Fast: Measuring Performance with Google Analytics Site Speed Reports from the Google Developers' YouTube channel live perfcast to begin in about 3 days.

  24. paradigmsearch profile image86
    paradigmsearchposted 5 years ago

    The text is too darned light! Have to strain to read it. Or is it just me? big_smile

    1. lobobrandon profile image84
      lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      It's not too light, but it's rather light. Would be better if it was a shade darker.

    2. Glenn Stok profile image95
      Glenn Stokposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      You can make it bold. I tried that and it's not bad.

      1. lobobrandon profile image84
        lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Nice

      2. Lisa HW profile image81
        Lisa HWposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I think yours looks nice.  I've been enjoying checking out the latest "converts" on this thread as they've been popping up.  I think they all look nice - far more polished.

        1. wordscribe43 profile image94
          wordscribe43posted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Yours looks nice too, Lisa.  Like me, you chose the blank background.  I'd like to change that, but use my own image.  Not sure what to use though... and not sure how it will look as a background.  To tile or not to tile?  How to represent what I want?  How to keep it from looking too busy?  It's hard since I write about a lot of different things.  I don't know.  Are you going to keep yours blank?

          1. Lisa HW profile image81
            Lisa HWposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Thanks.  I used a blank image with a shade of green that I "made myself" in the paint program.  It looks  too much like the gray of "no background" on here.  Another color wouldn't look so much like the "no background".  Maybe you could create a color shade that you really like - at least until you think up an image you may like.   I kind of like the no-image look.  I'm not sure I shouldn't adjust the shade of green.

            1. wordscribe43 profile image94
              wordscribe43posted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Ohhh... I see that now.  That's actually a really good idea!  I have a lot of experience with Gimp and Inkscape, so perhaps I could get something going there.  Thanks for the input, Lisa.

      3. rebekahELLE profile image90
        rebekahELLEposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        That is nice.  I agree that the text and blank background are too light.  I like the subtle design you have chosen, very appealing.

  25. rebekahELLE profile image90
    rebekahELLEposted 5 years ago

    All of my text profile links link  to my hubs, with one Twitter link, and one referral link.  I would like to hear how this changes link authority, if at all.
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the PR of our profile URL include our entire sub-domain, since it is the URL for our site?

    1. lobobrandon profile image84
      lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      As far as I'm concerned the PR of our subdomain is what ever it is and each individual page has it's own PR. But, the main PR of our subdomain does play a huge role on that of our pages

    2. Marisa Wright profile image95
      Marisa Wrightposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      It removes the link authority completely, because all of your links disappear. 

      Looking at your profile, I assume the phrases in italics were links in the old profile.  In the new profile, you don't have any hyperlinks in your text.

      1. rebekahELLE profile image90
        rebekahELLEposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Most of the italicized words on my current bio were hyperlinks leading to hubs.  I had no links (on bio) leading off the site except Twitter.  What I see is better site structure on our subdomain.  All of the hubs are linked on one page, plus we have additional pages of categorized hubs which is nice for search.     
        I like the update and we'll see how it works.  I like the look. I did see a slight google increase in traffic since updating, which I generally don't see on a weekend.

  26. Froggy213 profile image32
    Froggy213posted 5 years ago

    I love the layout except I lost the links to the books I have authored. I guess we take the good with the bad and I hope it helps traffic

  27. brianlokker profile image94
    brianlokkerposted 5 years ago

    Overall I like the new profile page very much. I'm glad that some of the community's suggestions were implemented before it was rolled out. I haven't experienced the other bugs that have been mentioned in this thread, but I do notice that my "Last seen" line says I was last seen "21 hours days ago." That code needs to be tweaked. Also, maybe "Last online" or "Last activity" would be better. I don't want my picture to end up on a milk carton if I'm not on the HP site for a while.

    1. Lisa HW profile image81
      Lisa HWposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      lol    I'm not a fan of the "last seen on" either.   It's not just the hint of "the milk-carton thing" that kind of doesn't sit well with me. - although that's the the thing that struck me most.  There's the "technically inaccurate" factor:  We've most often been "seen" by someone in this world - just not seen by anyone on HubPages.  If nothing else..  maybe it could be changed to "last seen on Hubpages".   It is kind of spooky/creepy as it is. - not to mention technically inaccurate.

      1. paradigmsearch profile image86
        paradigmsearchposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Last spotted...

        Last apprehended...

        Last noticed...

        Whereabouts unknown since...

        Escaped since...

        Torpid since...

        1. Lisa HW profile image81
          Lisa HWposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          I love your list - especially "whereabouts unknown since".   I might suggest just one more for Hubbers who are women and/or daughters and/or mothers and/or are/have ever been wives and/or employees at some companies....           
          "Hasn't been here since ______ and we've all been so worried.  We don't know why she wouldn't have at least said  where she was going"   

          Note:  My comma and other punctuation keys aren't working these days - which is the reason for all the "and/or's" and no smiley face at the end of my post.

          1. brianlokker profile image94
            brianlokkerposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Maybe HP could add something like "APB issued on [date]" that would be automatically triggered once the "last seen" interval reaches, say, 3 days.

  28. rebekahELLE profile image90
    rebekahELLEposted 5 years ago

    I have a question.  Can we experiment to see if we want a certain image, but decide not to upgrade if it doesn't look like we want it to?  I don't see a way to do this.


    EDIT:  No, there isn't a way to do this.  You can change images once you've updated, SO I've officially updated.  My original file didn't work unless it was tiled, and it didn't look right.  This will do for now, I like it.

    Here we go! big_smile

  29. paradigmsearch profile image86
    paradigmsearchposted 5 years ago

    Speaking of images, BE FOREWARNED!!!

    If you post an image in the forum, it could then show up on Recent Images on your profile page.

    I posted a picture of the Hubmobile in the forums 4 weeks ago.

    It is now my Number One Recent Image.

    I'm still grinning about it. big_smile

  30. Tenerife Islander profile image91
    Tenerife Islanderposted 5 years ago

    Thank you for posting this because I was just trying to find out how to get it!

  31. Will Apse profile image89
    Will Apseposted 5 years ago

    Usual storm in a teacup. Shock, horror! Something happened and it is sure to be the end of everything we hold dear! lol. (Unless one can find a nice shade of something indefinable).

 
working