New Classified Format !!!
Discussion
mrdemon said:
I have found an anoying bug
I don't use the "Browse makes and models" box as that just is anoying.
so at the top I use "Classifieds/Used cars/Audi/R8" to look for R8's
as an example once into R8's I some times loose the Audi Tag so have to all the way back to used cars and cannot get straight back into Audi.
Somewhere deep on the "things to do once we're live" list is "put a whacking great big button in so that you can start again if you get a bit lost" I don't use the "Browse makes and models" box as that just is anoying.
so at the top I use "Classifieds/Used cars/Audi/R8" to look for R8's
as an example once into R8's I some times loose the Audi Tag so have to all the way back to used cars and cannot get straight back into Audi.
Stuart said:
mrdemon said:
I have found an anoying bug
I don't use the "Browse makes and models" box as that just is anoying.
so at the top I use "Classifieds/Used cars/Audi/R8" to look for R8's
as an example once into R8's I some times loose the Audi Tag so have to all the way back to used cars and cannot get straight back into Audi.
Somewhere deep on the "things to do once we're live" list is "put a whacking great big button in so that you can start again if you get a bit lost" I don't use the "Browse makes and models" box as that just is anoying.
so at the top I use "Classifieds/Used cars/Audi/R8" to look for R8's
as an example once into R8's I some times loose the Audi Tag so have to all the way back to used cars and cannot get straight back into Audi.
it's not about getting lost
it's about looking at a R8 model or a 911 model and not being able to get back into the list or make and you have to go all the way back to used cars then Audi then R8 again.
It's a bug because some times you can see the full path and go back 1 step, but some times you cannot.
it's about looking at a R8 model or a 911 model and not being able to get back into the list or make and you have to go all the way back to used cars then Audi then R8 again.
It's a bug because some times you can see the full path and go back 1 step, but some times you cannot.
mrdemon said:
it's not about getting lost
it's about looking at a R8 model or a 911 model and not being able to get back into the list or make and you have to go all the way back to used cars then Audi then R8 again.
It's a bug because some times you can see the full path and go back 1 step, but some times you cannot.
Yes, that's what I mean. The "breadcrumb path" isn't consistent or clear enough.it's about looking at a R8 model or a 911 model and not being able to get back into the list or make and you have to go all the way back to used cars then Audi then R8 again.
It's a bug because some times you can see the full path and go back 1 step, but some times you cannot.
mrdemon said:
as an example once into R8's I some times loose the Audi Tag so have to all the way back to used cars and cannot get straight back into Audi.
This is the bit you're talking about, right? You're saying sometimes Audi just isn't there? If that's the case could you link me to an ad that does this? Cheers. -Matt
Stuart said:
bitwrx said:
Sorry to self-quote; thought it might help with context.
I just been on the new ad site to try and get some form of decent presentation back. I thought a foolproof way of viewing my old ad would be to type in the tinyurl I'd set up for it: www.tinyurl.com/miniforsale. The advert has been taken down, and a misleading message is displayed (saying I'm a dealer, and the stock is no longer available). I'm pretty annoyed about this because I have the link going into a few magazine ads this month.
When I went to update the text, I ended up being asked to pay a tenner for posting the ad. I would happily pay that, maybe more, for an advert that:
You assume that all the HTML formatting makes a single jot of difference to people looking to buy your car, and we would contend that it doesn't. I'm not sure why you would try to login and go through all of this when you've already discovered that running html in copy isn't something we want in our ads, nor external links.I just been on the new ad site to try and get some form of decent presentation back. I thought a foolproof way of viewing my old ad would be to type in the tinyurl I'd set up for it: www.tinyurl.com/miniforsale. The advert has been taken down, and a misleading message is displayed (saying I'm a dealer, and the stock is no longer available). I'm pretty annoyed about this because I have the link going into a few magazine ads this month.
When I went to update the text, I ended up being asked to pay a tenner for posting the ad. I would happily pay that, maybe more, for an advert that:
- Allowed me to use wiki-like formatting to enhance the presentation of the ad.
- Allowed me to link from the advert to a nice big gallery of pictures on my Picasa account.
- Had a URL that didn't change.
Both of those measures are purely to protect users from scam activity, and not punitive or aimed at antagonising you. However we aren't going to change this policy, so if this means that you decide not to advertise your car on PH, so be it.
Maybe I went over the top with the formatting on my original ad, but not even having bullet points? Surely there's nothing bad that can come of that?
I know links are generally undesirable in user-generated comment, but is there no way that some sites - like Picasa, Flickr etc - can be whitelisted to be linked from an ad? I for one would find it very useful. I know that the PH hamsters are much more numerous and better trained than they used to be, but you still don't want to overload them by serving a load of pictures you don't have to. Let the picture websites take the load...
PS - I will accept the new rules as a necessary evil when trying to get my car advertised to the right audience, but surely you can see it's a little galling to be charged a tenner for what I consider a lesser product than that which used to be available for free?
PPS - The old ad is probably a record in a database. The new ad is probably a record in a database. How much work would it have been/now be to link the two URLs?
bitwrx said:
Not even I would think that anything PH had done was to antagonise me...
Maybe I went over the top with the formatting on my original ad, but not even having bullet points? Surely there's nothing bad that can come of that?
I know links are generally undesirable in user-generated comment, but is there no way that some sites - like Picasa, Flickr etc - can be whitelisted to be linked from an ad? I for one would find it very useful. I know that the PH hamsters are much more numerous and better trained than they used to be, but you still don't want to overload them by serving a load of pictures you don't have to. Let the picture websites take the load...
PS - I will accept the new rules as a necessary evil when trying to get my car advertised to the right audience, but surely you can see it's a little galling to be charged a tenner for what I consider a lesser product than that which used to be available for free?
PPS - The old ad is probably a record in a database. The new ad is probably a record in a database. How much work would it have been/now be to link the two URLs?
Thanks for the response.Maybe I went over the top with the formatting on my original ad, but not even having bullet points? Surely there's nothing bad that can come of that?
I know links are generally undesirable in user-generated comment, but is there no way that some sites - like Picasa, Flickr etc - can be whitelisted to be linked from an ad? I for one would find it very useful. I know that the PH hamsters are much more numerous and better trained than they used to be, but you still don't want to overload them by serving a load of pictures you don't have to. Let the picture websites take the load...
PS - I will accept the new rules as a necessary evil when trying to get my car advertised to the right audience, but surely you can see it's a little galling to be charged a tenner for what I consider a lesser product than that which used to be available for free?
PPS - The old ad is probably a record in a database. The new ad is probably a record in a database. How much work would it have been/now be to link the two URLs?
We just don't think that pics embedded in body copy make for a nice experience. The new site gives you more images (12) at a bigger size, and we reckon that's enough to make the phone ring, which is really all that it needs to do.
Bullet points and limited formatting, yes perhaps we should look at that at some point in the future. Fair point.
Your old ad should have a link on it to the new site, if that's what you mean by the PPS?
Stuart said:
bitwrx said:
Not even I would think that anything PH had done was to antagonise me...
Maybe I went over the top with the formatting on my original ad, but not even having bullet points? Surely there's nothing bad that can come of that?
I know links are generally undesirable in user-generated comment, but is there no way that some sites - like Picasa, Flickr etc - can be whitelisted to be linked from an ad? I for one would find it very useful. I know that the PH hamsters are much more numerous and better trained than they used to be, but you still don't want to overload them by serving a load of pictures you don't have to. Let the picture websites take the load...
PS - I will accept the new rules as a necessary evil when trying to get my car advertised to the right audience, but surely you can see it's a little galling to be charged a tenner for what I consider a lesser product than that which used to be available for free?
PPS - The old ad is probably a record in a database. The new ad is probably a record in a database. How much work would it have been/now be to link the two URLs?
Thanks for the response.Maybe I went over the top with the formatting on my original ad, but not even having bullet points? Surely there's nothing bad that can come of that?
I know links are generally undesirable in user-generated comment, but is there no way that some sites - like Picasa, Flickr etc - can be whitelisted to be linked from an ad? I for one would find it very useful. I know that the PH hamsters are much more numerous and better trained than they used to be, but you still don't want to overload them by serving a load of pictures you don't have to. Let the picture websites take the load...
PS - I will accept the new rules as a necessary evil when trying to get my car advertised to the right audience, but surely you can see it's a little galling to be charged a tenner for what I consider a lesser product than that which used to be available for free?
PPS - The old ad is probably a record in a database. The new ad is probably a record in a database. How much work would it have been/now be to link the two URLs?
We just don't think that pics embedded in body copy make for a nice experience. The new site gives you more images (12) at a bigger size, and we reckon that's enough to make the phone ring, which is really all that it needs to do.
Bullet points and limited formatting, yes perhaps we should look at that at some point in the future. Fair point.
Your old ad should have a link on it to the new site, if that's what you mean by the PPS?
You're right about 12 being enough to make the phone ring. Look at it another way: on a site advertising niche cars, where people are deciding whether to travel potentially hundreds of miles to have a look, it might be desirable to have a load of detailed, hi-res pics showing every last detail before hopping in the car. The seller's word only goes so far.
Sorry if I put your back up yesterday. Snide comments about competitors aren't helpful. I was pretty hacked off about the old ad going dead... Smiling again now. Nearly.
cuneus said:
Bigger size - tick
Worse quality - tick
Pic on left from dealers site, right is PH new - image size same, file size identical
and yes the new PH is worse than old PH as well
Acknowledged, although I genuinely don't see it myself. I do however have crap eyes.Worse quality - tick
Pic on left from dealers site, right is PH new - image size same, file size identical
and yes the new PH is worse than old PH as well
I think that Matt is looking at this. At least he acknowledged that it might need looking at elsewhere.
carinaman said:
Is it broken?
Everytime I click on an advert it gives me a serving suggestion of four other cars and gives me nothing about the car I am interested in.
Is it just me?
Not just you http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...Everytime I click on an advert it gives me a serving suggestion of four other cars and gives me nothing about the car I am interested in.
Is it just me?
Harvey Milne said:
Something needs to be done about the image quality on the new Classified Format. The images are fuzzy and lacking detail compared with the quality on the old format. Please sort this out.
Does anyone else agree with me?
It isn't something I can personally see, but you aren't the only one who has noted it and we do have it logged as a bug to be looked at. Does anyone else agree with me?
Sadly i have now let all my trade adverts finish and will not be using this website anymore
I never thought i would say this but ebay is now the place to advertise
Pistonheads has taken away the ease of use for browsing and using it to advertise
The new system is far to complicated and the new look is no where near as nice as the old one
What a shame as i found it a great website to use or simply just browse for fun
Paul ( north yorkshire rs spares )
I never thought i would say this but ebay is now the place to advertise
Pistonheads has taken away the ease of use for browsing and using it to advertise
The new system is far to complicated and the new look is no where near as nice as the old one
What a shame as i found it a great website to use or simply just browse for fun
Paul ( north yorkshire rs spares )
Gassing Station | Website Feedback | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff