I can't understand why the new update page layout pisses people off so much. It's not that different, it doesn't require you to be a rocket scientist or a programmer, it's simple and easy to use. I use it when RPGing (using a client to make regular posts) and I think it's perfectly fine.
I got as far as the support page where they told me that there was no point posting a support request.
So I posted one anyway.
I got a reply: == Thank you for your report. LiveJournal has recently changed the update page, which has led to backdating entries for some users.
This problem has been reported to the developers. In the meantime, you may use a downloadable client to make any entries and they will not be backdated by default. == It didn't actually answer my question of course, or address any of the issues I was raising, but it was a reply.
I tried one of the client programs but in the end I decided that I was making fewer mistakes with the update page. Of course having broadband does help, no worries about connect time.
Can't see anything wrong with the new update page, seems to work a lot like the other. Like the icon preview.
Having had a post that I edited via the update page disappear from everyone's Friends Page, I've decided to stick to posting and editing posts via the standalone client that I'm used to as much as possible.
I never liked the web based update page - so I generally use Semagic on Windows. I like the interface, easier to set post options, better spell checking (and learning my words), etc. I also use LogJam on Linux and it will highly words it doesn't recognize as I type, which is also nice.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-24 01:46 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-24 01:52 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-24 05:46 pm (UTC)Because it's broken.
And even when it's not broken, it's got a fixed-width text entry box - the kind of stupid mistake that entry-level webpage designers make.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-25 12:56 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-25 01:03 am (UTC)So I posted one anyway.
I got a reply:
==
Thank you for your report. LiveJournal has recently changed the update page, which has led to backdating entries for some users.
This problem has been reported to the developers. In the meantime, you may use a downloadable client to make any entries and they will not be
backdated by default.
==
It didn't actually answer my question of course, or address any of the issues I was raising, but it was a reply.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-24 03:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-24 03:43 pm (UTC)Can't see anything wrong with the new update page, seems to work a lot like the other. Like the icon preview.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-25 12:27 am (UTC)Gina
(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-25 02:36 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-09-25 03:18 pm (UTC)