PLEASE IGNORE US, WE'RE OFTEN WRONG: Sure, we like the new nme.com site - mainly because it got rid of the pouf-up menus, which were our main dislike. But on the other hand, James chachacha has a small list of glitches. Okay, a large list of glitches:
Except that it looks *really* shit in IE4 or Netscape 4, or anything lower. The images refuse to load in version 3 browsers.
And none of the images used in the navigation have 'alt' tags, so that if the picture refuses to load, you can't easily tell what it is.
Which is a problem if you have navigation based on images which often refuse to load.
Except that it now takes even longer to load up.
Except that, if you were to try and print a page, there's no longer any option to print in plain text.
Except that they've left a whole load of horrible flash ads on the front page, and there's still a 'GET EVERY ISSUE FOR £1.60' pop-up.
And the text is *too* tiny. And their .css doesn't allow you to increase the font size in IE6 (but neither does my own site, so they've got me on that one).
And you would have thought they would have added accessibility features to it (there are quite a few near-blind Strokes fans out there, I hear). This is the third year of the 21st century, after all.
*Just a couple of things I've noticed after looking at it for half an hour.*
Well, I guess our excitement at the new look was because the only time we ever visit nme.com, it's been for news alone, so the navigation-imagey-thing never even occured to us as a problem. And we don't have a problem as such with flash adverts - if they're going to be there, a well-constructed flash ad should load more swiftly than a typical banner advert. And since they changed their look, we've not had a single pop-up - maybe they're rationing them more; but before we would routinely get three when we visited the nme.com front page. But your point about the lack of alt tags and ease of usability is a good one... maybe they're working on that?
Okay, okay. I said maybe...