New Time Format

[cscgal]

As you can see, the forums have a new time format. Now, instead of time being something like 'Today, 3:00' it says '1 Hour Ago'.

The reason for the change is because I am realizing more than ever what a huge, global community we are. And by far, the majority of our traffic are unregistered guests who don't have the ability to specify a timezone. Therefore, all times for unregistered users are in EST, my local timezone.

But I realized that doesn't really make sense. Because suppose Davey comes to DaniWeb and he sees that nothing was posted in the past 7 hours. That could be a major turn-off! And in reality, posts might have just been made minutes ago.

Therefore, I think that keeping times relative helps everyone.

[John A]

I noticed it nearly immediately when I logged onto DaniWeb. The change is a good one, and helps even when you have the timezone set correctly. In the past, I always had to look at the current time to figure out how long ago a particular entry was posted. This feature is a good improvement.

Thanks!

[Ancient Dragon]

Yes, I agree with joe -- that is a good change. :)

[~s.o.s~]

Yes, keeping a relative time scale really helps...Good one.

[The Dude]

Excellent :)

[WaltP]

Agreed (and I used the QR box :D)

[mattyd]

Yes, noticed this right away. Good change.

[happygeek]

Thank you, makes life a lot less confusing for those of us who are easily confused :)

[cscgal]

Didja like how I even cited you in my example? LOL

[Dave Sinkula]

As always, I'm not fond of it.

Absolute times do add a detail that relative times do not. For example, a stale "Who's Online" page. It says Joe Blow is looking at my post 1 minute ago. Oh, but that was a "Who's Online" from 3 hours ago.

Absolute time may have told my 5:10 for both. This I have learned to recognize and use. This addition is, for me, another inconvenience.

There is more than this one way that it affects me negatively, but I don't feel my opinion makes any difference such that thoughtfully enumerating them would do much.

"A stopped clock is right twice a day". A relative clock may not have that going for it.

[cscgal]

Dave,

I think that from a community point of view, relative times make more sense within the forum system.

However, I think that absolute times have their place in news feeds and in the printable view and pages meant to have more permanence.

Regarding the who's online page ... it auto-refreshes every 60 seconds automatically.

While you might find absolute time more convenient, you have to agree that for unregistered users, which account for 85% of our website traffic, will all see the WRONG times (anyone out of the EST time zone at least) ... and the wrong absolute times are worse than the correct relative time ... all the time.

So, the bottom line is that it simply makes more sense to provide something that is correct to 100% of the users (convenience being irrelevant as long as the data is at least correct) as opposed to something that is wrong for 85%, more convenient for 10%, and inconveniences 5% (of which you're one).

The 85% is a true statistic ... the 10% and 5% breakdown I just made up but the point is that from the responses in this thread, more people like the change than don't.

I also think that a lot of other websites are sharing my opinion in this. I actually initially got the idea from Digg, who also uses relative times, and they're a news source!

The only thing that I do have to say is that while the forum printable versions do use absolute times, I'm having a problem getting the blogs and code snippets to do the same, but that is a bug which I'm working on.

So while I do think absolute times have their place, I feel that they are more for news aggregators and stuff of that sort, because, for the most part, leaving and coming back to the site hours later just isn't the way most people interact with online communities and forum systems.

[Dave Sinkula]

However, I think that absolute times have their place in news feeds and in the printable view and pages meant to have more permanence.

Fine, provide an absolute frame of reference to make it meaningful.Regarding the who's online page ... it auto-refreshes every 60 seconds automatically.Ever hit 'Back'?While you might find absolute time more convenient, you have to agree that for unregistered users, which account for 85% of our website traffic, will all see the WRONG times (anyone out of the EST time zone at least) ... and the wrong absolute times are worse than the correct relative time ... all the time.Yes, yes, yes. One-offs and fly-bys matter more than regulars.So, the bottom line is that it simply makes more sense to provide something that is correct to 100% of the users (convenience being irrelevant as long as the data is at least correct) as opposed to something that is wrong for 85%, more convenient for 10%, and inconveniences 5% (of which you're one).

The 85% is a true statistic ... the 10% and 5% breakdown I just made up but the point is that from the responses in this thread, more people like the change than don't.

I also think that a lot of other websites are sharing my opinion in this. I actually initially got the idea from Digg, who also uses relative times, and they're a news source!Provide a feature for those that don't care in order to screw some who do? M'kay. The world turns.

[Dave Sinkula]

3769 posters since 2006-01-01 with 5 or more posts != 148,181 Members
:= 144412+ need this
???

[cscgal]

Remember, all regular members start off as guests once upon a time. They don't matter more but I do need to do all I can to make DaniWeb interesting enough for them to join.

And it's not as if the change to the time has made it worse for all of the regulars. You seem to be the only one who doesn't like it.

[Dave Sinkula]

Remember, all regular members start off as guests once upon a time. They don't matter more but I do need to do all I can to make DaniWeb interesting enough for them to join. And it's not as if the change to the time has made it worse for all of the regulars. You seem to be the only one who doesn't like it.

Novelty wears off. And I most often guest visit. The latest change has done nothing for that other than cause me further confusion.

I guess my computer just sucks. Perhaps you should post your minimum requirements for browsing this site? ::some smilie::

Point lost, again, I'll cower away. Again.

[cscgal]

3769 posters since 2006-01-01 with 5 or more posts != 148,181 Members := 144412+ need this ???

It would be one thing if this were a change which helped guests and hurt all regular members. But, based on this thread at least, you're the only one who doesn't love the new format.

[happygeek]

Didja like how I even cited you in my example? LOL

Yep, just call me Davey "easily confused" Winder from now on :)

[WaltP]

It would be one thing if this were a change which helped guests and hurt all regular members. But, based on this thread at least, you're the only one who doesn't love the new format.

I'm notin love with it either, but I do see some merit in it. I also like to know absolute times at times. (Dept of Redundancy Dept :))

In the edit note, the stamp says something like "Edited 3 minutes ago at 9:15", so give us both! Just add "at [time]" after the new format. IOW, complete the change because both forms are useful.

[WaltP]

In the edit note, the stamp says something like "Edited 3 minutes ago at 9:15", so give us both! Just add "at [time]" after the new format. IOW, complete the change because both forms are useful.

Dani,Please consider adding "at [time]" to the posting times. I would like to know a little closer than 24 hours when a post was made.

If the time is currently 23:54 and the last post was 1 Day Ago, I would really like to know whether the post was 12:02AM (2 days) or 11:59PM (1 day). And 1 week ago is totally worthless.

I don't mind the AGO info, but I do want some detail...

[Infarction]

I guess I'm third in the don't-like group. I also prefer to know precisely when people have posted things. The hybrid idea would be nice as well though.