Harmony-central.com as we knew it is gone.

[Robert****]

I noticed that yesterday. What a move! Let's make a bet. How long will it stay in its current form?

[Spudman***]

Anderton is pushing pretty hard that everyone goes to 2.0 but I know the majority of the folks like the 1.0 best and wont make the move. I wouldn't be surprised if 1.0 gets a remake or they both end up in existence.

[Duff]

There is no harmony at harmony.

The old version we like so much is there alright, but it is de-nutted: you can't post new reviews, etc. So it is sort of a dead image of itself.

They make it sound like they are working on the new version to make it really nice and better. I don't really see this happening in actuality.

When you look at reviews there is not a date that the reviewer submitted the review, as far as I can see. It just says 3 months ago, etc. But I could easily be looking in the wrong section of the reviews because it is not an easy new site to navigate around in. I think it is far inferior to the old site.

Why do they think the new site is better? It just isn't apparent to me. It looks cheap.

I would bet that they are paying some software development company BIG money to produce this inferior product. BIG money. Maybe even an additional BIG annual licensing fee and maintenance fees, as well as administration fees. Why?

Having a sterile version of the old site there is inadequate because it will contain no new content. This will have the effect of trying to push people over to the new site because of its up to date content. Slowly wean us off the old site and gradually get us to go to the new site when we need to.

Thing is, the new site doesn't seem to have the traffic and content of the old site, at least in terms of reviews. People may be jumping ship rather than mess with the undesirable new site and the way it was shoved down our throats.

I wonder if statistical analysis will show that the number of submitted reviews per week has decreased with the new format as compared to the average weekly statistics for the old format? I'm sure that info will never be shared with us.

[Spudman***]

I'm still unable to log into the new site. I guess I don't care if I ever do really.

[Bloozcat]

The feedback about the new format seems to be universally negative.

I could understand the change if it was a quantum leap from the old site to the new, but this is anything but that. Navigating the site is more laborious and time consuming than before with no appreciable gain in function. In other words, it's all pain and no gain.

Changing something just because you can is no reason to do so. If you're not making it better (as in this case), you're making it worse (again, as in this case).