[roelschroeven]

The "better" site looks mostly better to me, but there are two things I don't like about, and what I like even less is the authors assertions that his ideas about those are absolutely and obviously and undeniably better.

My pet peeve is line length. Too long lines are not comfortable because it's difficult to find the start of the next line, that's true. But too short lines force you to find the start of the next line every couple of words, and that's annoying too. There's a middle ground somewhere, and I think it's not the same for everyone. The 650px used on the "better" size is certainly too short for me. I can't count the number of sites where I open the style editor in dev console and go hunting for max-width or whatever to set it to a more comfortable width. So just respect the width of the browser window, which anyone can choose to their own liking. Some margin left and right is OK, perhaps even preferable.

The other thing is font size. Browsers have settings for font size, and in modern browser you can change the size with ctrl+ and ctrl-. Why override that choice?

I like overview: being able to not just see the sentence I'm reading, but a whole lot of context. Short lines, large fonts and large line-heights all work against that.

What I do like, I think, is #444 for the text instead of pure black. Looks less aggressive that way. And some amount of margin left and right. Something like the original page plus "body { margin: 40px 100px; color: #444; }".