Why, the difference is ... is ... is .... I guess we know what they're talking about at Seattle breakfast tables this morning.

Let's see...comments in a nutshell:

Things I liked:
- The sports ticker. It's catchy, but not that obtrusive. It's definitely enough to pique a fan's interest and make them pick up a paper to have them read more.
- Skyboxes. They're slightly smaller than the old ones, but they're also a bit more catchy with the red section heads and black type rather than the all red type shown on the old paper.
- The centerpiece photo. Yes, I know there won't be photos like that every day, but that one really grabbed me.
- The flag. It took me a few minutes to warm up to it, but once I did, I really like it.

Mixed feelings:
- Subheads. I see that they're going back to newspapers of yesteryear with this style, but at times it comes off a bit confusing. It works well with the lead story on Reagan's funeral and the centerpiece on D-Day. However, I don't think it works as well on the story about the FBI on the right. The subhead is slightly bigger than the headline for the story itself. Also, I would have liked to see "Mayfield Case" over the headline instead of under.
- Background information for the Charter-school network story. I love the fact that they gave a non-narrative like this to help readers understand the story. I just don't care where they placed it. You're going through an awful lot of text before getting to the main story itself. It would serve to be its own graphic, most likely on the story's jump page.
- Newsline. I'm not quite sure how I like this yet.

Curious to see some of the section fronts.

The headline font is really ... ummm ... interesting. I was expecting something bolder, not so classic in style.

Good to see that the news digest is on a gray screen.
Back when I read the Times practically every day, their registration was often really crappy. I figured they might take lots of risks with color in this redesign, but you don't see that on A1.