True multiple attachments yet?

[skysober]

I, like many others, choose not to re-purchase IPB, after being a faithful customer and user since it was clear back in freeware, simply because the major part of any forum are the photo and video attachments.

With each newer and better upgrade, the attachments were shuffled farther and farther down the priority level. 2.3.1 is our last version.

Now a member struggles to figure out how to add even a single attachment, then if the ajax doesn't fail the 5% of the time it is called on, they upload one single file, sitting there, while they wait to individually upload another 20 or 30 attachments, (hoping the ajax doesn't fail yet again while they are adding more photos or videos, causeing them to start all over again...)

Then as so many try to do, since sometimes an attachment is all they wish to post, they click on the submit and then they are truly confused, as the 'new and improved' attachment method doesn't even place it into the post like it used to. One must try and figure out how to do that manually as well.

While I am sure that the programmer whom designed this is very proud of it, and while it is not very functional, it is pretty with the Vista style interface. Yet it is the members and users whom we have to listen to on a daily basis complain and voice their frustrations about this.

I understand the newest IPB version has a download time estimator. That sounds like a great feature. I wish focus on bringing IPB up to the same standards for uploading attachments, (that the major competitors, and yes, open source free forums, all already have,) would become a concern as well.

It could be a simple aCP option. Use the ajax method for those few forums that rarely use attachments and do not mind that it works an average of 95% of the time. Or one could enable the original working upload method that worked in even back in 2.0, with an additional option that the owner could decide if true multiple uploading of attachments could be made, with even a limited 10 uploads at a time given.

Of course a real interface of drag and drop into a post would be then out perform even those freeware and competitors forums whom all offer multiple attachements already. Then a member could just drag 20 or 30 right into a post and relax with a cup of coffee while the computer does the work, instead of the fighting and frustraion to do it manually.

I realize customers have only been asking for this for over a year now. It was with that hope that I kept re-purchasing my IPB support and upgrade option. I know security really is the number one thing with forum software, and since IPB has the best security it has always been the main reason I use it. There must take a lot of focus by the programmers to insure this. (Yes I was hacked once on one of the sites and IPB came in and saved our entire forum and I can never thank them enough...) But perhaps somewhere in the near future an improvement in the attachments could also be made, because from a members point of view, attachments are their number one priority.

[bfarber]

I'm EXTREMELY confused, so I have questions...

With each newer and better upgrade, the attachments were shuffled farther and farther down the priority level. 2.3.1 is our last version.

Actually, we've continually done updates to the attachments area, just like the other areas, but we'll let that slide since it doesn't address any concerns or answer any questions.

Now a member struggles to figure out how to add even a single attachment, then if the ajax doesn't fail the 5% of the time it is called on, they upload one single file, sitting there, while they wait to individually upload another 20 or 30 attachments, (hoping the ajax doesn't fail yet again while they are adding more photos or videos, causeing them to start all over again...)

There's very little AJAX in the attachments area. It's actually an iframe (that's loaded initially by AJAX, yes). When you hit submit, at this point in time there is no real way to submit a file via AJAX. It's actually doing a normal POST to the site from the iframe, which then returns the new contents of the iframe. Thus, the 5% of the time that it's failing, I've no idea how that would be occurring for you (and this is the first report of it doing so).

Then as so many try to do, since sometimes an attachment is all they wish to post, they click on the submit and then they are truly confused, as the 'new and improved' attachment method doesn't even place it into the post like it used to. One must try and figure out how to do that manually as well.

1) If there is text in the area, yes, a file DOES automatically attach itself to the end of the post as it always has. You probably have an outdated skin, or something to that effect.

To show this, I'm attaching a file right now, and am not inserting it into the post. You should see it at the bottom of this post. So I'm not sure what you are talking about here exactly.

I understand the newest IPB version has a download time estimator. That sounds like a great feature. I wish focus on bringing IPB up to the same standards for uploading attachments, (that the major competitors, and yes, open source free forums, all already have,) would become a concern as well.

The download time estimator is in the download manager, not IPB - a download manager can utilize an estimated download time feature quite nicely. Again, though, that's a separate product.

It could be a simple aCP option. Use the ajax method for those few forums that rarely use attachments and do not mind that it works an average of 95% of the time. Or one could enable the original working upload method that worked in even back in 2.0, with an additional option that the owner could decide if true multiple uploading of attachments could be made, with even a limited 10 uploads at a time given.

I wonder what the demand is for this, though. Sure, it would be possible to add a setting and then allow users to use a "simple mode" for attachments - but is there anyone else that wants to return to the 2.0 style attachments? Is there anyone else whose attachments fail 5% of the time (that wouldn't fail on any other method, i.e. due to max upload size restrictions, or memory limits, for example)?

Of course a real interface of drag and drop into a post would be then out perform even those freeware and competitors forums whom all offer multiple attachements already. Then a member could just drag 20 or 30 right into a post and relax with a cup of coffee while the computer does the work, instead of the fighting and frustraion to do it manually.

It would be nice, but it's not possible with PHP presently (multi-file uploading is not part of the HTML specifications). A JAVA or Flash plugin would be needed, causing the attachments to "fail" more often than they do now, I'd suspect.

It IS possible to add multiple-upload fields, but when the new system was designed it wasn't seen as warranted. Basically, when you upload one file at a time it may feel slower because you select one, upload, select another, upload, and so on.

However, there is a MUCH lower chance of it failing by uploading one at a time. If you have a 2MB upload size restriction (the default for most servers) then you can upload a 1MB file and then another 1MB file and it's no problem. If you upload both at the same time, you will go over the restriction and then have to start back over and STILL have to upload them one at a time. In terms of upload time, it's the same regardless of whether you select all files at once, or upload them individually.

I'd personally love a multi-uploader (i.e. a java or flash plugin to drag n drop them as you said). It's just unrealistic.

How many, though, want multiple upload fields or feel it would provide much of a benefit?

[skysober]

it is not the first report of the ajax hook failing. Reports were made over a year ago...

many do NOT place any text into the post, as attachments are all they wish to post. No reason to make a text, when the photo or video is the subject itself. Text is left for those to critique or praise in replies.

sorry I misunderstood about the download estimator. Since that was such a simple mod years ago, when I viewed about it in the IPB updates, I assumed that it had been incorporated into the regular forum software by now.

I (and others whom also input their same frustration,) gave statistics to IPB over a year ago and 6 months ago, when I was making the decision to pay again for the yearly support and updates. Polls on 5 different IPB sites, each with at least 1000 members, showed 95% desired the means for true multiple attachment uploads. This was not a poll I made, but due to the overwhelming complaints on the sites themselves from members in which every time the site was upgraded the means to attach became harder and more confusing to utilize. So only about 4900 members, whom actually use the boards on a daily basis, that I can confirm my own self have asked to get this standard incorporated.

From a marketing aspect, how many of those who visits different sites, and perhaps are starting their own forums, view the frustating single upload mode of IPB or from the viewpoint of a member - the ease other software companies offer in theirs...

If the uploading is still somewhere in the core a real 'normal post' then a optional Java program that allows multiple uploads would be a valid reason to repurchase IPB, as well gain perhaps thousands of other new customers whom will chosen other forum software that has had this standard already built into it for years.

The theory about a 2 meg server limit and multiple uploads cause it to fail is moot... in reality, all the 'competition forum software" have at least a drop down box that a member can select, say for example 5 files, and upload 'at once'. In those it sends one file at a time, but the user doesn't have to interact after that until all files are uploaded. It is easier and more professional. The member can surf other sites, open a new window into the same site and do other things while waiting. One could have 20 uploads selected, but they are still sent in the background one at a time, so the limitation in this is the same as the single method that IPB uses... yet saves so much in the users actually on hand time that it is beyond compare.

If a single upload takes 30 seconds to upload... plus trying to remember what was already selected to upload so not to duplicate, then mouse about trying to add another file, and does this 30 times. The average time for a simple 30 photo series uploaded now is about 20 minutes of the member having to sit there and do all of this manually. Tests on a drop down with 30 attachment upload take about 16 minutes overall, yet only less than one minute user time. How patient must a member be? PC users / members buy faster computers, faster net connect speeds, and hate waiting even 1 second for a page to load. They think in milliseconds. If they can take one minute and select 30 uploads, walk away or do something else, or sit and babysit 30 uploads for 20 minutes, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to guess which forum software / sites they prefer to visit / use / purchase their own selves.

[bfarber]

it is not the first report of the ajax hook failing. Reports were made over a year ago...

Where at? No one HERE (which is obviously where we get most of our feedback, outside of tickets and phone support) has reported any such thing. Thus, it would be unrealistic for us to know about any such reports if they weren't reported to us.

many do NOT place any text into the post, as attachments are all they wish to post. No reason to make a text, when the photo or video is the subject itself. Text is left for those to critique or praise in replies.

I can see the point on this. As the code stands, we don't like empty posts. This is checked first thing when the post is submitted, so it will fail first thing. It may be worth investigating a way to automatically insert the attachment bbcode or something to prevent this so blank posts with just an attachment can be submitted, but this is hardly a major concern for most of our customers.

I (and others whom also input their same frustration,) gave statistics to IPB over a year ago and 6 months ago, when I was making the decision to pay again for the yearly support and updates. Polls on 5 different IPB sites, each with at least 1000 members, showed 95% desired the means for true multiple attachment uploads. This was not a poll I made, but due to the overwhelming complaints on the sites themselves from members in which every time the site was upgraded the means to attach became harder and more confusing to utilize. So only about 4900 members, whom actually use the boards on a daily basis, that I can confirm my own self have asked to get this standard incorporated.

Ok, so it sounds like you're talking about random sites on the internet that have held these polls? Again, though, how would we have heard of or have received any of this feedback? If someone had come to us based on these polls and said "look, our members are having trouble with this system, can we talk about it" it would be possible to do so.

Do you have any links so we can see what these polls are showing and the comments these members are making?

Now, I agree, again, that multiple attachments are something that have been requested from time to time. The problem is doing this "smoothly".

From a marketing aspect, how many of those who visits different sites, and perhaps are starting their own forums, view the frustating single upload mode of IPB or from the viewpoint of a member - the ease other software companies offer in theirs...

We've heard from very few (I want to say none, but I don't deal in sales much, so I can't confirm that) people who base their forum decision on the upload capacity in my experience. Everyone has their own requirements and needs, which we have to generalize into a "one-size-fits-all" package, but heck, phpbb is one of the most popular forum software's on the internet, and traditionally has never had an upload capacity built in at all.

If the uploading is still somewhere in the core a real 'normal post' then a optional Java program that allows multiple uploads would be a valid reason to repurchase IPB, as well gain perhaps thousands of other new customers whom will chosen other forum software that has had this standard already built into it for years.

Please show me one popular forum software that has a Java uploader. I'd be interested in seeing it. :) I know none of our main "competition" does.

The theory about a 2 meg server limit and multiple uploads cause it to fail is moot... in reality, all the 'competition forum software" have at least a drop down box that a member can select, say for example 5 files, and upload 'at once'. In those it sends one file at a time, but the user doesn't have to interact after that until all files are uploaded. It is easier and more professional. The member can surf other sites, open a new window into the same site and do other things while waiting. One could have 20 uploads selected, but they are still sent in the background one at a time, so the limitation in this is the same as the single method that IPB uses... yet saves so much in the users actually on hand time that it is beyond compare.

You are misunderstanding how HTTP POST requests work, I'm afraid.

If you have a 2MB upload limit on the server (again, this is the default when PHP is installed), then if you submit 2 files that TOTAL over 2MB, the entire POST request fails. The upload limit applies to the entire request. So no, my point isn't moot. If you submit 2 files that are over the upload limit (or 5 or whatever you submit) you will get an error and the files are not uploaded (due to PHP restrictions).

Now, you CAN change this limit in PHP, don't get me wrong. A lot of hosts allow this, and it's a relatively common thing for sites that allow uploads. But remember that we support tens of thousands of users, too, and our own shared hosting is limited to the PHP default of 2MB.

Again, though, I'm not directly opposed to multiple upload fields. It has been request at times. There are limitations, however, that do need to be overcome, and the last time this was brought up, there was no value really seen in doing this.

If a single upload takes 30 seconds to upload... plus trying to remember what was already selected to upload so not to duplicate, then mouse about trying to add another file, and does this 30 times. The average time for a simple 30 photo series uploaded now is about 20 minutes of the member having to sit there and do all of this manually. Tests on a drop down with 30 attachment upload take about 16 minutes overall, yet only less than one minute user time. How patient must a member be? PC users / members buy faster computers, faster net connect speeds, and hate waiting even 1 second for a page to load. They think in milliseconds. If they can take one minute and select 30 uploads, walk away or do something else, or sit and babysit 30 uploads for 20 minutes, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to guess which forum software / sites they prefer to visit / use / purchase their own selves.

I do understand this point, believe me. For example, the Gallery product provides a multiple-upload-field option, as well as a "zip import" option (member zips their images and uploads the zip file - Gallery takes care of the rest).

The underlying question remains, what kind of demand is there for this.

[Cybertimber2009]

I've had the need to upload multiple files when on tech support topics.
I could see maybe a compromise here if others agree that multiple file uploads are necessary and others think one is enough, just have a + icon that adds another upload feild?

It seems so much these days (even in the monthly desktop topics) that people use photobucket or flicker for their desktops rather than uploads, and in the sense of multiple uploads, it does seem more efficient to do one at a time if the 2M is the limit.
Maybe it could check and only allow x # of attachments if the total size is <=2M and overrideen by administrator setting?

So basically, yeah personally could see use in multiple attachments, but on maybe, 5% of my posts containing uploads.

[skysober]

ah, I can see Cybertimbers point in that some would use photobucket, (or another online photo or video site and thus link that into a post, which would reduce the amount of true attachments. I have been on sites that allow that. Legally I and others I know do not allow this, simply because say a person places a nice clean photo of a flower in a post... then 3 things can happen. After moderators review the post and insure it is a legal and safe photo or video, the topic then tends to get passed over by admin in the need to focus on newer topics. So the member can either enjoy his post and the replies, or he could later on delete his photo on that storage site causing the dreaded red X, or the scariest part, is he could change his photo to become something illegal, which is then viewed on one of our sites... and since it is over 48 hours old, our site is legally responsible for the post.

Thus no linked photos or videos are ever allowed on any of our sites. Simple rule that keeps everything rated G and family safe.

As to phpBB not having multiple uploads, true - the initial 'core' software do not have it. But the option/mod to have this is there and I have not visited on phpBB site that does not have this enabled.

And yes even at many invision software discussion forums there were many many posts asking for this. They were locked and appeared to be eventually deleted as the posts became obvious they were falling on deaf ears and the replies became more, uh, 'colorful' and derogitory towards IPB.

and I never said a forum competitor had a java uploader.. it was mentioned in a reply ;) I just replied it would put IPB ahead :)

even tho all of the servers I use have 200 meg limits, as to 2 meg limits and http posts request... they can be sent one at a time using a simple step method that the newest php college student programmer is taught. I myself hired a student on occasion over the years who had it working in the 2.0 up to the 2.2 version, but with each upgrade and the method to modify the uploads became harder and harder to trace and reverse engineer enough to understand it, and it became too expensive to keep hiring someone to fix it. It became easier for me to simply place a community notice to have members email sales at IPB and voice their displeasure and frustrations, which many did and stated they never once got a reply.

[Digi]

As to phpBB not having multiple uploads, true - the initial 'core' software do not have it. But the option/mod to have this is there and I have not visited on phpBB site that does not have this enabled.

IPB could be modified in the same manner as well. However, with the attachment system that exists, many have seen no need since, though single inline, you can ATLEAST upload on the same page (which didn't exist previously). This is not the same as phpbb's default which allowed ONLY ONE file per page load ;)

even tho all of the servers I use have 200 meg limits, as to 2 meg limits and http posts request... they can be sent one at a time using a simple step method that the newest php college student programmer is taught.

That's funny. Not just the "simple step process" bs (since there is no such thing as php on the browser side), but the "php college student" bs. (there's no such major). The closest thing to a "simple step process" is what you see in IPB now. ;)

[skysober]

CMPSC directive in Computer Science Major. Yes there is such an animal in most colleges, as just like a lawyer, they can define themselves into a specific field. My own son defined his BA in CS with C++ and Java. Four years of college and he never took one PHP or SQL class. :(

As to the php step process (I really wish I still had the old code that I hired the guy to do...) I did email and ask him, and he said he didn't have time to mess with it anymore, but said here was a hint any php programmer should understand. (note: I am not saying any programmer can nor otherwise can not, but he did make it sound like a simple thing, at least for him to do.)

/* To prevent multiple simultaneous executions, take out an exclusive read lock on the script */

$fd = fopen($argv[0], "r");

if(!flock($fd, LOCK_EX + LOCK_NB)) {

exit; // already running

}

Yet you mention it is possible to do a multiple update with a secondary form... how hard would it be to add a secondary option a site owner can turn on such as "http://www.jupload.biz/" which would even automatically give an upload status... Perhaps this might save a lot of programming time and enable multiple uploads?

[Digi]

Yes, I'm not denying you can get PHP classes in college. I'm denying that anyone could get any sort of training that could qualify one as a "php college student". Colleges are severely lacking in any sort of PHP language courses substantial enough to actually train someone to the level that they'd get from other programming languses like C or Java. Trust me, I've been begging/dying for such higher learning courses to be offered. The most I've been able to find are crap that come right out of a PHP/MySQL for dummies book. It's quite sad. :(

Zend offers some GREAT courses for PHP professionals but, unfortunately, none of them qualify for finacial assistance (though I've put in numerous calls to Zend in hopes of talking them in to at least certifying with the DoVA so I can use my GI bill cash). Anyway, I'm getting way off topic. On to analyzing your code.

You code does no more than the IPB script. Going of that very small amount you supplied, it will STILL take multiple internet requests in order to actually upload multiple files W/O exceeding any PHP (or other) upload/post limit. As Brandon mentioned, there is no way to do this w/o separate requests. It is impossible given the way PHP handles file uploads.

My guess is that your program operates a little more in the background than IPB does and works as so:

1) Provides multiple file input boxes
2) On submit sends a request via javascript for each file
3) Each request is handled by the server, and PHP, as a separate POST/GET form request
4) Thus, you don't have errors.

As you can see, the only difference between how IPB handles this and how (i assume) your system handles this, is the number of file inputs available in the form.

There are ways, using both IPB's method and the method I expect that you have, to provide an upload indicator. Unfortunately I believe that an additional PHP extension is required in order to provide the "return feed". Because of the extra extension requirement, I'd guess it wouldn't happen anytime soon.

It's easy to do cool amazing things when you are using a custom script on a specific server configureation. I do it all the time with ground up programming I do for my clients. The "prefabricated world" is a whole other animal though. While there's a possibly finite amount of server configurations available, the number of said possible configurations is astonding. In order to acutally succeed in the prefabricated world a company, like IPS, must make the "best" decisions on where to take their software based on majority feedback from it's clients. I'm only saying this because I see far too often, and recently in this thread, people saying IPS just doesn't care because their goals are not 100% inline with the requestor (or a mild minority). So, when making your requests, you should keep in mind that if your request is likely a niche or uncommon request, while still a valid proposal and may lead to a final result similar to it, may not be implemented 100% to your liking. This attachments system is a perfect example of that.

While IPS did vastly improve their attachment system, they couldn't move to a true "multiple attachments system" due to technical limitations across a vast majority of customers. While it may not make you 100% happy, I, and apparently many customers, are very happy with the change. I'd love a BETTER system (improvments on usability, etc), but I'm still happy with the VAST improvment! At least I can upload more than one file in a post w/o a page reload.

Remember, most importantly, modifications are always an alternative too and will yield 100% (if custom) the desired effect you are looking for basd on your needs! :)

[skysober]

Ah, but since one can no longer mod that area of uploads... as it is now so twisted and confusing in the, uh, structure of uploading, none of the 'kids' in the college area have been able to figure out how to place a mod so it will return to the way 2.0 to 2.1 was.

Thanks tho. The world can continue to wait and watch another 6 months, and as sales are lost, eventually IPB will realize the lost revenue it could be gaining, and then they will play catch up to the other forum software in this respect of multiple attachments.

IPB may be the most secure forum software out there, and that is a plus, but so is fort knox.... and they don't get many visitors ;)

[Digi]

I'm sorry, I've been able to figure out how to add multiple file upload fields and I'm hardly a person to consider as "college kid" in regards to programming. So I'm guessing you are asking the wrong people. ;)

(and no, I don't just work on IPB)

[skysober]

@ Digi. Thanks for your kind response. I am glad you have this figured out. I had to chuckle when you say hardly a person to consider as "college kid" ... Yes, I do know of your skills and the minor fact that you are a prodigy and highly paid programmer, so I guess that should not be a factor - lol

[Mat Barrie]

2) On submit sends a request via javascript for [b]each file[/b]

Hang on, I distinctly recall most javascript implementations not allowing access to "FILE" type input fields via script for security reasons. What implementation allows this?

[Digi]

Hang on, I distinctly recall most javascript implementations not allowing access to "FILE" type input fields via script for security reasons. What implementation allows this?

Your right. I was using laymens here. Javascript is used to tell each form (each file input is on it's own form) to submit. JS can access the "FILE" type, but it can't actually do anything useful with it. The most it can do is get the string out of the (technically) text box. Hope that makes sense.

That might not be exactly how this is working, but the point was clear. They definetly were not sent all at once :)

[mgalyen]

hehe, in the meantime, whilst the banter of theory and its work goes on, just not in the software reality that the members want - lol

[skysober]

on a related note. A local survey request simply of how often the 'new' uploads attachment fails for a user. The average response was 3 times out of very 50 posts.

We've been able to trace at least one example of this and re-enact it quite easily too. It seems since 99% of all members wish to upload a minimum of 5 attachments, (I know... a minority according to IPB...) anyway, if for any reason the page pauses or refreshes itself, the entire attachments already uploaded are lost. So if they have uploaded 30 attachments (which takes about 15-20 minutes babysitting it...) and the 31'st one stops or pauses long enough for explorer to refresh the page, everything is lost.

We never had one complaint when the original drop down box was used, not even with the true multiple attachment mod that was in 2.0 and 2.1. I myself use attachments and just today had this occur when I was uploading, after the 24th one, everything just disappeared in the attachments as if I had not uploaded one photo...

[Kevin Green]

Again, though, I'm not directly opposed to multiple upload fields. It has been request at times. There are limitations, however, that do need to be overcome, and the last time this was brought up, there was no value really seen in doing this.

The underlying question remains, what kind of demand is there for this.

Multiple file uploads at once would be an extremely handy feature which would save so much time on my board.

The current IPB upload system is far better than it used to be - multiple uploads would make it perfect for me.

2MB upload limit

Granted that most servers have that, but those who of us who have increased the limit should be able to have multiple file uploads if we wish.

Those who can't change the 2mb limit are stuck with it, so there's no use in punishing (if I can use that word) the rest of us who could make use of multiple uploads.

Definitely something I would like to see in IPB in the near future :)

[iloveipb]

I'm a new customer to IPB, and I have to say that I'm really satisfied with the software! I was deciding between VB an IPB and what really sold it for me was the fact that I could limit the size of attachments per post per user. I couldn't figure out how to do that in VB, without using a complicated formula or else.
The attachement module can't get more simple and powerfull then the one in IPB. The one in VB is really complicated (i mean just the fact that you have to open another window to add attachemnts and all those complicated rules per type of attachments...).

I'm not someone who like to compare, but i felt that it needed to be said.

Good job guys!
servanddo

[bfarber]

Thanks for the comments. And this shows how we have differing view points on feature requests, and hopefully illustrates to people how it is a hard decision how and when to implement features requested. :)

[henke37]

About the file form control restrictions, they only forbid unauthorized javascript from setting and reading the chosen file name.
At least in Gecko based browsers, there is a way to do request authorization to read and write to the filename, but that is not cross browser.

About the upload progress counter, I strongly dislike the concept of using an additional http request for checking the progress.

[mgalyen]

Since it seems that this will never be brought up to the same level as competitors sofware or properly incorporated to the main software, perhaps IPB might think of an 'add-on' area that modders could use to sell missing features?

I realize it will not show up in the shared 'free' submitted mods area, as while some say it is easy to make this mod, it has not been available for years now... Yet perhaps if a mod programmer could have a place to offer it at a reasonable price, he could make a nice profit from the hundreds whom would want this. Many of us can not afford to hire a programmer each time the forum 'upgrades' to a new version, and this would give an advantage for both the modder who must spend hours or days writing code, and for the many site owners to be able to get what they have been needing. Heck, IPB could have a disclaimer that they are not responsible for any mods that might cause errors or do not support mods, but in this they could even then brag it has the option for true multiple attachments!

[Mark H.]

This is related to the subject, and I don't wish to hijack the thread, but since Upload Progress has been named as a feature in the Software:

Why did IPS choose to employ an upload progress routine that allows only two possible handlers, neither of which is reliable.
Tools&Settings, bottom choice, highlighted in RED beside the checkbox:
"PECL package APC or uploadprogress required for this feature: apc_fetch and uploadprogress_get_info functions not available"

PECL APC has known (and documented) conflicts with Zend, while PECL uploadprogress is *STILL* in BETA, after two *YEARS*.

My webhost (Hostgator) won't allow either one to be installed, and I don't blame them.

PERL already has *three* upload progress handlers that are builtin or installable. (I'll find and post their exact names, if you wish.) But your software won't use any of them.

Unless someone has a magic bullet for this, or I was grossly misinformed, what can be done to resolve this? Or do I have to just live with no progress indicator?

And if "Multiple Attachments" is implemented, it's going to be MAGNITUDES worse. Members on slower connections are likely to just disconnect after a time if they don't see SOME indication that what they're uploading is actually transferring.

I sure hope I'm dead wrong about this and, if so, someone can point me to a solution. :(

[mgalyen]

@ rainbow viper...as I was informed within this post earlier, there is still no upload or download progress in the forum software, this is in some add on program that is not even a part of the main package. So it doesn't matter what they are using in their coding, as it deals with attachments - the highest priority need of members, but the lowest on IPB's...

[Mark H.]

What I mentioned is a "Native" choice (yes, no) in Tools & Settings -> IP Download Manager -> "Show Upload Progress Meter".

It's not an addon. Unless I misunderstood your answer?

At least, the *CHOICE* is there. Whether it actually would *WORK*, if I installed one of the handlers I mentioned, I have no idea.

Perhaps one of the IPS Staff can answer that?

[Keith J. Kacin]

PERL already has *three* upload progress handlers that are builtin or installable. (I'll find and post their exact names, if you wish.) But your software won't use any of them.

Well, the board is coded in PHP, and I believe it is going to continue to be so. So adding in some perl code one feature isn't really useful.