Jump to content

Topic Prefixes


Jeuhen

IP.Board Topic Prefixes  

72 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Last year there has been a topic floating around about Topic Prefixes. Opinions were different about this
subject so now i've decided to open up a public Poll. Would you want Topic Prefixes to be implented in the
software as a core function or would you rather not have it or would you not care about it. Let the community know!



I would like to see a conclusive poll showing that more than a small amont of the community really wants this and would actually use it.




In reply to fishfish's quote this topic has been made. Just out of curiousity.

===============================================================================================

As for myself, i would love to see this as a core function. Leave your replies and votes too!
Link to comment
Share on other sites


It would be even better if you could search and sort by prefix.




Even better! i'd love to see this in IPB 3.2 too. And then:

-- Prefix sets
-- ability to use HTML in prefixes (for the ones that would need a rounded background for example)
-- Image prefixes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to seem like I'm trying to hijack these topics, but my mod already does all of that sans prefix sets. :blush:


As far as Zhana's comment: I'll get rid of the file edits as soon as IPS gives me a way to do so. I'm still waiting on that, but I've explained what's needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I don't want to seem like I'm trying to hijack these topics, but my mod already does all of that sans prefix sets. :blush:



Your mod is great, cept for the price. I don't know how long it took you but 15$ is a little high imo. :ph34r:
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Your mod is great, cept for the price. I don't know how long it took you but 15$ is a little high imo. :ph34r:




And how much do you think is fair?

My only argument to these types of things is this:

If you aren't happy with it, or don't like the price, then make it yourself, and you'll see how much effort goes into this type of stuff, and if you cannot make it, then there is no room to complain about it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Your mod is great, cept for the price. I don't know how long it took you but 15$ is a little high imo. :ph34r:



I'm clearly not an objective person in this matter, but I consider it fair. As simple as the modification might seem, and conceptually it really is, the code needed to make it happen is quite a piece of work. The code totals roughly 50KB, including the admin module, additions to the forum manager, and ten separate front-end hooks [soon to be eleven] covering all the filters, searching, moderating options, post screens and places where the prefixes show up. In addition to initial development time, I also pour a not insignificant amount of time into it periodically in order to fix any bugs that were found and add in additional features, and I pride myself in providing a high level of support constantly to anyone who needs it. Also consider that there are no renewal fees, so that $15 covers you as far as support, fixes and upgrades go for as long as I end up supporting it.

That ended up being a lot more than I intended. Basically, people tend to undervalue the time and effort required for these things. I respect the value of money, though, and I try to avoid pricing things too high relative to the cost of the software itself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh for gods sake!
Stop arguing about the mod price and the mod in general!

Let's keep this topic about the actual suggestion - topic prefixes - and not start arguing like the previous topic.
To answer the question, yes I would use it and I'd like it to be a core feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I voted yes.



It should be a core feature. No one is forced to actually use the feature, but the ability should be there for those of us that do want to use it.



And that's how a piece of software gets to be called bloatware, by adding in every feature that a handful of people might use. So even those of us that wouldn't use it have to have our software continuously check to see whether it is enabled in a few dozen spots in the code. That stuff adds up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm saying the idea of "some people will want this, others can just disable it" as the justification to add something is what makes software become bloatware. I would absolutely consider things like prefixes and social groups being bloat.

People rant and rave about how great the XenForo skin is (off topic, but bear with me), but it looks so clean and 'professional' because it doesn't have the feature set that IP.Board has. The more features like this that people try to get crammed in, the more people will complain that IP.Board's interface is too busy, and I tend to agree with that at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


And that's how a piece of software gets to be called bloatware, by adding in every feature that a handful of people might use. So even those of us that wouldn't use it have to have our software continuously check to see whether it is enabled in a few dozen spots in the code. That stuff adds up.




So like Facebook and all that kind of stuff? I know no forum that uses this, I literally don't. But okay, I'm not as active as I used to be, and I'm not hyping every trend...

I don't know any software that stays like it is, if it's in development. So, by your definition in the end everything must become bloatware.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


So like Facebook and all that kind of stuff? I know no forum that uses this, I literally don't. But okay, I'm not as active as I used to be, and I'm not hyping every trend...



I don't know any software that stays like it is, [u]if it's in development[/u]. So, by your definition in the end everything must become bloatware.



I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you're getting at. If you're comparing IP.Board to Facebook, that's not a fair comparison. Facebook is a single site that has millions of users, and farms of servers to handle its load. IP.Board is a piece of software that lots of different people use for their own individual sites, and gets installed on part of a single server most of the time. It has to keep its resource usage in check, IPS can't just add every feature under the sun and tell their customers they need to have a better server to run the new features, while Facebook can just add more servers if they need to.

Every feature added to IP.Board does increase its level of bloat, yes. Certain things, though, are necessary, of course. I personally don't see Topic Prefixes as being one of those things that is necessary. I wouldn't ever use it, I have never frequented a site that does use it, and I can't imagine any site I use that this feature would make any sense in. I get that some people think it's a great idea, and you guys do have a third party resource author who has created such a feature for you. That's the sort of thing the resource community is for: creating those products that a small percentage of customers need so that they can install them, while the rest of us don't need to worry about it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone has problems getting better server, they should then look into IPS Hosting. Server issues can't be an excuse.

I think you really love the word "bloat / bloatware". I think you can use prefixes in your forum too, [Solved], [version #], [App], [plugin], [hook], etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...