Wolfie Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 Another "Community Supprted Feature". >_< That seems to be the kiss of death lately. Shoutbox, Links and now Portal. Shoutbox and Links were always community projects. They were never official IPS products. Exactly. Off to the graveyard with it. Read it again. Links and Shoutbox started off as unofficial products and have remained that way. They were never official products from IPS, they were only community developed. Your viewpoint on it demonstrates the confusion.
.Ian Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 Portals have been always pretty bad from what I've seen. They're a lazy CMS with generally bad navigation that throws a bunch of nonsense information at a user who might know what the site is. IP.Portal runs fine. Add in a few template bits and for single page it is great. Ours runs scripts, and is updated each minute automatically during live matches. For sites that just need one single page, do you not think that IP.Content is an overkill - even if it was free? We are talking about just a home page. We know that it will work with 3.2 and that is all that matters for now.
rastaX Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 Read it again. Links and Shoutbox started off as unofficial products and have remained that way. They were never official products from IPS, they were only community developed. Your viewpoint on it demonstrates the confusion. I'm not confused. I know the entire history of those, Links was an old bfarber (mostly) mod, Shoutbox was one of Deans, the former IPBeyond at some point came up with an idea for "Community Supported" mods. "Semi" official. I was never under the impression they were anything but "encouraged" by IPS. Point is only that the entire concept seems dead. A place for great mods to wither away. This move is disappointing to me, seems like the "Apple-fication" of IPS. Pay to play. But I'll live. IPS is still the best game in town. And I agree with the above post. ;)
Luke Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 Shout box has always been a mod, but there used to be an official Links application way back prior to 2.0:http://replay.waybac...r.com/?products "Invision Power Top Site List" and even "Invision Power File Manager" (I remember using File Manager...It's been a long time!) I'm pretty sure this was before bfarber (I know at least before he was hired). I'm also quite certain his mod came after Top Sites disappeared. Granted links can do more and had a different name, but it was still an official IPS product. It could even be used as a standalone product. (Yes I have been around for a while) Now Charles has said that Portal would be separated into a plugin and the community could maintain it. Everyone should be happy about that :).. But subscriptions hasn't been updated in a while? Didn't Matt just redo that for 3.0??? A lot of people have use for that (although I agree Nexus would be better).
Wolfie Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 Point is only that the entire concept seems dead. A place for great mods to wither away. It's not as though it's being removed and never to be updated again. It's being updated to work with IPB v3.2 and then up to the community to update from that point on. If there's enough need and demand for it, then someone will take it on to update, it won't just wither away. If there isn't enough demand for it, then obviously it'll just phase itself out anyway.
Wolfie Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 "Invision Power Top Site List" and even "Invision Power File Manager" (I remember using File Manager...It's been a long time!) If I remember correctly, TSL was sort of like a links system but worked more on a ranking concept. No matter though, unless I'm mistaken, Links wasn't made to duplicate or replace it, it was simply created to serve the function it serves now. TSL was retired long before Links came into play.
Luke Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 If I remember correctly, TSL was sort of like a links system but worked more on a ranking concept. No matter though, unless I'm mistaken, Links wasn't made to duplicate or replace it, it was simply created to serve the function it serves now. TSL was retired long before Links came into play. Isn't that what I said? Links has a lot more to offer. But Top Sites was an official product :). They aren't exactly the same, but they are very similar.
Wolfie Posted February 20, 2011 Posted February 20, 2011 Isn't that what I said? Links has a lot more to offer. But Top Sites was an official product :). They aren't exactly the same, but they are very similar. I was clarifying that one wasn't converted into the other.
Axel Wers Posted February 20, 2011 Posted February 20, 2011 I use IP.Content, so in my case Portal is really uselles. I was thinking about this last time ago, that I will probably disable Portal for future. So this change is only that I wanted.
Jυra Posted February 20, 2011 Posted February 20, 2011 For sites that just need one single page, do you not think that IP.Content is an overkill - even if it was free? My answer is no. Making a first good impression or giving your members a good experience is never overkill.
.Ian Posted February 20, 2011 Posted February 20, 2011 My answer is no. Making a first good impression or giving your members a good experience is never overkill. So what can IP.Content do for the home page that IP.Portal cannot?
ZakRhyno Posted February 20, 2011 Author Posted February 20, 2011 So what can IP.Content do for the home page that IP.Portal cannot? But what happens if you DON'T want IPC and just a simple easy portal. The portal system does that currently, simple easy and well don't have to spend extra if the user don't want to. You have to look on the other side of things.
.Ian Posted February 20, 2011 Posted February 20, 2011 But what happens if you DON'T want IPC and just a simple easy portal. The portal system does that currently, simple easy and well don't have to spend extra if the user don't want to. You have to look on the other side of things. I agree - I am saying that Portal is useful and does everything that IP.Content does for a single home page. IP.Content does not add value (that I know of) if a site just wants a home page, however it is a great package and will allow for additional pages if required. It was our friend that was saying it was rubbish which is just untrue.
Jυra Posted February 20, 2011 Posted February 20, 2011 So what can IP.Content do for the home page that IP.Portal cannot? If you're using IP.Content then it's safe to assume it will be customized to suit the site. But what happens if you DON'T want IPC and just a simple easy portal. If you don't want IPC then you can use something else or use an awful out of the box portal.
.Ian Posted February 20, 2011 Posted February 20, 2011 If you're using IP.Content then it's safe to assume it will be customized to suit the site. If you don't want IPC then you can use something else or use an awful out of the box portal. So why is IP.Portal awful - you are making sweeping claims without any substance.
Ichirō Posted February 20, 2011 Posted February 20, 2011 I use ip portal and its sufficient for my needs. I have tried out ip content and couldnt get on with it. I dont want to pay for yet another addon for a hompage when ip portal does the job fine. Also subscriptions being trashed as well now? Does that mean having to buy nexus ?? Time to close my wallet and walk!
Mark Posted February 20, 2011 Posted February 20, 2011 I use ip portal and its sufficient for my needs. I have tried out ip content and couldnt get on with it. I dont want to pay for yet another addon for a hompage when ip portal does the job fine. Also subscriptions being trashed as well now? Does that mean having to buy nexus ?? Time to close my wallet and walk! Neither are being "trashed" - they are being updated to 3.2 and then there will be no further updates. You're quite welcome to continue using them, or as we said, we'd be interested to talk to anyone who wants to take over. Note that Portal and Subscriptions haven't been updated in some time anyway, so it probably won't be until 3.3 that this actually effects anyone.
CheersnGears Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 I bought the IP.Content add on stupidly not realizing that I'd have to be a programmer to make anything look right. So at this point it's been a waste of money for me What I wish someone would offer is a new Portal like the Unreal portal that was a much more non-programmer friendly setup. I can just insert little snippits of HTML and make everything work right. Unfortunately, it appears that Unreal portal has been abandoned. I don't even care if it is designed to run in IP.Content.... but IP.Content is still too hard to use for non-programmers.
Claudia999 Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 Because there's no answer to my other thread I'll try it here: I tried to make my Portal page with IP.Content - but then the search box in the header is predefined for search in Pages (IP.Content) - and this is the bad point, for me. Most search results are in forums, and a blank result page (or with a few results) is confusing for the users. For this reason I decide to make my Portal with "Portal". Do you change the search function or the result page if you kill the Portal?
.Ian Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 Portal page search defaults to the forums - although nothing is shown in the dropdown, which is fine. I would say that as IP.Content is to replace IP.Portal it should be selectable as every site is different. Some (many) will prefer the forums, but some might prefer other sections if they have a higher priority on their site. You might want to suggest this in the IP.Content feedback forum.
Claudia999 Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 You might want to suggest this in the IP.Content feedback forum. Done, thanks! :)
bobblebum Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 I would hate to see the portal go, if they get rid of the portal IPS should convert your portal blocks for free!
.Ian Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 I would hate to see the portal go, if they get rid of the portal IPS should convert your portal blocks for free! Portal will still be around after 3.2 comes out :)
Wolfie Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 I would hate to see the portal go, if they get rid of the portal IPS should convert your portal blocks for free! Something that I think people are missing is that IP.Portal, as I understand it, will still be available for people to use. It just won't be updated anymore by IPS after it's updated for IPB 3.2. Here's my understanding of the situation: * Both portal and subscriptions will be upgraded to work with IPB v3.2 * Since both add-ons rarely get updated, it is likely (but not guaranteed) to continue working for all of the v3.2.x series * If someone wants to take over the development of portal (and/or subscriptions?) then IPS will try to work with them to make it possible. To put this into Laymen's terms, if it takes a year before IPB v3.3 to be developed and released, then it's likely that portal and subscriptions will work for everyone who uses them at least until then. So that's roughly a year for someone to decide to take one (or both?) of them over for development. That's plenty of time before having to get worried that it'll become an issue. Also, keep in mind that with some HTML knowledge or a tool to create a front page, it's actually quite simple to call on the IPB framework to manually create a portal page. I think there is even an app, or at least there was an app, to allow you to create a custom page. That could also be used as a portal. There are options available and plenty of time to plan for what to do.
ZakRhyno Posted February 23, 2011 Author Posted February 23, 2011 Something that I think people are missing is that IP.Portal, as I understand it, will still be available for people to use. It just won't be updated anymore by IPS after it's updated for IPB 3.2. Here's my understanding of the situation: * Both portal and subscriptions will be upgraded to work with IPB v3.2 * Since both add-ons rarely get updated, it is likely (but not guaranteed) to continue working for all of the v3.2.x series * If someone wants to take over the development of portal (and/or subscriptions?) then IPS will try to work with them to make it possible. To put this into Laymen's terms, if it takes a year before IPB v3.3 to be developed and released, then it's likely that portal and subscriptions will work for everyone who uses them at least until then. So that's roughly a year for someone to decide to take one (or both?) of them over for development. That's plenty of time before having to get worried that it'll become an issue. Also, keep in mind that with some HTML knowledge or a tool to create a front page, it's actually quite simple to call on the IPB framework to manually create a portal page. I think there is even an app, or at least there was an app, to allow you to create a custom page. That could also be used as a portal. There are options available and plenty of time to plan for what to do. True but why get rid of something that been working for a while. I mean I bought IP.Content seeing that it would help me but it still not at a point that I can't understand it, even with the documentation that is listed (needs to be more water down). So I wanted to start testing out the portal was a simpler answer. Currently I use Uportal, thanks to the IPS staff that change it IPB so it will work with 3.1 version, but can't stay on the Uportal side when things start moving on more. So the last one that is supported is Portal. Which was being us. I'm not saying I have IPC and want to used it for a portal, I just want to use what is already there and is simple to use from the start. It was made to be simple and is simple. IPC is something totally different and if use correct can fill that void. As of it current standing I'm waiting to major release before I start playing with it again as it not up to part with being "lower end user friendly." Just saw this [url=", helps to explain the same way I feel.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.