Rheddy Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 I didn't know where else to place this topic and I figured this was the best place for it. What I don't understand is that when IPB 3.1 was released, IPS took the stand to eliminate redundancy in the IPB forum software. Yet, here we are, and IPB 3.2 has built in redundancy in the forum software and I don't understand why this was necessary. In 3.1, we saw the elimination of the "top of page" icon removed from the individual posted topics and moved to a global position in the footer area of the forum code. In 3.2 we saw the removal of "avatars" from the forum because IPS saw no need for photos and avatars. Now, we're confronted with deliberate redundancy. Take a look at the following image: If you examine this image, pay attention that this was a new topic I created on a test board I installed for 3.2. Now, by default, the first topic of the post gives you the indicator of who created the topic, along with their photo-avatar, which should tell anyone who is reading the topic, which member created it. However, look at the photo-avatar that appears above the first post. You'll notice that the photo-avatar appears again (redundancy #1) and while I blocked out the text, the informoation about "topic-started" is also posted here. This really isn't necessary. Look at the bottom of the image where the "post box" is, here we see "Reply to this topic" along with the photo-avatar, again. This is redundancy #2. While I realize that IPS may have thought this was a good idea, is it really necessary to have these multiple redundant "photo-avatars" listed above the forum topic and below the forum topic? While this may have been deliberate to place these here, it's redundant to post the photo avatar all over the place when you're viewing the topic title. Summary: I'm enjoying the new software but I just don't see why plastering the photo-avatar all over the place is really needed. It's like the forum software took one step forward and two steps back. While the photo-avatar might feel needed next to the "post box" in the fast reply, I do think that the photo-avatar and the topic starter information above the topic title is very redundant. The photo-avatar next to the post box isn't really needed since the only person seeing your p-a next to that post box is yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeuhen Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Plus 1 sir. Three times your p-a seems too much. The "Reply to this topic" can be the same one as in 3.1, without your p-a. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sammy Nicole Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 The photo-avatar next to the post box isn't really needed since the only person seeing your p-a next to that post box is yourself. It's presentation really. It looks nicer with your photo next to the reply box. Facebook does this as well, so even if it's unnecessary, it's nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
• Jay • Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 I don't really see the point of making an issue of it. It's not like the image is downloaded 3x, so there's no extra strain on resources having them where they are. The redundancy issues had a lot to do with improving performance. That doesn't apply to the avatars. You could have the same image 100x on the page and it'll only download once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan H. Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Unlike your examples of things removed, these are not functionally redundant. Each one has a specific purpose for being where it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nervosa Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 At first I thought the avatar at the top was a bit much but it gives a nice header to the post. The avatar in the reply wount be as bad once other people reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rheddy Posted June 18, 2011 Author Share Posted June 18, 2011 I don't really have a problem with the presentation of the post box but I think it's redundant to have the same thing "above" the topic title ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan H. Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 I don't really have a problem with the presentation of the post box but I think it's redundant to have the same thing "above" the topic title ... Not if you're on a page beyond the first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christophe Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Can you provide a way to reproduce your screenshot because I can t figure out where you are seeing 3 avatars...I can only see two. The first poster and yours for your pending reply. If you are the only person in a thread I suspect you are going to see this but not in a conversation with more than 1 person. How did you get 3 avatars? Edit: this is what the layout is made of Topic title Discussion Reply box The first poster will probably always get 3 avatars until someone posts a response other than the OP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MageLeif Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 The last one is the reply box at the bottom. The placement of these three things makes sense and they all serve different purposes, so I see no redundancy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcher Technologies Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 The last one is the reply box at the bottom. The placement of these three things makes sense and they all serve different purposes, so I see no redundancy. I actually Do...Specifically in the absolute throttling of the topic vertical space... IMHO this layout would be better(ignore the non3.2ish css, from skin im working) could be just me, but the over-sized avatar/page title detracts from the topic contents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Ian Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 In 3.1, we saw the elimination of the "top of page" icon removed from the individual posted topics and moved to a global position in the footer area of the forum code. This is still here and was in 3.1 - you just have to remove the word hide from the template. Simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aisha Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 I actually Do...Specifically in the absolute throttling of the topic vertical space... IMHO this layout would be better(ignore the non3.2ish css, from skin im working) could be just me, but the over-sized avatar/page title detracts from the topic contents. I agree with you, but honestly, it's a complete matter of opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3DKiwi Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Re bottom mini photo. Could be because Xenforo has the mini photo at the bottom? I'm sure IPS aren't copying Xenforo but I'm seeing a few similarities with 3.2 and Xenforo. I'm fine with the mini photo being at the bottom although it does seem a bit silly to have the photo above the first post as you end up seeing it twice. Xenforo doesn't have it twice at the top. Seems a few things like this they have thought it out a wee bit better. 3DKiwi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MageLeif Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 IPS isn't XenForo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jυra Posted June 18, 2011 Share Posted June 18, 2011 Redundancy is very often a good thing, but the avatar near the topic title is a bit much. If a thread is short, you can see who it is If a thread is long, then it might not be your thread anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management Matt Posted June 18, 2011 Management Share Posted June 18, 2011 I think the user photo next to the topic title at the top of each page is a neat stylish twist that is unique to us - and also has benefits when you enter the topic at any other page than the first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rheddy Posted June 19, 2011 Author Share Posted June 19, 2011 Matt, I respect what you guys have done but comparing the previous iterations of IPB to this new version, it just seems that IPS took out a lot of what they felt was redundancy and replaced those with new redundancies. It's like a web-owner discovering a new code and he decides to go overboard, copying and pasting that code on every page on this website. While some may think it's cool, I just see it for it is, redundant code, used over and over again, on the same pages. Not everybody has a lot of bandwidth and then there are those visitors or members to your site who don't have an updated computer and who use slower machines. I tend to rely on decent judgment and try to keep images or graphics down to a bare minimum and this photo-avatar issue is one that I have a problem with because there's no need to have the photo-avatar above the forum topic (#1), as the first post (#2) and next to the post box (#3). Having the photo-avatar next to the post box is like IPS having to remind the Admin that every member has mental retardation and that the forum software has to remind every user that he or she is who they are logged in as. I hate using descriptions like this but 99% of the members on my forums know who created the topic just by looking at the first post, and they don't need to be reminded who they are logged in as, with that avatar next to the post box. At any rate, I really think that the photo-avatar that is permanently attached just above the topic title has got to be the most ill-conceived idea since I started using the IPB software and I've been a long time user of IPB since IPB v.1.3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qscott86 Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 While some may think it's cool, I just see it for it is, redundant code, used over and over again, on the same pages. Not everybody has a lot of bandwidth and then there are those visitors or members to your site who don't have an updated computer and who use slower machines. I tend to rely on decent judgment and try to keep images or graphics down to a bare minimum and this photo-avatar issue is one that I have a problem with because there's no need to have the photo-avatar above the forum topic (#1), as the first post (#2) and next to the post box (#3). Having the photo-avatar next to the post box is like IPS having to remind the Admin that every member has mental retardation and that the forum software has to remind every user that he or she is who they are logged in as. I hate using descriptions like this but 99% of the members on my forums know who created the topic just by looking at the first post, and they don't need to be reminded who they are logged in as, with that avatar next to the post box. Disagree entirely. It's hardly a bandwidth problem .. that's what the cache is for. It's a great stylish twist. At any rate, I really think that the photo-avatar that is permanently attached just above the topic title has got to be the most ill-conceived idea since I started using the IPB software and I've been a long time user of IPB since IPB v.1.3. Disagree again. I love the look -- it should not be changed at all. Thanks Matt.. you guys are doing a great job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Account- Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 I will also have to agree with the op. Don't misunderstand, I like the concept of "stylish twists", however.. stylish twists are stylish twists, and clutter is clutter. While it may be unique, there's also always a reason that others don't do the same. It's either because it's a bad idea or they weren't wise enough to think of it, in this case.. I don't think it's the latter. I see some of you saying that they each serve different purposes, may I ask what they are? And while they may serve different purposes, I don't see the point in displaying an avatar in each place for them. I mean, I think I know that it's me replying if the reply box is on my screen, I don't need to see my avatar again. My general preference is that avatars only display in profiles, post profiles, and a smaller avatar wherever you have your user control panel located. I apologize, but that's just my opinion.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kornman00 Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 In 3.2 we saw the removal of "avatars" from the forum because IPS saw no need for photos and avatars. Last I checked, IPS didn't run my, and many others, communities. Only their software does. So why are they the ones waving this hammer, instead of giving their customers said hammer? What would be so hard about giving the end-customer the ability to turn this junk on and off? Some of us would rather have a more barebones forum view (without going and modifying the template crap), just like some others would like to not have their users uploading profile pics. I don't take too kindly to software I pay for which later goes and removes features that I used in their product, or imposes new "fluff" that gets in my way which I have to way to toggle on or off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hennet Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 It's not about redundancy, there are things worth being given emphasis. imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCWT Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 I think it's better to move the mini photo next to the fast reply box to the same line as the "Reply to this topic" text. Too much white space wasted at the left and looks out of place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qscott86 Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 I will also have to agree with the op. Don't misunderstand, I like the concept of "stylish twists", however.. stylish twists are stylish twists, and clutter is clutter. While it may be unique, there's also always a reason that others don't do the same. It's either because it's a bad idea or they weren't wise enough to think of it, in this case.. I don't think it's the latter. You're exactly right that clutter is clutter, but the avatars are not clutter - this is just silly whining. And yes, it is the latter -- it's a great idea, not at all a bad one. If you don't like them, change the skin and remove them. The purpose is quite obvious. The avatar at the top of the topic quickly identifies the person who started the topic. The avatar in the reply section is really more of a cosmetic thing that looks good and also makes clear what the person's avatar is going to look like when their post appears. I don't understand this mindless nit-picking -- skins are there for a reason-- edit them to your heart's content. I'm quite happy with the avatars and don't want them removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qscott86 Posted June 20, 2011 Share Posted June 20, 2011 In 3.2 we saw the removal of "avatars" from the forum because IPS saw no need for photos and avatars. I just noticed the removal of avatars and am not at all happy about that. There should be photos and avatars. This was a bad decision. I don't really have a problem with the presentation of the post box but I think it's redundant to have the same thing "above" the topic title ... The problem with your entire assertion is that in your image, you selectively misrepresented this feature by creating a topic in which you were the creator, were the only poster, and had the reply box showing. So of course in your example it would look redundant, but in the course of actual use, how often would a person see that unless they are viewing a thread with no replies? I like the avatars as they are.. this is getting to be silly whining. :baby: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.