.Ian Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 You are missing a very critical point. For example we were working on a news,article section for some time for our big board. However atm we need to hold ourself because we don't know what changes Ip.Content will introduce. We don't want to start releasing articles and facing URL changes after moving to IPB 4. There are lots of other examples i can share easily. But important thing is IPB Team started sharing more informations which pleases us extremely. Because what we currently see made us believe we bet on correct choice with IP Content instead of Wordpress Fairly sure Brandon said recently that there would not be any url change at this stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenLinks Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Fairly sure Brandon said recently that there would not be any url change at this stage. He cleared that a bit , it seems that no change is only covering forum URLs. They will share information about IP.Content on upcoming blog entries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miguel Munoz Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I have saw some pictures of IPB 4.0 It looks amazing! I'm sort of new to Invision Power Board, but soon enough I will get a hold of it, I have been practicing on making skins, I really like the navigation on 3.4.6 but 4.0 looks like something new I can't wait until the release, I am willing to pay for it again if that's so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZakRhyno Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I have saw some pictures of IPB 4.0 It looks amazing! I'm sort of new to Invision Power Board, but soon enough I will get a hold of it, I have been practicing on making skins, I really like the navigation on 3.4.6 but 4.0 looks like something new I can't wait until the release, I am willing to pay for it again if that's so. From what the video should IPS 4.0 navigation are like buttons hovering over them and all, I like to keep the the current look of the navagtion like tabs; they are also trying to copy Facebook and Apple's circle images looking going around. Sort of ungly way to to the profile images; hope we can change it back to squares if we want to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZakRhyno Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Oh also the whole point of this thread! Frequently Asked Questions When will 4.0 be released? Q2 2014. http://community.invisionpower.com/forum-305/announcement-30-what-new-in-ips-community-suite-40/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VyVid Productions Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I personally like the rounded look. Looks very nice to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teraßyte Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Where's our daily blog entry? :sorcerer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrettyPixels Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I like it too. It was mentioned (earlier in this topic?) that you could adjust different settings, including the rounded corners, if you don't like them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sinistra Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I do love the skin. now how about those IP.Content blog posts? ^_^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farcaster II Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Honestly, there is little point going to use other forum software. Once you see IPS 4, you'll want to switch back because it is significantly better than all other software so you'll just be wasting your time and effort. Use IP.Board 3 and then we'll help you upgrade when the time is right for you. I'm 100% sure that this is true, i LOVE what i've seen in '?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>> and the other Dev Blogposts and I wish i could do this, but because of the ipb4 delay i had to start coding the application for my client with xenforo :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pavero Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Oh also the whole point of this thread! Me with the ad that I saw and improvement will have, frankly it's worth the wait.4.x time due time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rimi Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 one of the biggest unknowns and decision making points is the role of IP.Content and it's enhancements, as well as how portable 3.4+ to 4.0+ will be. Ohey that reminds me. They ignored my question about whether or not our IP.Content database templates would be completely destroyed upon upgrade due to new template logic. Anyone care to answer? Fairly sure Brandon said recently that there would not be any url change at this stage. If they still haven't done anything about the database marker then there's a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esquire Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 You pretty much only saw the uploader. So I hope it's more flexible that simply uploading files too. Especially as its name is "IP.Downloads". Although I'd sort of enjoy the irony of a product called "Downloads" that only allowed you to upload. That's not the issue I'm referring to. I'm talking about structure, taxonomy, etc. Looks a bit like the approach to the old one and just don't know whether it is because all I'm seeing is a glossy video. What concerns me is that many of the issues that site owners had regarding the true utility of the modules may not be addressed. IP.C is the only module that actually had the capabilities to match the basic functions of dedicated modules and the others were not very practical for active sites. I just wished IP.C didn't have it's own issues, many of which I've shared. Things like this are either addressed or not addressed and I don't know whether you found them as important as I did (and likely most sites with an active community.) Not trying to push you into anything but I'm now launching some of these modules using a different software because I simply can't wait even more months just to find out if the architecture is sufficiently flexible this go round. But what makes it more challenging is that without knowing the architecture, it makes any migration potential a guessing game. For existing site owners it's tough. I expected to wait until sometime in December the latest for beta (we heard release.) Now we're talking about possibly April, May or June just to get these answers. Can't stand still any longer. I hope you can take the constructive nature of my comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esquire Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 You are missing a very critical point. For example we were working on a news,article section for some time for our big board. However atm we need to hold ourself because we don't know what changes Ip.Content will introduce. We don't want to start releasing articles and facing URL changes after moving to IPB 4. There are lots of other examples i can share easily. But important thing is IPB Team started sharing more informations which pleases us extremely. Because what we currently see made us believe we bet on correct choice with IP Content instead of Wordpress Perfectly stated among all the laudatory comments about how beautiful the new style looks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rikki Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 That's not the issue I'm referring to. I'm talking about structure, taxonomy, etc. Looks a bit like the approach to the old one and just don't know whether it is because all I'm seeing is a glossy video. What concerns me is that many of the issues that site owners had regarding the true utility of the modules may not be addressed. IP.C is the only module that actually had the capabilities to match the basic functions of dedicated modules and the others were not very practical for active sites. I just wished IP.C didn't have it's own issues, many of which I've shared. Things like this are either addressed or not addressed and I don't know whether you found them as important as I did (and likely most sites with an active community.) Not trying to push you into anything but I'm now launching some of these modules using a different software because I simply can't wait even more months just to find out if the architecture is sufficiently flexible this go round. But what makes it more challenging is that without knowing the architecture, it makes any migration potential a guessing game. For existing site owners it's tough. I expected to wait until sometime in December the latest for beta (we heard release.) Now we're talking about possibly April, May or June just to get these answers. Can't stand still any longer. I hope you can take the constructive nature of my comments. Can you elaborate on what you are trying to achieve and what shortcomings our current apps have? I'm not sure I follow the issue, and I think it'd be useful to understand it better :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clover13 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Ohey that reminds me. They ignored my question about whether or not our IP.Content database templates would be completely destroyed upon upgrade due to new template logic. Anyone care to answer? If they still haven't done anything about the database marker then there's a problem. Yes, that is very relevant to my current work as I am using IP.Content databases and templates heavily. My guess though is that the templates may be broken (especially if they are custom HTML/CSS). The data iteration/extraction code should get upgraded, but I'm not sure how seamless presentation logic will be. I literally only have a few days into learning/coding the IP.Content databases and database templates...so the current implementation isn't entirely clear to me yet. I'm really hoping there is a better level of IP.Content database relationships and the ability to automatically and selectively extract/display related data (without a mod or heavily custom querying/coding). We shall see, but I definitely like the concept of the IP.Content databases and templates for uniform and reusable data to presentation handling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soniceffect Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I personally like the rounded look. Looks very nice to me. Yeah me too Can you elaborate on what you are trying to achieve and what shortcomings our current apps have? I'm not sure I follow the issue, and I think it'd be useful to understand it better :smile: And comments like that and the humour from the staff around here are why Im glad I came back to the place I should have never left in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZakRhyno Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I like it too. It was mentioned (earlier in this topic?) that you could adjust different settings, including the rounded corners, if you don't like them. Ahh nice! Thanks! I'm 100% sure that this is true, i LOVE what i've seen in '?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>> and the other Dev Blogposts and I wish i could do this, but because of the ipb4 delay i had to start coding the application for my client with xenforo :sad: How is it delay? They never given a date on when it will come out; last I check you need a time when it can be ending than pass that it's delay. Check my link up above in early post it says Q2; that April; May; June time frame. Me with the ad that I saw and improvement will have, frankly it's worth the wait.4.x time due time huh? What you talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPhilip Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Where's our daily blog entry? :sorcerer: No blog post today can only mean one thing - 4.0 got delayed cancelled! :frantics: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shariq Ansari Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Latest blog posts have been excellent and much appreciated!! Theme looks good - simple & clean but not fugly and spartan like VB5... It sounds like a LOT of the apprehension being expressed on this thread surrounds IP.Content... sooner we can get some blog posts spelling out what's going on with it, the better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esquire Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Can you elaborate on what you are trying to achieve and what shortcomings our current apps have? I'm not sure I follow the issue, and I think it'd be useful to understand it better :smile: Sure thing Rikki and GreenLinks hit the nail on the head. Regarding taxonomy, I have no idea how things like categories and nesting of categories are handled. How about searching? In the past, the modules took a very meaningless "web 2.0" approach of KISS aka as stupidly simple as possible just to get a file, picture or whatever piece of media uploaded. But when you deal with a site that is larger than small, trying to organize, categorize and make finding those entries easy was beastly with this approach. A simple keyword based system for entry, browsing and searching will not do. Now let's get to flexibility. Where does this module have to be installed? Anywhere? In a subdomain or subdirectory off of the forum install? Some other requirement? If I don't know how independent modules are installed than all the work I'm doing using forums in a subdirectory and files in a subdomain becomes completely incompatible with the IPB suite. And then there is the matter of which software must sit in the root directory. Is there any requirement? Does IP.C have to sit i the root? It had to in order to create an install so that forums appeared in a subdirectory. Next, let's get to what all this means regarding URL generation. I started a very long discussion long ago about the issues with IP.C and also the problems caused by the way it creates breadcrumbs and URLs. To make it short, everyone can have an opinion but IMHO IP.C created far less than optimal URLs that are incompatible with most website URL construction. And breadcrumbs were flat out wrong and very problematic. Creating new databases required not only an identifier but also a slug - and I'm not going to bother explaining again why an unsightly or unnecessary slug takes IP.C down a big notch. So... what are our options for URLs? Are my Wordpress multisites compatible URL-wise with the current IP.C? I've had to start these other initiatives - with no concern for what is going on here at IPB - because the delays were extremely long and little information but very nice looking pictures have been released. I honestly have no idea whether all of these things have been considered and, more importantly, the answers to these questions. The last thing I care about is the way it looks so long as the template is responsive. Hiring a designer is the easy part. The stuff above is what really makes the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigratrus Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Ohey that reminds me. They ignored my question about whether or not our IP.Content database templates would be completely destroyed upon upgrade due to new template logic. Anyone care to answer? If they still haven't done anything about the database marker then there's a problem. The DB marker is still up in the air as far as what's been said publicly. There WAS a post that there were no major URL changes, but >Brandon clarified: I was referring to general FURL structure for applications on a global level. IP.Content is an entirely different beast as YOU specify the URLs. We haven't talked about IP.Content yet so I wouldn't make any assumptions about it. So we're still waiting to see. Yet another reason that we're biting our nails waiting for the IP.Content blog posts. ;) James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheersnGears Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 That puppy is an approved funny puppy. I completely understand that you do not enjoy being "in the dark" about the specifics of IPS 4. It's not fun not knowing exactly where we are and what we're doing. clearly we aren't understanding each other (although it seems as if Charles is following what I'm asking for) - I'm not asking to see your Alpha work. Nor am I asking for access to a Beta. I'm not even asking for a release date. All I was asking for, and have since received, is a general time frame of when we could expect to see 4.0 released to the wild. All I want to know is where/when I should invest 3rd party development dollars. If 4.0 wasn't going to be out till the end of 2014, I would be willing to spend some money now on 3.4.6 improvements. If it comes out on the very last day of Q2... then I'll hold off on any development spend in anticipation of the new software. I don't think it is an unfair question to ask.. and I am not at all asking to look over your shoulder and criticize while you're still working on the Alpha or even the Beta..... I'm sure there will be plenty of time to criticize the software after you release 4.0 Gold. :tongue: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheersnGears Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Honestly, there is little point going to use other forum software. Once you see IPS 4, you'll want to switch back because it is significantly better than all other software so you'll just be wasting your time and effort. Use IP.Board 3 and then we'll help you upgrade when the time is right for you. My issues with IPS has never ever been about the software, or even the ticket support.... but with the attitude I get during interactions with the staff. When I was 24, I wanted and had the means for a new Cadillac. I knew exactly the model I wanted and stopped at a dealer that had the car with my exactly desired specifications. The salesman decided not to take "this 24 year old kid in ripped jeans and baseball hat" seriously and instead tried to steer me towards a used Saturn or Pontiac. Even more unfortunately, this dealership had been doing the service on my Oldsmobile for years. Guess who I didn't buy the car from even though it was exactly what I wanted..... I went to another dealer across town. They had a similar one that was missing a feature or two, but was mostly right. They treated me like gold, answered all my questions and didn't treat me like I was a nuisance. Not only did I buy the car from them, but two years later I went back and bought a truck from them. I feel like I'm dealing with the first dealership whenever I have interactions with IPS staff (as already has been demonstrated in this thread). Switching out of a forum software is much more difficult that switching car dealerships..... and I hope I never have to do it... but gosh you guys make it hard to stick around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheersnGears Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I do understand the concerns of the whole " We don't have a release date yet" I would like to see it released like the next person but you can't rush stuff like this. like I sated it will be released when it is ready. I am not trying to start any arguments but I have to agree with Matt, If they released alphas betas, and nightlies as it were. they wouldn't get any work done to improve on what they have already done. I completely understand but telling them is not going to get it released any faster. Again, not asking for that. I just want to know how and when to invest development dollars in the most efficient fashion. i don't really care if it is 2016 before we see 4.0 (yes I do). I just want to know the approximate "when" so I know what money to spend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.