Jump to content

Push for Mobile first


Dylan Riggs
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, christopher-w said:

Yes, I am sure that's the intention, but the larger the user base, the more generic the solution - just look at O365. Which is why I advocate core being wrapped in a versioned API, which allows theme devs and more advanced owners to construct their own front end presentation. Plus themes don't break when core is updated because they will be authored against an API version.

Yes, this

This is why I actually like Node and a reason I do like nodebb in many cases to clients. It definitely doesn't have all the features that IPS has, but it's much easier to build said features that are missing in node, and much easier to find developers if you need to. It's 'mostly' designed as a mobile designed with keeping more support for mobile devices than what IPS has as the software was designed for more or less phones and scaled up. It's also much much faster out of the box.

Though, again - like anything else we pick... has its pro's and con's.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

12 hours ago, DesignzShop said:

In the future as has been pointed out, some of those extended features can be added into the new community mobile feature as you've read, the content is already present, just needs to be in some cases aggregated into the new feature. In the future releases there's no reason why themes couldn't be added even though they may need to be color matched once. However there's another bonus, you wont have to worry about maintenance on that theme or costs associated with that. You wouldn't need much for settings to accommodate the simple view of mobile imo and some general settings would be an idea to present to IPB for this if they already don't have a idea on what that would be.. My guess is they already have a idea however. A simple logo and you're done.

 

Hey @DesignzShop

You know I have no doubt as to the ability and efficacy of the dev team here. They've clearly been thinking ahead of the curve in terms of functionality - but just as with the 8088/286 legacy issues that somewhat thwarted progress of  x86 .exe development, the future decisions regarding code direction that face all application architects are wide ranging. As has been pointed out, Invision has lots of active clients, which is both great from a business perspective, but problematic in terms of updating them if you make a fundamental direction change in terms of how you build pages. Which is what deploying a versioned API amounts to. Although, wrapping core as it stands in an API wrapper is a possibility I guess, although probably not desirable in terms of performance.

Either way, deploying a versioned API is not something you are going to roll out as part of a mid year x.xxx update. It's a fundamental change in how pages are built, with controller methods just as, if not more likely, to be executed on the client with async server fulfillment - promises etc, than backstage via waterfall PHP. As for themes, and for that matter plugins, with a documented client side API and CSOM, themes and plugins can transform themselves from passive to active devices. I appreciate there's already the odd plugin making async server calls, but having an API and CSOM would make it the norm.

And thinking more on this, it probably means an entirely new branch of code - operating in parallel with the existing legacy installations for the short - mid term. Whether this is in Invision's plans? Who knows but I am sure they will make the right decision as they see it and thereafter execute them to a high standard. And of course,  it's easy for folks like me to suggest this and that. These guys have the real hard job. Making the decision and then making it work.

 

3 hours ago, Dylan Riggs said:

Yes, this

This is why I actually like Node and a reason I do like nodebb in many cases to clients. It definitely doesn't have all the features that IPS has, but it's much easier to build said features that are missing in node, and much easier to find developers if you need to. It's 'mostly' designed as a mobile designed with keeping more support for mobile devices than what IPS has as the software was designed for more or less phones and scaled up. It's also much much faster out of the box.

 

 

I worked with the NodeBB platform for a few months and was impressed with its sheer economy of design. What it did, it did very well, and as you say was/is quick out of the box  - but there wasn't enough of it. Third party plugins augmented what you'd argue, should be in core, but just as with most community platforms, they worked with varying degrees of success and the irony being, the more you planned your new site, the less comfortable you felt relying on an individual plugin developer to deliver core functionality for the foreseeable future. But as we know, that's not specific to one platform - it's the industry we're in.

With regards Discourse, I think they are in much the same boat as NodeBB, albeit more widely used, and for good reason given the dedication and provenance of the founders. But as I mentioned earlier, they made decisions that, in my view at least, crippled their desktop offering. But apart from that, I do really like the immediateness of the Discourse platform - especially how changes to the model (both app data and CSS) are instantly pushed to the view (clients) - alarming when you first see it in action, with for example, the theme changing before your eyes, without a page refresh, a second or so after it's been updated on the server.

 

4 hours ago, Dylan Riggs said:

Though, again - like anything else we pick... has its pro's and con's.

Well yes, exactly.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, christopher-w said:

 

Hey @DesignzShop

You know I have no doubt as to the ability and efficacy of the dev team here. They've clearly been thinking ahead of the curve in terms of functionality - but just as with the 8088/286 legacy issues that somewhat thwarted progress of  x86 .exe development, the future decisions regarding code direction that face all application architects are wide ranging. As has been pointed out, Invision has lots of active clients, which is both great from a business perspective, but problematic in terms of updating them if you make a fundamental direction change in terms of how you build pages. Which is what deploying a versioned API amounts to. Although, wrapping core as it stands in an API wrapper is a possibility I guess, although probably not desirable in terms of performance.

Either way, deploying a versioned API is not something you are going to roll out as part of a mid year x.xxx update. It's a fundamental change in how pages are built, with controller methods just as, if not more likely, to be executed on the client with async server fulfillment - promises etc, than backstage via waterfall PHP. As for themes, and for that matter plugins, with a documented client side API and CSOM, themes and plugins can transform themselves from passive to active devices. I appreciate there's already the odd plugin making async server calls, but having an API and CSOM would make it the norm.

And thinking more on this, it probably means an entirely new branch of code - operating in parallel with the existing legacy installations for the short - mid term. Whether this is in Invision's plans? Who knows but I am sure they will make the right decision as they see it and thereafter execute them to a high standard. And of course,  it's easy for folks like me to suggest this and that. These guys have the real hard job. Making the decision and then making it work.

 

 

I worked with the NodeBB platform for a few months and was impressed with its sheer economy of design. What it did, it did very well, and as you say was/is quick out of the box  - but there wasn't enough of it. Third party plugins augmented what you'd argue, should be in core, but just as with most community platforms, they worked with varying degrees of success and the irony being, the more you planned your new site, the less comfortable you felt relying on an individual plugin developer to deliver core functionality for the foreseeable future. But as we know, that's not specific to one platform - it's the industry we're in.

With regards Discourse, I think they are in much the same boat as NodeBB, albeit more widely used, and for good reason given the dedication and provenance of the founders. But as I mentioned earlier, they made decisions that, in my view at least, crippled their desktop offering. But apart from that, I do really like the immediateness of the Discourse platform - especially how changes to the model (both app data and CSS) are instantly pushed to the view (clients) - alarming when you first see it in action, with for example, the theme changing before your eyes, without a page refresh, a second or so after it's been updated on the server.

 

Well yes, exactly.

 

 

 

If I had my pick, which we can discuss offline as well. I like discourse as a well rounded option out of the box. What features were taken away from desktop viewers that you can’t get added back in? Node is something that’s out of the box, powerful in design, but basic in feature set. It’s economy is developer friendly and works well in other applications that have a great approach to mobile first while keeping the footprint small. Here are a couple of my 0.02c

IPS is a great ‘forum’ but that’s about all. Anything else added on top are cherries. I have no complaints about the forum aspect, its community features for member control/profiles etc. Then again, most of the ‘forum’ features you have exist in Vanilla, PHPBB, Discourse, Nodebb, flarum and on and on. THe difference is when you start tacking on other applications for a whole ‘community’ suite. IPS has one, but in my opinion, it’s lackluster.

4.x Pages is just about the same in content development as 3.x - I used to be a huge pages guru developing some really cool stuff with it and it had many perks with the fact that you could build things out of it while being contained in your ecosystem. However, support was lackluster, they didn’t have really any documentation about it or anything else. IPS 4.x does have better documentation, but not by much for pages specifically. You have @opentype and another user who have released pages specific content on the marketplace and that’s about it who are publishing things. I would too, but the investment of time etc isn’t worth it for what I can get back out of it hence why I personally ‘lump’ it into niche market.

I hate wordpress, but the simple fact that it’s easy to find themes, plugins and developers while still being supported as a way to extend your site is hard to pass up from a user perspective. Now there are CMS’s coming online that are geared towards node or other frameworks that are super fast, light weight, easily extendable, API driven and some forum platforms offer integrations right outside the box. IPS is trying to maintain a self contained ecosystem which isn’t necessrily bad in a sense for niche markets. But statistically, it isn’t what makes sense for most people. If you bought or use this software. You were either already invested into it from years ago (like in my case) or there is just something about the software that you really need and are willing to sacrifice in other areas to have it. Hence why it’s hard to recommend to ‘most’ people.

IPS reminds me of one of those all-in-one TV’s that have the TV, VCR, DVD player built in. But usually it’s best to just buy your 3 different components and save face. Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dylan Riggs said:

If I had my pick, which we can discuss offline as well. I like discourse as a well rounded option out of the box.

Sure you do, and any other software than IPB, I think you've promoted every software here but IPB's which you've managed to do nothing for but diss in every way you could imaginable and as nastily as possible. Constructive criticism it's not been.

You also have managed to take IPB customers to PM to promote other products. You're using IPB's facilities to solicitation business for yourself using other products than IPB's. Shouldn't be permitted.

 

3 hours ago, Dylan Riggs said:

THe difference is when you start tacking on other applications for a whole ‘community’ suite. IPS has one, but in my opinion, it’s lackluster

Yet again, another praising comment for IPB and a great way to make IPB users here not only feel questionable about their choice but also act as a deterrent to future sales here for IPB.

 

3 hours ago, Dylan Riggs said:

I used to be a huge pages guru developing some really cool stuff with it and it had many perks with the fact that you could build things out of it while being contained in your ecosystem

 

3 hours ago, Dylan Riggs said:

I would too, but the investment of time etc isn’t worth it for what I can get back out of it hence why I personally ‘lump’ it into niche market.

Guru.... give us a break. You abandon your other projects and customers here also, or wait, did you still have customers? If IPB was gonna do the right thing here it would be to remove your contributor badge as a great start under your own admittance of not being one. It's also a shame you have access to areas here you really shouldn't have imo.

 

3 hours ago, Dylan Riggs said:

IPS reminds me of one of those all-in-one TV’s that have the TV, VCR, DVD player built in. But usually it’s best to just buy your 3 different components and save face. Lol

Laugh out loud? Thanks for bringing this full circle now. Maybe some of the others will now understand what you're about. Just when I thought you couldn't dog IPB anymore, I was wrong, you could and will keep doing it. I knew all along this was the type of person you are from your past here. There's thousands of IPB users for a reason, not because it's a sub-par product that doesn't fit your profile of what it should be. People like me and many others love IPB, it's just a shame anyone here has to hear your vitriol and attacks on their choice over and over and over and over.

Again, just stop... You've lost total control of your faculties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Management

We appreciate the feedback, exchange of ideas and overall dialogue. I believe the original question has been addressed and this topic has run its course and we're just heading downhill at this point. There are various admin sites that serve as a platform to exchange comparisons between platforms and bounce around ideas. You're also welcome to continue the exchange via PM (with civility, of course.)

As noted, 2020 is about bringing more modern elements to the platform - including UI changes to 4.5 and the introduction of a mobile app. There are 18 years of customer history to account for and it's not a switch that can be flipped overnight, however, we are very pleased with the present and are looking forward to the future. We feel most of you will as well. 🙂 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...