Andrews8602

Please see
http://forums.invisionpower.com/topic/287067-link-wraping/page__pid__1840069__st__0

As the internet slowly moves to longer URLs, with better descriptions of the content, truncating the link's text should be an option in ACP (either enable/disable, or enable and x amount of characters, with your default of ~35 characters). It's easier to see what content your link is going to if it's longer than the truncating number, especially if it's all from a domain with a long name, and multiple links from the same website's directory within the same post.

You know, 14 hours is far too long to just let a ticket go without even bothering to respond to it.
Of course, during that time, I was able to find and handle the issue myself, but if this is the typical 'response time', I'll find somewhere else to take my business.

I'm not an impatient guy, 4-5 hours is reasonable, at least as long as things are submitted during business hours (which this was), but 14 hours is pushing it.
Even better? A second reply took 45 minutes or less. Kinda ironic.

The moral of the story? DON'T keep your customer waiting. If they open a ticket, they deserve a non automated reply, same business day, urgent or not.

Your analogys are off.

Mac OSX is more resource intensive than Mac OS9

HOWEVER, through out the 10 series, they continually work at improving resource usage and efficiency so that by the time you reach the end of the 10 series, it is as efficient as possible (and 9/10 more so than the first iteration of the series).

As I've said before, Windows 7 is what Vista should have been. Really it's just an update to Vista, however Microsoft doesn't generally do releases in the same fashion. They release patches, or an entirely new version, and not much in between. To that extent, since Windows 7 is building and improving upon Vista, my analogy above still stands.

Same with Firefox or Opera or Safari.

Firefox 3 uses WAYYY more resources than Firefox 2. HOWEVER, Firefox 3.0.1 improved upon 3.0.0, and 3.0.2 improved upon 3.0.1.

It's the same way here. IPB3 uses more resources than IPB 2 (as a blatant general statement - this largely depends upon the features you enable). However, 3.0.1 uses less resources than 3.0.0 did, and 3.0.2 improved greatly upon 3.0.1. It's probable that you will see improvements with 3.0.3 over 3.0.2. And this is what we've said all along in this topic. Over the lifetime of the 3 series, we will continuously improve the software so that it becomes as efficient as possible.


You have to use analogies that match up here. :)

According to their standards of service, IPS has up to 2 days to respond to your ticket. This topic isn't feedback...

App or apps is short for applications.