APUG's next version and migration to a new system, possibly in June/July.

[RobC]

will the new setup have a "Todays Posts" button/link which I can then create a favourite for in my browser and set my own number of days to fetch like I can now by using something like:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Sean]

Hi Rob, shouldn't be a problem.

 

[Sean]

Just a quick update, our dev environment is now upgraded to the 1.5 version, things are progressing well. This new software is beyond slick, more than I could have ever hoped for. It's chock full of things I always wished the current software had. Overall things are taking longer than expected but we'll get there in the end. Thanks again for the support and patience (definitely want to do this right).

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Just a quick update, our dev environment is now upgraded to the 1.5 version, things are progressing well. This new software is beyond slick, more than I could have ever hoped for. It's chock full of things I always wished the current software had. Overall things are taking longer than expected but we'll get there in the end. Thanks again for the support and patience (definitely want to do this right).

Thanks for the update Sean. Glad things are going along so well. Your excitement is really making the rest of us excited too! You shouldn't have put "June/July" in the subject line, eh? Ha ha.

 

[RobC]

Hi Rob, shouldn't be a problem.

great

 

[TheToadMen]

While you're at it: please insert a pizza-ordering-button so I can stay longer on APUG!

(and keep ut the good work)

 

[bdial]

Another forum I follow went from vBulletin to Xenforo a couple of months ago. The new system is really nice. I am really looking forward to this evolution for APUG.

 

[Wayne]

Since I'm probably going back to dial up internet shortly all of this scares me.

 

[RobC]

Since I'm probably going back to dial up internet shortly all of this scares me.

Websites are so full of large files these days that anything less than 10Mbps download speed will be a pain unless you are only using it for email or you are extremely patient.

 

[Wayne]

As I said, since I'm probably going back to dial up internet shortly all of this scares me. I don't want bells and whistles. I want a forum I can use for exchange of written information, not an entertainment experience.

 

[winger]

If dialup is worse than satellite (we had HughesNet for 18 months), I can only warn you that you're not going to be happy with much of the web. I had a tougher time with Yahoo and news outlets than I did with APUG, though. Even the gallery worked fine out there. I just couldn't upload files faster than walking them to the server and downloads took a lot longer than on cable.

 

[RobC]

If dialup is worse than satellite (we had HughesNet for 18 months), I can only warn you that you're not going to be happy with much of the web. I had a tougher time with Yahoo and news outlets than I did with APUG, though. Even the gallery worked fine out there. I just couldn't upload files faster than walking them to the server and downloads took a lot longer than on cable.

Sattelite has never been "fast" and most internet connections are designed for download speed and not upload speed. The suppliers are really only interested in sending information to you and not allowing you to send information to other people.

However, with fibre things are improving and a fast fibre connection in UK will allow upto 19 Mbps upload speed but more typically 10 Mbps upload.

If you are so remote that you need satellite then research http://www.inmarsat.com/ their new satellite system partially onstream now but should be worldwide by end of year will give you upto 50 Mbps download speeds. I doubt its cheap but if you need the speed then maybe it worth looking at. Really designed for maritime and people in very remote locations with zero internet access.

 

[Wayne]

I used dialup until a few months ago so I know the current site will work well enough for me if I turn off various things. Its the new site that worries me. People want features and all I care about is reading words. I would be completely happy with a text version of APUG.

If dialup is worse than satellite (we had HughesNet for 18 months), I can only warn you that you're not going to be happy with much of the web. I had a tougher time with Yahoo and news outlets than I did with APUG, though. Even the gallery worked fine out there. I just couldn't upload files faster than walking them to the server and downloads took a lot longer than on cable.

 

[RobC]

It is a photography forum which if I'm not mistaken is about visual images / photographs.

Suggest you join a photography mailing list of which there are quite a few I think.

 

[Truzi]

You could try a text-based browser. If you are using windows, your options may be limited as will support for javascript and HTML5, but you may be able to get by. Some even have graphical support (so you can view images).

 

[pdeeh]

One of the reservations I have about xenforo is it is very JavaScript-heavy, and on less than excellent browser js implementations (my experience is opera 12.x), it performs unpleasantly slowly.

The rich-text editing is quite unusable for that reason.

I'm expecting to have to switch to ffox for apug, which is a pain.

That's the price I pay for sticking with an outdated but very configurable and otherwise very fast browser of course.

The chrome browsers are vile in comparison.

It was much better when analogue browsers were still all the rage ...

 

[removed account4]

hi wayne

you might look into lynx, its a text only browser that might be useful.
people are still using text only these days, even on websites that look like vegas
http://royal.pingdom.com/2012/06/25/using-web-browser-lynx-visit-top-websites/

 

[Wayne]

Suggest you join Flickr

It is a photography forum which if I'm not mistaken is about visual images / photographs.

Suggest you join a photography mailing list of which there are quite a few I think.

 

[Wayne]

Wow that really is just text. I guess I meant it a little looser than that, I just don't need or want excess time and bandwidth gobbling features. A normal browser interface is a bit easier on the eyes. As I said this site work just fine but going into the great unknown scares me, especially when I see so many people asking for things I don't need that will undoubtedly make the site more difficult for me to use. And we may be a minority but I'm sure I'm not alone.

hi wayne

you might look into lynx, its a text only browser that might be useful.
people are still using text only these days, even on websites that look like vegas
http://royal.pingdom.com/2012/06/25/using-web-browser-lynx-visit-top-websites/

 

[RobC]

One of the reservations I have about xenforo is it is very JavaScript-heavy, and on less than excellent browser js implementations (my experience is opera 12.x), it performs unpleasantly slowly.

The rich-text editing is quite unusable for that reason.

I'm expecting to have to switch to ffox for apug, which is a pain.

That's the price I pay for sticking with an outdated but very configurable and otherwise very fast browser of course.

The chrome browsers are vile in comparison.

It was much better when analogue browsers were still all the rage ...

If js is slow its either your machines implementation of it or the browsers implementation. That's not the websites software fault except it may expect a reasonably fast and current processor.

 

[pdeeh]

Yes RobC, that's all exactly what I said in my post.

Please take the trouble to read what people say before kneejerking to the keyboard, especially if you're going to the trouble of quoting.

 

[Truzi]

Links-2 has a graphical mode, which may be more useful. It is still text-based, but will show graphics and photos. It is very fast even in graphics mode. Yes, you can use a mouse with it.
http://links.twibright.com/

The download area has an hyperlink to windows versions. I believe there is a windows version, though it may need cygwin - it's been a long time since I seriously used windows. (This is not the same as lynx. There are a number of text-based browsers, especially if you're not using windows.)

 

[Wayne]

The graphical interface looks interesting, but reading the instructions reminds me of my many failed attempts to get comfortable with Linux. What I got out of those efforts was very little compared to the time I invested in them. Rather than force the cavemen like myself to spend hours and hours trying to figure out software solutions that in the end probably won't work (for us non-geeks) and will just leave us frustrated, I would hope that development of this site keeps us in mind and provides low-bandwidth options. When the great global warming war comes and knocks out all hi-tech communications you're all going to thank me for being so prescient.

Links-2 has a graphical mode, which may be more useful. It is still text-based, but will show graphics and photos. It is very fast even in graphics mode. Yes, you can use a mouse with it.
http://links.twibright.com/

The download area has an hyperlink to windows versions. I believe there is a windows version, though it may need cygwin - it's been a long time since I seriously used windows. (This is not the same as lynx. There are a number of text-based browsers, especially if you're not using windows.)

 

[Sean]

Wow that really is just text. I guess I meant it a little looser than that, I just don't need or want excess time and bandwidth gobbling features. A normal browser interface is a bit easier on the eyes. As I said this site work just fine but going into the great unknown scares me, especially when I see so many people asking for things I don't need that will undoubtedly make the site more difficult for me to use. And we may be a minority but I'm sure I'm not alone.

If you're worried you're going to wake up to this:

Please don't. We're heading to a far more streamlined system.. less old clunky code, old bugs, convoluted menus, glitches that have annoyed some for years. It will be de-cluttered, smooth and easy to use. It almost looks identical in most ways, it will definitely feel familiar. It's xenforo but quite modified to suit our needs and aesthetic. I'll also have a low bandwidth option as well.

 

[MattKing]

If you're worried you're going to wake up to this:

Please don't. We're heading to a far more streamlined system.. less old clunky code, old bugs, convoluted menus, glitches that have annoyed some for years. It will be de-cluttered, smooth and easy to use. It almost looks identical in most ways, it will definitely feel familiar. It's xenforo but quite modified to suit our needs and aesthetic. I'll also have a low bandwidth option as well.

A photo of your new living room, Sean?