Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Migrating to Xenforo

Status
Not open for further replies.
grahamperrin said:
Please follow the link in my previous post.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Apparently I completely missed both the link in that post and the entire thread in the forum. Oops!

Doctor Q said:
The issue with voting is that the new forum software shows you who voted, so arn decided to try to carry the current vote totals over anonymously, with only new votes showing who voted.

That's made more work for the transition, but it preserves the anonymity that some users assumed they had when voting (even though arn said otherwise from the beginning).
Click to expand...

I inferred as much but was unsure...
 
Doctor Q said:
The issue with voting is that the new forum software shows you who voted, so arn decided to try to carry the current vote totals over anonymously, with only new votes showing who voted.

That's made more work for the transition, but it preserves the anonymity that some users assumed they had when voting (even though arn said otherwise from the beginning).
Click to expand...
If we keep up-voting going forward the votes should be public. Otherwise whats the point.
 
arn said:
Sorry about the delay. The design took the longest piece. So we got a version of that in late Feb. Then I've been traveling pretty much all of March. And into April. (I'm out next week too).

I am going to open up the test environment to everyone pretty soon. Some of the contributors have access to it already.

I expect people to have issues with it... :) But that's why I want people to play with the early version of it first to get any obvious issues out of the way.

arn
Click to expand...

If you need more beta testers count me in. I was present on three other forums (and served as a moderator on two) during the same migration and am familiar with Xenforo.
 
Looking forward to (not chasing) opening of the test environment …

arn said:
… The design …
Click to expand...

This morning I registered to use The Omni Group Forums.

I found very pleasantly impressive:
  1. first, the cleanliness
  2. then, the effectiveness of the banner 'Your topic is similar to…', which appeared I typed (so I guess the keyword is FAYT).

The cleanliness helped the blue banner to be outstanding and so, topic duplication was avoided.

This is not to disagree with the choice of XenForo for MacRumors Forums. Just an observation on the combined effect of two things.

I don’t expect MacRumors Forums to be free from advertisements, but maybe ads could be suppressed wherever someone is drafting a new topic.
 

Attachments

  • neat.png
    neat.png
    396.1 KB · Views: 173
grahamperrin said:
Looking forward to (not chasing) opening of the test environment …



This morning I registered to use The Omni Group Forums.

I found very pleasantly impressive:
  1. first, the cleanliness
  2. then, the effectiveness of the banner 'Your topic is similar to…', which appeared I typed (so I guess the keyword is FAYT).

The cleanliness helped the blue banner to be outstanding and so, topic duplication was avoided.

This is not to disagree with the choice of XenForo for MacRumors Forums. Just an observation on the combined effect of two things.

I don’t expect MacRumors Forums to be free from advertisements, but maybe ads could be suppressed wherever someone is drafting a new topic.
Click to expand...

Hey that looks familiar! It's the same software used for Sponge forums.

https://forums.spongepowered.org/
 
poiihy said:
Will the XenForo forum allow small images in signatures?
Click to expand...

The other Xenforo based forums that I view do allow images in signatures, including animated .gif. However, I'm not sure if that is default or if it's something that admin must enable.
 
poiihy said:
Will the XenForo forum allow small images in signatures?
Click to expand...
Both vBulletin and xenForo can be set to allow or disallow images in signatures. It was a policy decision made long ago not to allow them. Therefore, the policy is independent of which forum software is in use. I don't know if that decision is being reconsidered.
 
I was thinking VERY small images... a few pixels, like 18x18, the size of a smiley here. :):(:eek::D

Would the new forum have live updating threads?
So that people can talk as if it were a live chat, without having to reload the page all the time?
If not then I think it should be implemented.
It's a very good idea!
Don't you think so?
 
poiihy said:
I was thinking VERY small images... a few pixels, like 18x18, the size of a smiley here. :):(:eek::D

Would the new forum have live updating threads?
So that people can talk as if it were a live chat, without having to reload the page all the time?
If not then I think it should be implemented.
It's a very good idea!
Don't you think so?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't server load be a concern when dealing with live feeds on a large forum?
 
I don't know... It might... But IRC is very lightweight so maybe not.
 
poiihy said:
I was thinking VERY small images... a few pixels, like 18x18, the size of a smiley here.
Click to expand...

A problem is that the size of an image isn't known in advance until you try to load it. While it'd be possible to check the dimensions when the signature is set, users could then replace the small file with a larger one and the forum software would be none the wiser (unless it checks the file every time it's rendered, increasing bandwidth and processing requirements).
 
Nermal said:
A problem is that the size of an image isn't known in advance until you try to load it. While it'd be possible to check the dimensions when the signature is set, users could then replace the small file with a larger one and the forum software would be none the wiser (unless it checks the file every time it's rendered, increasing bandwidth and processing requirements).
Click to expand...

How it would work is when someone puts an image in the signature and saves it, the system checks the size of the image and then sets that size. So if I post a 10x10 image, it will hard-code that so that the html says "width=10 height=10". Then, if the source of the image changes the image at the URL, the new image would be resized to 10x10 by the browser. So if they change it to a huge image, you'd just see it squeezed into the tiny square.
 
poiihy said:
How it would work is when someone puts an image in the signature and saves it, the system checks the size of the image and then sets that size. So if I post a 10x10 image, it will hard-code that so that the html says "width=10 height=10". Then, if the source of the image changes the image at the URL, the new image would be resized to 10x10 by the browser. So if they change it to a huge image, you'd just see it squeezed into the tiny square.
Click to expand...

It would still have to load the entire image no matter how big it is, which means extra loading time and a heavier page. (Although it does mean the image will look better on Retina displays!)

Really, the only practical way to go about this would be to upload the image and have it get automatically resized by the forum software, not simply using HTML code to resize it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back