The user first has to enter their user/display name before it can be translated to a numerical ID. In most instances, the username or display name is preferred to be unique. What you are wanting to do is not a default feature, I'm afraid and would require custom development. If you have a license, you may login to the account attached to the license and ask in our product modifications forum -- another member or developer may have an answer for you. Unfortunately, we're not able to assist with this in a sales capacity. Thank you.
Thank you for your interest! If you would like to contact our sales team at firstname.lastname@example.org, we can provide a few examples. As a matter of course, we typically do not like to share customer URLs in a public setting. I'm sure current customers will also be happy to chime in with their own examples! As a point of interest, our own site at http://www.invisionpower.com is powered exclusively by IP.Content and IP.Nexus. Please let us know of any further questions and again, please feel free to contact our sales team for more specific examples if other customers don't see this to share their examples.
IPS is pleased to offer 15% off starting now through Monday on all new purchases for both new and existing clients! This includes all self-hosted software licenses as well as Community in the Cloud packages. Whether you've been wanting to add a new component to your current IPS Community Suite license or are considering IPS for the first time, simply use the coupon code HOLIDAY2014 at checkout to take advantage of this offer. Get started now!
This doesn't seem like a sales inquiry, so it's been moved out of the pre-sales forum. Feel free to report specific issues. I think it might be a slight overreaction to say "nearly everything regarding Version 4.0" has issues, but we are working through upgrade issues related to posts / content and appreciate your patience.
With Facebook, it's fair to say, the content you post is yours. It's by you, for you and about you. In a community setting, you're merely contributing content to and for others. It's not your content per se - it belongs to the community (and if you want to get technical, the site owner's) - this is spelled out in the Terms of Service, unless the admin specifically removes it. I could possibly understand blog content, but topic and shared community content is not really yours, regardless if you started the topic or not. If we were to export ONLY your posts, it would make for silly reading out of context without the surrounding content. We can't export content that doesn't belong to you in any way, shape or form without the site owner's authorization and frankly, I don't know why they would give it - but some might. Nonetheless, I can't say there's no use for this, but certainly not one that would prompt this to be built into the software.
We don't want end users reporting bugs at this time. It sounds like a novel idea and we've allowed this in the past due to various reasons, but at the end of the day, the "bug" is usually caused by a third party modification or theme modification the site owner has performed that the end user would know nothing about. Further, not having access to the site owner's ACP, we're not going to be able to obtain any useful information about the site's configuration and it just becomes (most of the time) a wild goose chase. As for Darkshine's piracy argument -- we definitely don't want to hear from anyone who are using an unlicensed product (likely full of hacks) regardless of how they've self-rationalized their actions to be for the benefit of paying customers. There's enough usage of the product across so many different types of communities that it's not necessary to have the bug tracker as a free for all at this time. Thank you for the feedback, however.
I suppose we could at some point as you said when we're done - but it's not something I'd consider a top priority of course. I would suspect a third party is going to get to an in-depth write-up before we do. As someone responsible for the IPS infrastructure (and someone responsible for controlling related costs) and loving solid performance, it's also not a straight apples to apples comparison. We've not just taken IP.Board 3, done a little refactoring and called it IPS4. In the end, some pages will be faster, some will be a wash and some like View New Content will be a little slower due to providing a smoother experience across the suite content. "Performance" itself is such an open-ended discussion. I've seen many times pages that load lightning fast on the onset, but can't scale beyond a few hundred simultaneous users or X amount of data records. I deal with the largest sites on our own network serving tens of thousands of users and millions and millions of content items -- scalability is what I care most about, not sheer page load times (though having the best of both worlds is obviously ideal, when possible.) It's a difficult balance when you factor in the magnitude of the content we're serving, coupled with the fact that we still have to factor in the lowest common denominators -- dollar hosts that haven't upgraded MySQL since 2007 for self-hosted software. Without those limitations, the sky would be the limit -- MySQL 5.6+, for example, is incredibly more efficient than any previous version. We can leverage some things, but are stuck holding back the software in many regards to accommodate antiquated (in our world) technology. My personal shooting-for-the-stars goal is to make IPS4.x the last series where we have to worry about whether it will work on a $2.99/yr. host as with a product on this scale, it REALLY slows things down from a development standpoint. I would hope/expect in IPS5 (no release date yet, sorry ;)) we'd have moved to a point where we can comfortably say the requirements are xyz (and I wouldn't expect anything crazy, but definitely latest versions of the LAMP stack.) I digress on the little side tangent there. In short, we still have some work to do performance wise. When we're all done, we'd welcome someone to do some real world benchmarking.
I would suggest waiting a bit longer. Having IPS4 on a real-world live "production" site has highlighted several areas that can be improved performance-wise -- and this is a good thing; the time to work these out is now, not after it's on YOUR live production site. With an infrastructure background, I too have identified areas of improvement and we're all working together here to get IPS4 in tip-top performing shape. You'll notice gradual improvements as changes are rolled out. IPS is on the Amazon Web Services platform. Currently, we are not leveraging any caching engines, Cloudfront or any of the many technologies available to speed up performance and this is on single instance connected to RDS. We're keeping it simple and traditional until we're happy with base performance and we're comfortable kicking it up a notch.
The topics have been merged and as the bulk of the issues have been resolved, I'm going to close this to prevent further confusion. I'm sorry this has caused any inconvenience - we're just taking precautions to protect you and your account. Some have, for whatever reason, found these measures unnecessary and as such, we've incorporated an opt-out in the client area. You may check a box and avoid answering the security questions, leaving your account protected by password only. As noted on that page, you assume all responsibility for your account should you choose not to accept the extra layer of protection -- this means in the event your account is compromised, IPS may not be able to assist you in regaining access.
Some have asked for the ability to create their own questions. We do not feel this is necessary at this time as there are nearly two dozen questions to choose from. It is also worth noting that the answers do not have to be accurate or factual. Personally, I treat security questions/answers like additional passwords and make use of a password manager such as Lastpass. This also solves the challenge of using unique passwords on every site.
We will be placing notifications on the login forms as some customers did not receive the mass e-mail due to having opted out of receiving e-mails from us - we apologize for this and will look into tiered notifications (ie: promotional, critical) in the future.
If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to open a customer service ticket, or contact us via http://www.invisionpower.com/contact
Some think we're in our ivory tower sipping scotch laughing at all the ways we can cause inconvenience, like *gasp* trying to protect customer accounts. :) In reality, by the end of the day, we're ready for a well padded room for some alone time after the abuse we take in (some self-inflicted, some not).... then I get to go home to a wife, three kids 10 and under (two of them being special needs) and start it all over again!
That said, I wouldn't trade it for anything. Maybe just a little more medication. :)
Sonya, was this yesterday or just now? There was an issue that was resolved. Since yesterday afternoon, nobody should be receiving passwords by e-mail and the lockout issue has been fixed as well. If that is not the case and this just happened, please PM me further details so I can investigate further. Thanks.
I'm sorry for your frustration -- you purchased a product almost 9 years ago (others purchased even longer ago) and we've delivered that product -- and then some -- the entire time and with IP.Board 3, we will continue to do so, likely for another two years. The product you purchased is no longer feasible to develop as you purchased it. We're giving you the choice of continuing to use what you purchased or opt-in to the new license structure and take advantage of the new IPS suite. You did not purchase IPS4 or a license that's compatible with it (introduced in 2007) - thus you are not entitled to IPS4, but we are indeed not only offering it to you for free, but essentially paying you for half or more than what you paid those 9 long years ago, thus allowing two more years on the IPS4 platform before you even need to think about renewals. If that's unethical, I fear there may be an expectations issue.
I'm regretful we've lost your confidence. Obviously what we're offering is a far cry from literally a lifetime of everything IPS does (which is not what you purchased) - but it's the best we're willing to offer.