dr. Jekyll

Hi,

Please could you consider a change to breadcumbs for pages.

Currently the breadcrumbs is simply

home > page or home > page > page (if the index is shown)

It would be nice (as it is with articles I believe) to have

home > folder > page

with the folder link going to folder/index.php for example.

Or even better, have some way to custom input breadcrumbs within IP.Content

Thanks.

I think it's great at the top with the rest of the navigation, but agree with marklcfc, it should be at the bottom too. I still think the symbol needs a rethink.

augenj, on 04 June 2011 - 07:40 PM, said:

The oldest member on my board is a Chelsea Pensioner who served in my regiment, he is the young age of 103 yrs, been through 3 wars, and is now being well looked after.  He loves my board, can chat, email, and find his way round the board easily, without me mentoring him, not bad for an old soldier.

I think it is ok to agree and disagree with people and to say why but not to get personal with each other and turn into being critical of each other.

This is Business 101 stuff guys.

Social media integration and innovations are the new "thing." If you're a professional with any level of talent you should know fads are important to keep up with in this rapidly-changing online world. Being able to keep up with what your users want is the mark of a successful business. I don't understand how there is any controversy about this.

If chickens became the new "thing," guess what? You should put chickens on your site! Going against that concept is like saying you don't want to make money. The same applies to social media. It's not about what you think; it's about what the customer thinks. If you can't keep up, too bad; the competition will.

Hello,

I would like to request an "Linkedin Connect" component to supplement the current Facebook and Twitter social media connectivity features within the IP. product suite.

Why? I believe that this can benefit various communities, especially professional oriented communities. Note that as of 22 March 2011 Linkedin surpassed 100M users (Source: http://blog.linkedin...in-100-million/) and has a different demographic compared to Facebook and Twitter. Therefore I hope that you will consider adding this social media network to the the IPS software infrastructure.


Kind Regards,

Cogito ergo sum.

dr. Jekyll, on 24 June 2011 - 01:37 PM, said:

actually it does matter but only sometimes. If you're hosted on host with a bad neighbourhood ,such as a place where spammers operate, then it will have great negative impact on your SEO

It doesn't matter where your site is hosted.

The domain name is not connected to IPS as such.

Could be IPS hosting, my hsoting, fred's hosting - makes no difference.

If you already have hosting, use that for your forum - either at forum.yourdomain in your forum root or at say yourdomain/forum

I have setup a test conversion from UBB.threads 7.5 to IB.Board 3.1.4

There where a few problems with the conversion system but after filing a ticket, I got great support!

The conversion scripts have been fixed and improved and now the convertor works like a charm.

I can recommend everybody who is now using UBB.threads and does not like the version 8 drama, to convert to IP.board.

Kind regards,

Michel

I don t understand how someone could sue someone for having a poll, this makes no sense.
Nobody is going to censor a company or forum for asking questions otherwise you would never have any polls done in the street or online as people against polling would try to censor the poll. In order to be sued you need to break the law somewhere. Being offended is not a justification for sueing.

R1Lover, on 19 June 2011 - 11:54 PM, said:

Apparently, there are many threads because it's something users want.

I wouldn't be surprised if someone else has suggested this.  And I mentioned it in another thread but I'm not sure if the staff saw it.  Me and my forum members REALLY would like to continue having BOTH a profile pic, AND an avatar.  That's the way it is in 3.1.x and I really don't see how taking that away is an improvement.  Both serve different functions and this is really the only thing I dislike about the new software.


Thanks for listening!

vBuser, on 11 June 2011 - 05:10 PM, said:

To answer your question, the problem is vbulletin itself and not the editor... as you can see IPS has properly implemented the CDK Editor just fine on this site.

I'd argue there's no such thing as wasted space in web design.

Biker.GA, on 15 June 2011 - 06:49 AM, said:

With all due respect, we are quite capable of making improvements off our own back, and not because someone else has done it. Sure, xF came out and is 'shiny'. IPB 3.x has been around for (including development) approaching 4 years. It was time for an overhaul. It's simply coincidence that xF came out too. We would have made the changes anyway because that's where the modern web is going.

That's what we're influenced by. Modern web applications. Hundreds of millions of people use Facebook, Twitter, Last.fm, Wordpress, and so on. There's some conventions and styles that work because people see them every day.

I appreciate your needs are different, and I'm sorry if you feel that out of the box we aren't up to meeting them. But that's exactly why our software is highly extensible, skinnable and so on. You might groan at once again being told that you can make changes in your skin, but please look at it from our point of view - if we met your needs, someone else would come along and tell us we're doing it wrong (and indeed that's exactly what they did with 3.x - see the next paragraph). We cannot possibly meet all needs by default. (Set up a stock Wordpress install - it probably does very little of what you need. That's why it, too, is extensible).

Feedback on the original 3.x experience was fairly unanimous, even from the many people who love it - it was a little clunky, quite dark, confusing, and just didn't feel modern. That's party because it's 4 years old. So we've worked based on that feedback to make 3.2 what it is. Other than a handful of people making their voices heard, the feedback has been outstanding - so we must be pleasing a lot of people.

If your needs dictate that you need something done differently, that is why we're so extensible. I'm sure you'll be able to resolve it and make it work for you while still having the excellent foundation that 3.2 provides.

And regarding version numbering, would it matter if we called it 4.0? Would your feedback change? I'm not entirely sure how 'major update 3.2', 'major update 4.0' etc. would change things. It's just a number. The core hasn't changed, so that's why it's still '3'.