PDA

View Full Version : Make Photopost Responsive


Peter
April 21st, 2013, 01:12 PM
I want to make PP responsive, but it uses ancient coding with many nested tables for layout and inline width/height properties instead of correct html tags + css.

Is this something in the way to be fixed ?

Chuck S
April 21st, 2013, 02:45 PM
PhotoPost is 100% xhtml and css3 compliant so not sure what your comment means. There is nothing ancient about the coding it adheres to current PHP guidelines and has no bugs or security issues. Ancient code would have issues. There are two PHP coding types object oriented and procedural. Photopost uses procedural coding.

Your free to alter your coding to suit your needs but we do not assist with code modifications.

Peter
April 21st, 2013, 02:49 PM
I mean all the nested tables for layout and inline width/height properties instead of correct html tags + css.

Because of that is impossible to make it responsive and I was wondering if that code is planned to be table less and width heights being css and not inline.

I think that doing that will help a lot the product itself and for sure everybody will welcome it.

Chuck S
April 21st, 2013, 03:05 PM
Peter what version are you using you might want to update if you haven't as there is no issues with our product. You may not like something it does not mean it is bad.

It is also hard because there is a language barrier to some degree what you mean as "make it responsive" does not make sense in the english language. If I remember right you speak german so I know that alot of times direct translations are hard.

Like I said out latest code is definately xhtml and css3 compliant like all css elements are validated as well as the html code so not too sure what your expecting.

Just because someone does not do something like the next person does does no make it wrong. What makes a program bad is if it has bugs and security issues. Our product does not. In fact there have always been far less issues whether it be a bug or a security issue than most of the well known programs out there.

Peter
April 21st, 2013, 03:41 PM
Oh no, my main language is spanish and to make it responsive is to make it display correctly in any screen, desktop and mobile. Take a look here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsive_web_design).

I asked a developer about it and that was his response.

Take a look at my forum in any device you choose and you will see how it adapts perfect, no matter the size of the screen, you can also resize the browser window in your Desktop to understand how it works. Then do the same with the gallery.

Thats what I want to fix.

Chuck S
April 21st, 2013, 04:09 PM
Peter,

Like I said make it responsive did not make sense in what you where saying. That website talks about stuff that is our application.

A community photo gallery - My Photo Gallery (http://www.omegatron.net/pics/index.php)

Our application is xhtml valid and css3 valid. It is crisp clean and easy to follow. It has tons of features our customers want. It is easy to follow and has features like mobile phone viewing and almost 40 different styles.

It also integrates with 25 different products and can look like several different products.

I have a motorola razr hd phone and my site looks fine on that phone and on any mobile devices images are sized down for viewing as well as a mobile template design is used.

I viewed your site in my phone and it looks fine. One thing I need to do is add a switch to turn off the wysiwyg editor on mobile viewing like we do in the other products as that feature is a new one to the gallery but otherwises your images seem to resize to the proper stuff for mobile viewing.

Peter
April 23rd, 2013, 12:58 PM
And how about the real galleries we use?

VBulletin and Photopost. (your gallery)
See the result (http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fomegatron.net%2Fphotos%2F&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0).

Xenforo and Photopost. (your gallery)
See the result here (http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fomegatron.net%2Fgallery%2F&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0).

As you can see, it is not xhtml valid and css3 valid, actually its pretty bad and everything is obsolete.

That needs to be fixed, the main real gallery used in the browsers. It uses ancient coding with many nested tables for layout and inline width/height properties instead of correct html tags + css.

Is there a plan for fixing that ?

Chuck S
April 23rd, 2013, 01:22 PM
You are checking things as HTML5 which is experimental not XHTML. I can not speak about xenforo or VB styles but our styles have all been verified as CSS compliant. I will post links when I get home

Peter
April 23rd, 2013, 01:27 PM
Do I have to include all the tests to demonstrate it fails in all of them ?

Come on Chuck, why not admit its pretty bad and that it needs to be fixed ? It really does and I would love to have a software up to date.

I am not saying the things does not work, I am saying exactly what I am saying.

And thats why I am asking, I can't hire a developer to create more things for me because the code is terrible and that is not good.

Chuck S
April 23rd, 2013, 02:13 PM
Peter we just released a xenforo integration meaning we pull the header footer and style. It does mean our program is going to conform to some doctype we do not support. I may in the future offer a html5 template set for xenforo but thats not what we claim on our site.

Your just saying our code is terrible and that assertion is wrong in so many ways. The only claim we have made is that our code itself is xhtml valid and css3 valid and that is easily shown here are two clean installs. Here are links to my test sites. I can upload any of our stylesheets to the css3 validator and they pass.

Validation Results - W3C Markup Validator (http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fomegatron.net%2Fpics%2F&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.3+http%3A%2F%2Fvalidator.w3.org%2Fservices)

[Valid] Markup Validation of http://omegatron.net/test/ - W3C Markup Validator (http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.omegatron.net%2Ftest&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.3+http%3A%2F%2Fvalidator.w3.org%2Fservices)

I can fix the one warning I get easy enough.

Here is my vb4 site

[Valid] Markup Validation of http://www.reeftalk.com/gallery/ - W3C Markup Validator (http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reeftalk.com%2Fgallery&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.3+http%3A%2F%2Fvalidator.w3.org%2Fservices)

All of them totally pass with flying colors.

In fact if you put your xenforo or even mine in the validator and change the doctype override to xhtml the only errors found are in xenforo now on the page. Our program is completely xhtml and css3 valid.


We have made no claims about working with the BETA html5 experimental stuff yet. HTML5 just came into real suggestion by w3c in December 2012. That is 4 months ago.

You could have saved alot of discussion here and just asked when are you going to support html5. That is all I am saying here. Remember our product integrates with about 25 different products out there so overall it has to work with all of them. Hard thing to do.

The only 2 products which use HTML5 are the new vb5 and xenforo.

Currently not even sure vb5 is going to be a player at all but in the future I may write up a specific xenforo template set that has as much html5 design as possible but that is not going to happen overnight. I would need to figure out xenforo handles tables and go through each template and replace accordingly.

Take note also we can only support the default style class structure of the default xenforo so writing such a complex template set can also create issues if your not using a custom style that does not conform to the xenforo default structure. So there is lots I would need to think about before attempting such a thing.

If our product did not integrate with any other product and all we did was write a gallery that integrated with nothing but ourselves and did not have to worry about anything else then the sky would be the limit.

Peter
April 23rd, 2013, 02:54 PM
I give up, it seems we are talking about completely different things. For me it means nothing that 3 sites (from you) pass a validator.

The 2 examples that are yours show exactly what I mean and I hope that someone else joins this to explain things better than me.

No one uses this: A community photo gallery - My Photo Gallery (http://omegatron.net/test/)

There is not a single install from a client that looks like that.

I will say it again.

It uses ancient coding with many nested tables for layout and inline width/height properties instead of correct html tags + css.

I am not saying there is not a single install that passes a validator, I am saying it uses ancient coding with many nested tables for layout and inline width/height properties instead of correct html tags + css.

¿Anyone has an opinion about this?

Chuck S
April 23rd, 2013, 03:19 PM
Peter I already commented on what you said which you overlooked. The point is you said our code does not validate and it does. I can quote you if you need me to. It is xhtml and css3 valid which is what we claim on our site. It is not html5 valid which just became a recommendation from w3c in December of 2012 4 months ago.

Your issue is trying to get our code to validate on an html5 doctype which is experimental validation. It even says experimental validation at w3c.

There is nothing wrong with xenforo or our product. The issue with validation is one product uses html5 and one uses xhtml thats all.

I said that I may create a special template set for xenforo in the future which might help with that. You seemed to overlook all of that.

Yes our product uses some tables although we have gotten rid of alot of them in the PP8 series.

Alot of what keeps us from totally being just css driven is the fact we integrate with 25 different products. I touched on that as well in my reply.


No one uses this: A community photo gallery - My Photo Gallery

There is not a single install from a client that looks like that.


Are you kidding me you have to be or you just do not know. 40-45% of our customer base uses vBulletin. Another 40-45% uses the product as a standalone meaning there product would look exactly like our example provided so a vast majority of our customer base uses the examples I provided.

In fact it is less than .0025% of our customers that use Xenforo and even that is new to most. Your talking about a product that has only pulled header and footer of that product for not even a month. I just finished writing up plugins to show content on the forum.

So a special template set is not out of the question but your not going to see that next week just not going to happen. ;)

If I eventually get time to create a special template set like I did just for vb4 series then I would assume this discussion is mute and things would validate fine.

I never said I would not eventually create a html5 xenforo template set as thats really what your talking about here.

Peter
April 23rd, 2013, 04:07 PM
Peter I already commented on what you said which you overlooked. The point is you said our code does not validate and it does. I can quote you if you need me to. It is xhtml and css3 valid which is what we claim on our site. It is not html5 valid which just became a recommendation from w3c in December of 2012 4 months ago.

Where did I said the code does not validate?

I open the thread saying this: I want to make PP responsive, but it uses ancient coding with many nested tables for layout and inline width/height properties instead of correct html tags + css.

Then you change it, to it validates, but that has nothing to do with my main words.

Your issue is trying to get our code to validate on an html5 doctype which is experimental validation. It even says experimental validation at w3c.

No, my issue is that I want to make PP responsive, but it uses ancient coding with many nested tables for layout and inline width/height properties instead of correct html tags + css.


There is nothing wrong with xenforo or our product. The issue with validation is one product uses html5 and one uses xhtml thats all.

I said that I may create a special template set for xenforo in the future which might help with that. You seemed to overlook all of that.

I never wanted that, I just reply to your comment about validation, but I don't actually care about that, what I want is to make PP responsive, but it uses ancient coding with many nested tables for layout and inline width/height properties instead of correct html tags + css.


Yes our product uses some tables although we have gotten rid of alot of them in the PP8 series.

Alot of what keeps us from totally being just css driven is the fact we integrate with 25 different products. I touched on that as well in my reply.
Ok, we start to talk about the same thing. That needs to be fixed.

There is not a single reason to why PP needs tables to integrate with other products, none.


Are you kidding me you have to be or you just do not know. 40-45% of our customer base uses vBulletin. Another 40-45% uses the product as a standalone meaning there product would look exactly like our example provided so a vast majority of our customer base uses the examples I provided.


Then please use a VB link for the example and not an empty stand alone PP installation with a 1980 theme. Referring to your link, no one uses that.


In fact it is less than .0025% of our customers that use Xenforo and even that is new to most. Your talking about a product that has only pulled header and footer of that product for not even a month. I just finished writing up plugins to show content on the forum.

Actually I never talked about Xenforo, I said that I want to make PP responsive, but it uses ancient coding with many nested tables for layout and inline width/height properties instead of correct html tags + css. Nothing else.

.
So a special template set is not out of the question but your not going to see that next week just not going to happen. ;)

If I eventually get time to create a special template set like I did just for vb4 series then I would assume this discussion is mute and things would validate fine.

I am not asking for a special template, I am asking for a more 2013 core code.


I never said I would not eventually create a html5 xenforo template set as thats really what your talking about here.
And I never asked for that.


I hope everything is more clear now and please think about it, at the end this is to have a better product and that will benefit everyone. It's my feedback and concern as a client, please just take it like that, there is no harm at all or bad intentions.

Cheers.

Chuck S
April 23rd, 2013, 04:42 PM
Responsive did not make sense which is why I asked for clarification to what the core discussion we where talking about. You brought up validation and said our code is obsolete ancient more than once. You even said terrible once. There is nothing obsolete or ancient about our code. It validates fine except for html5 which became a recommendation from w3c 4 months ago. That is why I provided multiple examples of validation and even touched on your html5 examples which are brand new products by the way.

I have answered all your points.

Of all our integrates only vb5 which is a beta product and xenforo which is a new product that uses that new html5 doctype. Otherwise all 23 other integrations including standalone validate just fine and view fine in all browsers.

PhotoPost 8 was a huge leap forward for most people in that it supports mobile viewing as well as getting rid of lots of tables and using lots of valid css3 technology. It also added tons of other things customers wanted and have asked for.

Will I eventually write an html5 template set yes. What will be first xenforo or standalone who knows. I never said I would not in fact I said I would more than once. I just said you would not see something like that next week. Do you follow! I used xenforo as an example because that is the main site that brings up those errors because you are trying to validate our code as html5 which it isn't. Your using xenforo.

If your site was on vb4 just like the example I provided it would validate 100% using vb4 and our latest code.

Just because a product is xhtml and html5 is only been recommended for 4 months does not make it ancient or obsolete. ;) That is the point I am making because you have made some strong remarks in your replies.

I have lots of plans but is any of that going to happen overnight NO. We are an extremely small company with limited time and budget.

I just wrote up mysqli support for the gallery and need to wrap that up for the other products. I still have to write up the extra plugins for xenforo for ReviewPost. I have lots on my plate and still have support to do for several products and life in general too.

Some of my future plans would be......

1. Adding as totally table less design using css as possible but note that is going to be dependent on what product we integrate with. Like I could see developing our main core standalone templating into a css design because we have total control over that so we can write up html5 templates to use there. In fact all I would need to do is write up some css table code for the catmenu class and then start converting. I could do something in the future with xenforo as I posted earlier once I see what style class names etc do tables in that product since we use there style. Now like I said that would be an issue if you use a custom style and those style class names do not conform to the default xenforo style class names. I have seen that twice already people using a custom style and having some issues. Could you imagine what would happen if we wrote up a custom xenforo template set and then someone uses a style that has class names that are nothing like the supported xenforo style.

Those are the things we need to contend with and also stop us from doing alot of in depth things. We need to make sure to provide the best of both worlds here and it is hard making some people understand that.

2. I would love to convert the entire program to object oriented php coding instead of procedural which it uses now because that is what Michael coded it in. Is that going to be something anyone sees anytime soon. NOT A CHANCE. That would be something that would take a full complete rewrite.

If your a big company like xenforo or vbulletin which employ a good amount of people you can do things fast just because you can. Our company is small always has been and it takes time.

The two most important things on my books right now is making sure all products can use mysqli since mysql support is deprecated in PHP 5.5.0 not to mean it will vanish then but its getting close and eventually PHP 6 compatibility.

Swanny
April 23rd, 2013, 09:47 PM
I'm staying out of this but I just wanted to add that I'd like to see a responsive template too for PP at some point in the future. If it is done right, you don't need a separate mobile style or detection. Considering how long it took for the newer CSS-based template (8.x) I'm not holding my breath for the responsive version ;)

Chuck S
April 23rd, 2013, 10:22 PM
Personally think you will see html5 first. ;) After all the important stuff like supporting upcoming php/mysql changes I think getting rid of tables in lieu of using div would take precendence over anything else.

Yes Swanny things do take awhile sure. Problem is most people always try and compare us with companies that are one hundred times as big as ours. You simply can not expect things to move anywhere near as fast with a company as small as we are.

Chuck S
April 24th, 2013, 09:58 AM
The issue I have been trying to explain which alot of people do not understand is what holds us back to a large degree is all the integrations we do which of course is what people buy our program in the first place. ;) That is our niche in the market place. No other gallery program out there can integrate with the user login and style parameters of so many different products.

I just released 8.31 which adds in mysqli support so I need to wrap up the other programs then I will move forward.

What I will be working on in the upcoming 8.4 release for the gallery is to work on a table free design which is html 5 compliant for the standalone gallery product because we do have total control over the output there it uses our stylesheets. They are all css3 validated. I just need to add in some dl,dt,dd class statements to simulate lists and tables and I can start replacing tables. I have already in one of my test sites done a few templates to see how it goes an it worked fine. I basically did a simple test using some renamed class code from xenforo and it worked fine. The dt statement floats left the dd floats right.

I can not say how long that would take there is alot of templates to work on. Then after that there is of course 5 main different browsers to view the site in and then diagnose any imcompatibilities.

Once I get the main gallery templates to a table less design I can decide how to handle xenforo. For that I would need to investigate how to achieve that without breaking things. I will probally need to place a style mapping guide in the admin for xenforo where I input the default xenforo style names for particular elements and then create a template set off that and call those elements in the templates. That way users if they are using a custom style can input there different class name to use that instead.

The main template folders of forumstyle vb3 and vb4 all products which are coded to XHTML would remain the same to be compatible with the other 20 some other integrations.

I am not really pressed about vb5 because that product is moving at a snails pace in beta.

SteveSteve
August 16th, 2013, 08:08 AM
Hello Bootstrap (http://getbootstrap.com/)!

tommyxv
August 29th, 2013, 07:36 AM
I did notice that there are a few older br tags without the self close. I fix them when I see them but I have to re do them after upgrades. :cool:

<br> should be <br /> now.

Chuck S
August 29th, 2013, 07:40 AM
There should be no old break tags in the templates. I just did a global search on our templates directory and there are no old style break tags just an FYI.

tbworld
August 29th, 2013, 06:11 PM
Let me say in @Chucks defense that there has hardly been a reason in the past to have a responsive design. Either your whole website is responsive or it is not. Just having the gallery responsive is of very little use.

Mobile phones, not tablets -- you have to consider bandwidth. The current design of Photopost requires to much bandwidth for smaller mobile handhelds. It makes sense to me that they divided this into a two template system.

That being said - I spent a couple of weekends rewriting Photopost right after they released v8. I redid the templates so they were table-less and responsive. Added a quick and dirty framework with Javascript to handle reduced bandwidth for mobile, and some tablets. Added a medium resolution to the file management and the database to handle low bandwidth designs and of course added better mobile detection to change viewpoint. Of course you still cannot upload via mobile phones, they do not have that ability unless you write a special app. (I hear iphone-6 might have this capability.)

I sent a few pictures -- Hopefully they still send -- I discontinued support last month, not due to @Chuck or photopost, I just decided to use my $40 elsewhere since my updates exceeded theirs. I think @Chuck gives excellent support for a small company.

I think the core product of photopost is still quite viable, but my viewers want to see something like Flickr to see their photos. I will be tackling this next for the desktop and tablets.

I can only attach 5 photos sorry. The photos are just using the desktop, I don't have time to upload them from using a mobile device, I would have to go through a third party App.

Chuck S
August 29th, 2013, 06:35 PM
I am not sure what phone you are using but I have uploaded photos on many of my past two phones into my gallery with no issues.

As far as our mobile design we employ a totally different scaled down template set which also has content scaled down. The images are sized accordingly and views fine on most devices. This is how alot of sites employ mobile viewing.

Not sure if you have checked out what we have done with mobile since you talked about you did a mobile thing right after they released vb so you most likely modified a photopost that was not mobile friendly where as the Pro 8.x series is.

tbworld
August 29th, 2013, 06:46 PM
Sorry, guys. I cannot see if the photos posted correctly. Evidently since I am not paying for support. I cannot see my own attachments.

@Chuck, you are killing your community here. Just because I do not need your support anymore, doesn't mean I can't contribute to the community. Your current setup makes that kind of difficult. I have seen the activity dropping off this site tremendously over the last couple of years. I think your support policy is find, but killing off your community that will not work well over the long run. For those that haven't purchased photopost, not showing the links is a good thing. No sence supporting those that steel scripts. If you want to charge a minimum just to belong to the Photopost site: I can even understand that. But evidently I am not the only person that doesn't want to pay $40. at this time.

My point -- I do not want to see Photopost die. I really have no idea of your sales so I do not want to say that it is dying. My viewpoint is only based off your board traffic, which almost doesn't exist anymore. People like myself who could write plugins now, certainly will not if they do not have access to the site. Anyway, I just think you need to revisit this part of your marketing plan.

Even though $40. is not that much money, I would have to pay for it and the company not reimburse me.

tbworld
August 29th, 2013, 06:53 PM
I am not sure what phone you are using but I have uploaded photos on many of my past two phones into my gallery with no issues.

As far as our mobile design we employ a totally different scaled down template set which also has content scaled down. The images are sized accordingly and views fine on most devices. This is how alot of sites employ mobile viewing.

Not sure if you have checked out what we have done with mobile since you talked about you did a mobile thing right after they released vb so you most likely modified a photopost that was not mobile friendly where as the Pro 8.x series is.

I use your mobile templates for mobile phones. Maybe I didn't state that clearly enough. We added the responsive design mainly for tablets, it will work for mobile phones, but it still suffers from to high of bandwidth for older devices.

My photopost core is still at v8.3 - just modified. In Photopost v8.4 you mostly modified your templates, we just did not need to go that route at this time, so my company decided not to pay for support until your product has advantages over the version we are running. The point to my post was originally was for @Peter's sake, just to state the possibilities.

Chuck S
August 29th, 2013, 07:13 PM
I did not tell you that you did anything or did not do anything. You said you modified your stuff when VB came out and to my recollection that means 4 years ago so I stated you might want to check out what we have done in later versions. You where not clear what version you used. There was a lot of work done in 8.3 and even more in 8.4. I am just stating the facts. 8.4 adds a table less design and is HTML 5 validated which is the standard as of 8 months ago. I can upload on my mobile phone and the mobile design is solid at least to me. Again just the facts.

tbworld
August 29th, 2013, 07:21 PM
Sorry, I reacted to your reaction. I revised my message to be more civilized. I was a bit upset that I could not see how my pictures posted. Again, I apologize for that.

@Peter wanted to talk about responsive design and the direction of the conversation went to validation.
I was trying to steer the conversation back to responsive designs. I do feel photopost has to consider this in the future. Lets face it, paying my share of your development costs through support is much cheaper than writing new modules for your software -- it was not an exercise in "this is what I did".

You do have many other platforms to support and that definitely complicates and directs software in a certain direction. I only had to worry about a single company site, specific server, single platform with very specific needs. I did not have to worry about pleasing everyone. Development is certainly faster under those kind of circumstances. The only people that understand that is developers.

Chuck S
August 29th, 2013, 07:50 PM
Our mobile design is scaled down even more than yours based on what I am seeing by your pictures each to there own I guess 10 different people will do things 10 different ways. I have received alot of compliments from customers on all the templating and mobile work we have done in 8.3 and especially in 8.4. Anytime you show images your going have higher bandwidth. Any Pro gallery I have visited on my site or customers sites loads real fast on my phone but speed is going to vary on your connection speed. There is only so much you can do with that as you know. The size of people's images are going to vary site to site. You can scale an image but the image is say 250K it is still going to be 250K on a mobile or a desktop.

No problem in overreacting. It happens and I do not take anything personally. Like I said I explained that anything I say you can see is in direct reply to what is posted. I am all about facts. ;)

I do not make the policies here. As far as the support policies here they have been in place for a very very long time. You can feel free to post all you want in the general forums like your doing now but we do not allow users access to the support forums or mod forums. That is a luxury for people who have access to support and can see the code etc.

Let's face it the one reason it is done is it gets people to pay the $39.00 member renewal which funds continued support and development of the product. No company is going to give you free support forever. That is the main reason I believe vBulletin switched to that you pay for a specific code branch which means when a new branch comes out you buy a completely new license. They want more money. Our costs are very reasonable for what you get and we constantly develop and improve and add features customers want.

tbworld
August 29th, 2013, 08:06 PM
I see where we went off track. You saw that I posted v8. (where I meant v8.xx series) in my first post as 'vB'. Have a good-one Chuck. :)

Chuck S
August 29th, 2013, 08:19 PM
Yeah I saw vB ;)

tbworld
August 29th, 2013, 08:43 PM
To clarify for everyone:

The screen shots. I upload are not taken from the company board. We do not use that skin, we use a special light weight template design that we wrote. The images were taken off one of the developments systems that uses a standard third-party vBulletin skin. That is why the photos are flowers. Obviously, I should not be posting the company board on a public website.

To @Chuck:
You are right your mobile templates are even lighter weight then my responsive design that I showed. We really do not use the responsive design for mobile phones as we designed our own specific APPS for android and iphone: mainly for sales. The internal company website cannot directly be called up on the internet using standard protocols. The responsive design was done to handle tablets for internal correspondance.

The skin and design I showed is not what my company actually uses. It actually is a very early development style that I pulled from one of my development systems when we just started working on our responsive design. I uploaded those images because no one would have recognized the gallery or vbulletin on our current style. We only really use the core of each products and even then in a very non-standard way. I wanted to show something that would make my point. --- I don't think my company would approve black and purple, or have flowers as pictures! :)

I personally do not have a problem with the $39.00 for support and upgrades. That is cheap, money well spent, but unfortunately the current policy is hindering the community here and word of mouth is everything in software. I believe one of the only reasons vbulletin did as well as it did was vbulletin.org, but that is just my opinion.

I cannot tell you how upset I was with vBulletin4 when it came out. I was the one who recommended going to the product based on vBulletin3 -- I almost lost my job over it. Luckily, I was fully prepared when they decided to roll out vBulletin5. We now go our own way not having to wait for other companies to get their software right.

Ahh.. what we leave out of a conversation :)

Chuck S
August 29th, 2013, 08:51 PM
Do not get me started on Purple my other half's favorite color.

Everyone has there own specific needs as you point out.

When developing a product we have to develop something that works on a wide array of web server setups we can not code to one server so making people understand we are not facebook or flickr or some site that is developed to run on one specific server where you can do anything you wish sometimes getting people to understand that is like pulling teeth.

You have a good night I am off to rest and relax before hitting the hay. ;)

tbworld
August 30th, 2013, 01:45 AM
Thanks for the discussion Chuck. It was appreciated. :)

Chuck S
August 30th, 2013, 07:49 AM
I believe one of the only reasons vbulletin did as well as it did was vbulletin.org, but that is just my opinion.



I agree with you. What made vBulletin.org is the fact that there are contributors who created mods.

We tried something like that years ago but it was a flop. The vast majority of our customers are novices when it comes to software. The site was known as photopostdev.com. It ended up being somewhere people asked for mods to be created but no people that made them. ;)

PhotoPost will never be as big as vBulletin.

motowebmaster
October 12th, 2013, 07:37 PM
Not trying to fuel a fire, but I too would like to see PhotoPost transition to a design that is more responsive to different resolutions/devices.

I was at a Best Buy last weekend; and tried out my site on several tablets, laptops, chromebooks & etc in an effort to better understand how my site looks best. It was also an eye-opener on the various resolutions manufacturers use - even on the latest devices some were not what I'd expected.

Regardless, it motivated me to make several changes to my PhotoPost Pro implementation to "widen the audience". I'm using some minor CSS tricks, which is good for tablets and phones in "landscape" view - but still isn't good on a vertically-oriented mobile device.

No one liked the mobile theme that was included with PhotoPost, so we've been making the best of it using Xenforo theme as well as simplifying the settings and template code. It's not perfect, but getting there:

R3Owners (http://www.r3owners.net)

I'm planning to turn the gallery-view into essentially an unordered list, and remove the table, so that it will flow better. I'm just not yet sure if my CSS skills can handle the necessary descriptions that are included - but we'll see :p

Chuck S
October 12th, 2013, 08:09 PM
There is only so much one can do in the nitch that we hold which is integrating with 25 different products different styles etc. That does limit what we can and can not do alot. If we did not have to integrate with alot of products looks feels etc

My site looks fine in all the tables and phones I have at my disposal but each to there own. The standalone gallery is totally css driven and tableless design. Your free to remove stuff you want although the mobile design we use does scale things down alot. We could simplify what we display even more. I always view any site though on my mobile in landscape mode.