Forums

Unfortunately no one can be told what FluxBB is - you have to see it for yourself.

You are not logged in.

#151 2015-07-06 14:56:43

Newman
Member
Registered: 2011-11-05
Posts: 350

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

cyberman wrote:
Newman wrote:

Ofcourse the JS is heavy, but it's literally 1 js file that needs to load and then it gets cached and everything loads fine.

No, it's not - cause a lot of people are using js blocker ...

But doesn't it still get cached?

Offline

#152 2015-07-06 15:25:16

cyberman
Member
From: Germany
Registered: 2010-01-11
Posts: 297
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

There's nothing cached because js blocker prevents loading js ...

Offline

#153 2015-07-06 19:18:36

benjawi
Member
From: Plymouth, England
Registered: 2013-03-30
Posts: 81
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Newman wrote:

Ofcourse the JS is heavy, but it's literally 1 js file that needs to load and then it gets cached and everything loads fine.

Got to think of some smartphones as well. Mine doesn't have a space for an external SD card, so space on my phone is at a premium... I regularly clear the cache on my phone from all apps and can free up almost half a gigabyte a week from that alone. So I'd be reloading the js file once a week when I clear my cache on my phone. And I know a few people that have to do this too.

Offline

#154 2015-07-06 19:39:18

adaur
Developer
From: France
Registered: 2010-01-07
Posts: 842
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Let's disable JS on flarum.org:

BX0F9bLyMI.jpg

I'm not saying that using JS is forbidden, but it should degrade gracefully.


FeatherBB - A simple and lightweight new generation forum system
Based on FluxBB, written in PHP, using Slim Framework for a proper OOP-MVC architecture.

Offline

#155 2015-07-06 20:07:27

cyberman
Member
From: Germany
Registered: 2010-01-11
Posts: 297
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Think a useful fallback is a minimum to await

Offline

#156 2015-07-06 22:21:13

Askelon
Member
From: Bretagne − France
Registered: 2010-06-09
Posts: 202
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

cyberman wrote:

a lot of people are using js blocker ...

Actually no, they don't. People browse to Google, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Netflix, 9gag. They use JS. A lot. All the time. And they don't give a crap. Geeks and techies, on the other hand, avoid these types of websites, and tend to block JS. So in the end, it only depends on who you plan to reach. If you want a forum for geek communities, then a raw PHP/HTML base will do better. If you want regular people to use your forum and have a cool experience, then you'll put JS. In the end, it's just that simple. My guess is that Flarum intends to be used by regular people. And I can see why that's a wise choice, because regular people are a way bigger target than just techies and geeks.

Now that does not mean we shouldn't have a completely JS-free forum software; just that there are targets for that kind of project, and Flarum is aiming at a wider one than FluxBB was from the start.

Offline

#157 2015-07-07 07:50:39

cyberman
Member
From: Germany
Registered: 2010-01-11
Posts: 297
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Askelon wrote:
cyberman wrote:

a lot of people are using js blocker ...

Actually no, they don't. People browse to Google, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Netflix, 9gag.

You are wrong.

Right, have unblocked these companies (exception: Facebook - doesn't like their special privacy rules).

But what's the difference between named companies and a in comparing with them small FluxBB powered forum?

Right, they have a lot of trust. I'm not so arogant to say my forum has the same trust.

And for a business client it is the worst case to see an empty page like adaur shows.

I have no problem to to give js loading permission to well known services. But I have a big problem to give the same permissions to a unknown website/forum I find via Google search.

Offline

#158 2015-07-07 08:12:54

chris98
Member
From: England, United Kingdom
Registered: 2013-05-31
Posts: 1,292
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

... and in-private browsing stops caching.

Offline

#159 2015-07-07 12:18:53

Askelon
Member
From: Bretagne − France
Registered: 2010-06-09
Posts: 202
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

cyberman wrote:

You are wrong.

No, but I fear you missed my point. You're talking about your personal usage habits; I'm talking about average people. Average people won't understand a word of your last post. From my forum experience, 90-95% of my users have JS activated; a good two-third of them don't even know what JavaScript is! One third of them are using fairly deprecated browser versions and don't even know how to install a plugin, let alone install a JS-blocker… This sentence says it all:

cyberman wrote:

I have a big problem to give the same permissions to a unknown website/forum I find via Google search.

You. Trust me on that, the average user is way beyond that wink Now again, this is perfectly fine if you want FluxBB/Flarum to be a forum software meant for geeks, devs and techies. Those guys know who to block JS, a large portion actually does it. But you want to reach a larger frame of users, you'll have JS activated. And as I said, I suspect Flarum is trying to reach average users, not geeks. As someone said, why the need for popups when hovering usernames and stuff, why infinite scroll? Because that's something the average user wants, or at least is used to from sites like Facebook, Twitter or 9gag. I don't think I'm wrong in saying that these websites draw more traffic in a single hour than all summed FluxBB-based forums in a week wink


christ98 wrote:

... and in-private browsing stops caching.

Indeed, though I'm not sure about the real impact of this either. I actually know only two people using private browsing (average people, I mean, excluding my geek friends and colleagues): my dad, who's more concerned about intrusive ads than real privacy; and my best friend, who's more concerned about his wife not finding he watches pr0n. Apart from these two, I can't think of anyone I know using private browsing.

Offline

#160 2015-07-07 12:53:44

chris98
Member
From: England, United Kingdom
Registered: 2013-05-31
Posts: 1,292
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

I actually know only two people using private browsing (average people, I mean, excluding my geek friends and colleagues

To be honest, I don't really know anyone using it either.

But according to some research done in 2012, out of the 2000+ people asked, 19% said they used in-private browsing. This is about the newest data I can find on it, so it may well have gone up/down in the previous three years from now.

In regards to the handling of JS, according to some research done by CloudFlare last year, not all people will be able to handle this. They class a "modern browser" anything 6 years previous to now. Antarctica is the best region with 99.44% requests coming from modern browsers, while Iran is the worst, with only 52.01% of requests coming from modern browsers.

Bear in mind that not all websites are using CloudFlare, but with over 2,000,000 websites using it, including my own to a certain extent, I think this is going to be pretty accurate.

See the world map here with the percentages: http://cloudflare.github.io/sni-visualization/

Last edited by chris98 (2015-07-07 12:58:36)

Offline

#161 2015-07-07 14:22:50

hcgtv
Member
From: Charlotte, NC
Registered: 2008-05-07
Posts: 463
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Askelon wrote:

So in the end, it only depends on who you plan to reach. If you want a forum for geek communities, then a raw PHP/HTML base will do better. If you want regular people to use your forum and have a cool experience, then you'll put JS. In the end, it's just that simple.

I agree 100%, my concerns were strictly with the FluxBB code base, since I'm in the raw PHP/HTML camp.

But as soon as Flarum has a release candidate, I'm going to kick it's tires on my local server, because one day I may have a need for a Flarum style of forum, and I'd rather go with a code base that has it's roots in FluxBB, rather than go with something like Vanilla.

Offline

#162 2015-07-10 01:02:16

Newman
Member
Registered: 2011-11-05
Posts: 350

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Flarum actually does look extremely promising and their design is very unique. It's just, there has to be way to disable the ajax features so sites can display google adsense if they wanted. AFAIK adsense and other advertising networks are not allowed on ajaxified pages. Other then that, I'm going to be completely honest and say it look really damn good.

Also, for the non JS preachers here.. Give me a break! Everyone uses javascript nowadays... maybe back when we had flip phones with a 0.0001 ghz cpu powered browser sure, but that was literally like 20 years ago. Come on..

Flarum has a small hiccup when it's first loaded, but there is no hiccup's when the main js file is cached, it works fine. A small loading bar for first time visitors would increase UX a lot too and look professional. It's really not that big of a deal.

Last edited by Newman (2015-07-10 01:05:13)

Offline

#163 2015-07-10 04:30:07

cyberman
Member
From: Germany
Registered: 2010-01-11
Posts: 297
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Is it so difficult to understand there are some guys they want to have the freedom to decide about the UI they want to use?

Maybe it's good a Js UI is possible.

But in my eyes it's a point of quality to give the choice between some UI options per default.

Offline

#164 2015-07-10 09:55:57

micbr
Member
Registered: 2014-05-23
Posts: 57

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Newman wrote:

Also, for the non JS preachers here.. Give me a break! Everyone uses javascript nowadays... maybe back when we had flip phones with a 0.0001 ghz cpu powered browser sure, but that was literally like 20 years ago. Come on..

We've given several reasons why Javascript UIs aren't suitable for all communities, and none of them have anything to do with processing power. Arch Linux wants their forum to be usable from within a console / command line web browser. We want our discussion forums to be readable on PowerPC based computers running older operating systems. It's the demographics our communities attract, and it makes absolutely no sense to go against the best interests of our users for the sake of eye-candy.


My community has started discussions internally to leave FluxBB (and Flarum) in favour of something different. We need features that this engine doesn't have and we need a user interface that isn't Javascript dependent. It's unfortunate, because I wanted to fly the flag for this software and its future roadmap, but the two are diverging onto different paths and ultimately its our users that we need to take care of.

Last edited by micbr (2015-07-10 09:59:38)


Administrator, ThinkClassic - A vintage Apple computer community.

Offline

#165 2015-07-10 10:53:50

hcgtv
Member
From: Charlotte, NC
Registered: 2008-05-07
Posts: 463
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

micbr wrote:

My community has started discussions internally to leave FluxBB (and Flarum) in favour of something different. We need features that this engine doesn't have and we need a user interface that isn't Javascript dependent.

When and if your community finds something as light as FluxBB, would you be inclined to come on this forum and tell us your findings? I'm curious to know the direction you take, what Flux's competition is, what features this new forum software has that FluxBB does not.

Thanks.

Offline

#166 2015-07-11 13:53:42

micbr
Member
Registered: 2014-05-23
Posts: 57

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

We're actually considering upgrading our server and moving to something with a little more power under the hood. Perhaps Xenforo or IPS Community Suite, depending on whatever best suits our needs. While we love light and efficient, when you have a hundred or so users asking "where's the Private Messages" or "how to we attach images", sometimes you just have to keep them satisfied.

We intend to continue using FluxBB for a while yet, and we still have some great stuff in the pipeline for our current FluxBB based forums, but unless something happens between now and then, we'll almost certainly be looking to move our current database to something else. We don't exactly have a choice at this point.


Administrator, ThinkClassic - A vintage Apple computer community.

Offline

#167 2015-07-11 14:24:10

adaur
Developer
From: France
Registered: 2010-01-07
Posts: 842
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

@micbr: while I can understand that you have requests from your members, it is wrong to say that FluxBB can't satisfy them

https://fluxbb.org/resources/mods/attac … ses/2.1.4/
https://fluxbb.org/resources/mods/anoth … ses/3.0.9/

Moreover, there is really no need to rush to another BB system since FluxBB is and will be maintained for some time.


FeatherBB - A simple and lightweight new generation forum system
Based on FluxBB, written in PHP, using Slim Framework for a proper OOP-MVC architecture.

Offline

#168 2015-07-11 22:34:53

Newman
Member
Registered: 2011-11-05
Posts: 350

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

micbr wrote:
Newman wrote:

Also, for the non JS preachers here.. Give me a break! Everyone uses javascript nowadays... maybe back when we had flip phones with a 0.0001 ghz cpu powered browser sure, but that was literally like 20 years ago. Come on..

We've given several reasons why Javascript UIs aren't suitable for all communities, and none of them have anything to do with processing power. Arch Linux wants their forum to be usable from within a console / command line web browser. We want our discussion forums to be readable on PowerPC based computers running older operating systems. It's the demographics our communities attract, and it makes absolutely no sense to go against the best interests of our users for the sake of eye-candy.


No disrespect man, but what percentage of the forum market actually uses forums through console browsing? Probably less than 1%?  I fail to see how your demographics are so important?

If Arch Linux wants their forum to be usable through console browsing, don't use flarum then. It's really that simple. They will just stick to fluxbb, I don't see anything wrong with that either. Fluxbb is great and always will be tongue.

Last edited by Newman (2015-07-11 22:36:25)

Offline

#169 2015-07-12 12:33:58

adaur
Developer
From: France
Registered: 2010-01-07
Posts: 842
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

You see Newman, that's precisely the main issue with all this merging stuff. Flarum and FluxBB don't aim the same users (Flarum = users wanting bells and whistles, FluxBB = power users wanting lightness), making the whole operation a bit difficult for us.


FeatherBB - A simple and lightweight new generation forum system
Based on FluxBB, written in PHP, using Slim Framework for a proper OOP-MVC architecture.

Offline

#170 2015-07-12 15:59:38

hcgtv
Member
From: Charlotte, NC
Registered: 2008-05-07
Posts: 463
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

adaur wrote:

You see Newman, that's precisely the main issue with all this merging stuff. Flarum and FluxBB don't aim the same users (Flarum = users wanting bells and whistles, FluxBB = power users wanting lightness), making the whole operation a bit difficult for us.

I've always been partial to minimalistic apps, that's why I run Textpattern over WordPress, I prefer FluxBB over phpBB, and I really like DokuWiki over MediaWiki.

But we're entering a different stage of the Internet, where in the past websites were viewed on a computer screen, we now have tablets and phones starting to fill up our visitor logs.

This past week I spent it dealing with this whole Mobile-Friendliness push by Google. Adjusting my sites so they get picked up by the Googlebot without any issues, because I'd hate to lose search rankings over fonts.

Textpattern scores 99% using their responsive default template, DokuWiki scores 100% with their default install, FluxBB scores a 64%.

As we move forward in Internet years, responsive designs will play a more important part.

Offline

#171 2015-07-12 19:45:27

Newman
Member
Registered: 2011-11-05
Posts: 350

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

adaur wrote:

You see Newman, that's precisely the main issue with all this merging stuff. Flarum and FluxBB don't aim the same users (Flarum = users wanting bells and whistles, FluxBB = power users wanting lightness), making the whole operation a bit difficult for us.

Yeah, good point.

Hmm. Well, in that case I agree.


I don't know what to say though, I mean, fluxBB will always be fluxbb there is no changing that. Flarum seems totally different and I think Franz just wants us to all know he's teaming up with Flarum's Developer maybe? Iuno Haha.

They can do their own thing I guess, I know Franz still has a special place in his heart for fluxbb, and now flarum. Not sure what's going to happen ~

Last edited by Newman (2015-07-12 19:46:04)

Offline

#172 2015-07-14 22:40:00

cyberman
Member
From: Germany
Registered: 2010-01-11
Posts: 297
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

adaur wrote:

Flarum = users wanting bells and whistles, FluxBB = power users wanting lightness

If you think this way to the end Flarum couldn't be FluxBB 2.0 ...

Offline

#173 2015-07-15 08:57:46

Franz
Lead developer
From: Germany
Registered: 2008-05-13
Posts: 6,559
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

adaur wrote:

Flarum = users wanting bells and whistles, FluxBB = power users wanting lightness

That is simply not true. Flarum itself is very minimal; absolutely no bells included. It's just the interface that's more advanced (and I'd argue more user-friendly, too).


fluxbb.de | develoPHP

"As code is more often read than written it's really important to write clean code."

Offline

#174 2015-07-15 10:46:25

hcgtv
Member
From: Charlotte, NC
Registered: 2008-05-07
Posts: 463
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Franz wrote:

That is simply not true. Flarum itself is very minimal; absolutely no bells included. It's just the interface that's more advanced (and I'd argue more user-friendly, too).

Franz, when will we get a chance to kick the tires on Flarum?

I'd like to install it locally and run some benchmark tests.

Offline

#175 2015-07-15 10:55:01

Franz
Lead developer
From: Germany
Registered: 2008-05-13
Posts: 6,559
Website

Re: 2.0: Joining forces with Flarum

Beta is a bit delayed, as always. wink
End of this month, hopefully.


fluxbb.de | develoPHP

"As code is more often read than written it's really important to write clean code."

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB