The previous webforum/NNTP interface had roughly 90 percent of the questions coming from the webforum, and 90 percent of the mostly correct replies coming from the NNTP newgroup users.
The newsgroup users are for the most part NOT going to use this web forum.
so for the most part- there are 50 or 100 people who tried to offer help daily, who are not "in here" and won't participate because this web forum interface is just slow and clunky and flashy. We just want TEXT. NNTP. WORDS.
I've been ACE and TMM longer than i can remember. Not renewing.
No. without the "Pros" helping us, what good is it?
I think that the bigwigs in charge of Adobe were worried about job security so they needed to screw with what works, so that they'd have something to fix for the next 10 years - you know, create some job security...
And the fonts in the window is too big and takes up too much room.
OK. I tried it. I had to do that in the interest of fairness but people running businesses don't have time for this.
Rule 1. know your customers and how they work.
What Adobe are saying is that they don't care. Interesting course of action in a competitive market. Of course community forums have no impact on product choice, brand awareness and brand trust. So that's OK.
Jan
Yes- the quirks of the NNTP-->webforum sync are gone. But- the CONTENT provided by many of the NNTP posters will be gone.
New widgets and buttons and features may seem great to someone who always used the web forum to access this. They are a joke/impediment/hassle to people who for up to ten years have just READ questions and TYPED answers. I would read most of the 300 plus messages over the course of a day, and reply to maybe 30 or so. I read and type fast and have a fair memory and a drafts folder of common replies or research info.
I just opened two threads from the first page thread display for this forum in new tabs in IE7 on a new wintel box with 2 gigs memory.
"Internet Explorer has encountered an error and must close now. Do you wish to send an error report to Microsoft"
Even if it doesn't blow up the browser, 30+ seconds to open a new page or just plain go BACK to the list of threads is the killer.
I agree; just waiting for the wysiwyg editor to open seems to take forever. As If I needed to specify which font to use to ask a question... This forum is much less useful as a learning tool than it was before. How long do you think it will be before people start inserting pornographic videos and bring the whole thing crashing down?
![]()
"I agree; just waiting for the wysiwyg editor to open seems to take forever. As If I needed to specify which font to use to ask a question... This forum is much less useful as a learning tool than it was before. How long do you think it will be before people start inserting pornographic videos and bring the whole thing crashing down?" QUOTE INSERTED FOR BENEFIT OF JOEY1978 ![]()
All good points. I wondered about the usefullness of file uploads, too. Is this really necessary? Personally, I won't open any file attachments unless I know they're from a trusted source.
Nancy O.
Alt-Web Design & Publishing
Web | Graphics | Print | Media Specialists
www.alt-web.com/
Looks like the nntp sever went down about 1 min. ago
"Nancy O" <nancyoshea1@NOSPAMatt.net> wrote in message
news:grg25v$i2o$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> Sorry. Make that April 7th not 6th, Doh.
> "Nancy O" <nancyoshea1@NOSPAMatt.net> wrote in message
> news:grg25v$i2o$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> > Sorry. Make that April 7th not 6th, Doh.
>
> I'm here!
>
Thierry did get the last post.
I am still scratching my head over some of these changes. This new forum setup seems inefficient and difficult to keep track of. My preference was the original Adobe Forum setup. It was pretty close to what I would call the perfect forum setup. Professional, user friendly, and well thought out in so many ways. I can't for the life of me understand why Adobe would change to a setup like this for professionals. On the plus side, I will be keeping track of much fewer threads this way, so I won't waste as much time using the forums.
I also understand that Adobe removed the ability to use news readers. Whereas I don't use a news reader, I know that it is supposed to be a very efficient way for those who help others, such as Murray. Because I want to support our faithful Support base, I am in favor of requesting that Adobe give this feature back to it's support base.
I keep trying to guess why change something that worked so well for so long was replaced. It wasn't broken; why did it need to be fixed? Now it's broken. Now it feels more like teenie bopper town than professional Adobe interaction. I guess the word is: Juvenile?
LRK, Such nautical terms.
Sorry about that. I love nautical terms because they represent life in so many cool ways.
On another note, I would like to at least make one suggestion. It would be helpful if we could set our preferences to reverse the order of each thread, to where the last post is at the top, and so forth. This would at least prevent the continuous need to find the last page to see what has been posted.
As for bookmarking, at this point I guess the best we can do is use our browsers to bookmark. Not very high tech I admit but it looks like high tech has turned on it's heals and we are headed the other direction. ![]()
It would be helpful if we could set our preferences to reverse the order of each thread, to where the last post is at the top, and so forth.
I think that might be rather confusing. However, there is already a very convenient way to get to the most recent post. Just click XX (minutes|hours) ago above the person's name in the Last Post column of the main discussion list. That takes you directly to the last post.
If you're already inside a thread, there's a "last post" link at the top of the page.
for outsiders- think about it.
THIS topic i started has over 400 reads.
The old nntp/webforum setup did 300+ messages a day. This is not doing that. Can't see any overall stats because every link i click opens something else...
What number of new questions have good answers.
What IS the number of new questions.
massive fail.
The old nntp/webforum setup did 300+ messages a day.
In the three months prior to the switchover, this forum and the Dreamweaver Application Development forum did a combined average of 270 messages a day.
This is not doing that. Can't see any overall stats because every link i click opens something else...
A very crude way of estimating is to count the number of posts and replies. The first page of 30 posts contains approximately 130 replies. To get to posts that are more than one day old, you need to go back to the fourth page. Yesterday, this forum was just as busy, if not busier, than it used to be. To get an accurate count, just subscribe to the forum by email. I unsubscribed because I couldn't cope with the flood of messages.
Yes, I would like to see NNTP restored, but the only way to persuade Adobe to do so is by using well thought-out arguments.
A very crude way of estimating is to count the number of posts and replies. The first page of 30 posts contains approximately 130 replies.
The value of this forum should not be measured by the number of posts and replies, rather by the number of issues that it solves. The "crude" measure that you are suggesting is more likely to measure the amount of noise that this forum produces than its effectiveness in helping people better understand Adobe products and how to use them to their advantage.
If we are looking for a good indicator of this forum's success, then we should be looking at the number of solved issues as functions of the following:
1) The total number of posts.
2) The total number of responses.
3) The average number of visits to unresolved problems.
4) etc.
The argument that Newsgroup Users cannot see whether a problem has been resolved or not should no longer be an issue, as everyone is working in the same medium.
. . . the only way to persuade Adobe to do so is by using well thought-out arguments.
Adobe is likely no better positioned to cut through the noise than any of its contributers. Well-reasoned arguments are easily lost amidst mayhem.
Roddy ![]()
If we are looking for a good indicator of this forum's success, then we should be looking at the number of solved issues as functions of the following:
1) The total number of posts.
2) The total number of responses.
3) The average number of visits to unresolved problems.
4) etc.
Are those mutually exclusive? If so, I choose #4.
The argument that Newsgroup Users cannot see whether a problem has been resolved or not should no longer be an issue, as everyone is working in the same medium.
What gives you that idea?
--
Mark A. Boyd
Keep-On-Learnin' ![]()
Message was edited by: Mark A. Boyd (added my sig)
kiusau wrote:
The argument that Newsgroup Users cannot see whether a problem has been resolved or not should no longer be an issue, as everyone is working in the same medium.
Completely wrong. Although NNTP access has been removed, it's perfectly possible to do everything through email or an RSS feed. I'm monitoring several forums through email, which displays no icons, avatars, or images.
The question of whether an issue has been "resolved" is also moot. An inexperienced person is quite likely to mark a question as "answered", even if the answer is wrong, incomplete, or no longer represents best practice. Moreover, once a question has been marked as "answered", the setting cannot be changed. Things are not quite so clear cut as you seem to think.
Are those mutually exclusive?
What would give you reason to believe that they are mutually exclusive?
What gives you that idea?
There are only two ways to respond to questions of which I am aware.
1) Go online, enter the forum, and observe the results.
2) Respond to questions through email.
Certainly with regard to the first you cannot help but observe, whether a questions has been checked as resolved. Do you not receive some indication of the same through email?
Roddy ![]()
Completely wrong. Although NNTP access has been removed, it's perfectly possible to do everything through email or an RSS feed. I'm monitoring several forums through email, which displays no icons, avatars, or images.
One does not require an icon, avatar, or image to receive an indication that a topic has been resolved. The same information could be passed through text. Is it not? :smile
In any case this diverges from the question of measuring this forum's success.
The question of whether an issue has been "resolved" is also moot. An inexperienced person is quite likely to mark a question as "answered", even if the answer is wrong, incomplete, or no longer represents best practice.
The last time I posted in this regard it was in response to how one might measure success in this forum. Within this context I would much prefer a measure of consumer satisfaction over the "crude" measure of noise that you have suggested.
Moreover, once a question has been marked as "answered", the setting cannot be changed.
Obviously a weakness in the system, but still a better indicator of success than your proposed measure of noise.
Things are not quite so clear cut as you seem to think.
If you ever knew how I thought, then communication between us would not be so difficult. Once again, your thoughts with regard to the vertical centering of text in a floated <span> tag would be greatly appreciated. Just do not provide them here, as this is not where I posed the original question.
Roddy ![]()
I am not aware of a "resolved" email notification, but maybe I haven't
participated in such a thread yet.
Is it your experience that threads marked as answered are accurate and
reliable?
--
Mark A. Boyd
Keep-on-learnin' ![]()
via iPhone
Message was edited by: Mark A. Boyd. Interesting. I was able to change my "on" to "in" in my emailed post from the Web interface.
2) Respond to questions through email.
Curious. My earlier email reply took almost 20 minutes to appear here. I didn't have this problem in a different thread.
If email cannot be relied upon, I'm afraid this forum is even less useful than I had initially hoped. I'm not an RSS kind of guy, so I can't speak to that aspect.
As for "Resolved" or "Answered", I don't think they carry much weight at all. I am under the impression that the vast majority of Web forum newbies don't bother to look at previous threads at all. "Answered" is completely useless for that majority. I know there are exceptions, but I suspect that those who actually do look for past posts are smart enough to distinguish the quality of the answers for themselves.
Is it your experience that threads marked as answered are accurate and reliable?
As there is no one to monitor the quality of posts anyway, does it matter?
Important is that the Asker walks away satisfied. If his satisfaction should prove illusionary, then he can always come back with a new question or reopen his old one. In fact, reopening an old question should automatically require removal of the user's previous satisfaction setting.
Also, important is that the so-called ACEs of this forum encourage users to make use of the setting.
Roddy ![]()
As for "Resolved" or "Answered", I don't think they carry much weight at all. I am under the impression that the vast majority of Web forum newbies don't bother to look at previous threads at all. "Answered" is completely useless for that majority. I know there are exceptions, but I suspect that those who actually do look for past posts are smart enough to distinguish the quality of the answers for themselves.
This statement appears based on the forum's past technology -- not on its current format.
Roddy ![]()
North America
Europe, Middle East and Africa
Asia Pacific