Ridiculous decision to wipe out Newsgroup.Access.

A key reason for choosing DW as a development tool is the near-instantaneous support available through the newsgroup

It is most disheartening to watch a company make decisions like this.

Not at all, very cumbersome and slow.

Bewildered.

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?

I'm searching but not finding... is there a way to bookmark a thread? Like the old threads, so I can easily come back to the thread I want to follow up on?

Saskatchewanobie wrote:

 

I'm searching but not finding... is there a way to bookmark a thread? Like the old threads, so I can easily come back to the thread I want to follow up on?

I don't think you can currently. This would be an important addition and we should request it.

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)

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

I think it is a massive step backwards

the nntp forums worked well

this is just clunky, slow and a hinderance

wake up adobe and smell the coffee

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.

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

"the only way to persuade Adobe to do so is by using well thought-out arguments."

The old forums, the way they were a week ago, needed no "well thought-out arguments" because they were serving everyone well enough as they were. Now we have problems. I post here, and thankfully am able to get help with questions, but it is now now 'shoot from the hip' 'get in and get out' because it is not possible to keep track of information for more than 24 hours without doing quantum physics to manage threads and keep track of input.

These forums are on the level that works best for teenagers talking about last night's date, not for serious professionals who need in-depth tracking of questions and responses.

Could Adobe understand that logic?

My hope is that these forums will be restored to their better more useable format that we had a week ago and now have lost.

A Cry In The Wilderness,

Ken

"This isn't the place for such arguments. The place for discussing what you love and hate about these forums is in the Forum Comments forum (http://forums.adobe.com/community/general/forum_comments), which is closely monitored by Adobe employees who are in a position to make changes to the way things operate."

This is good input, but that link gives an error message that says Adobe is tired of getting input and now has deleted that thread.

Maybe having a nervous breakdown right here is our only choice.

Sigh.

I think everyone's frustration here can be illustrated on one point: I had posted a question about accessing the extensions manager on my computer without going through Dreamweaver and now have looked in the applications folder and the Dreamweaver folder in applications and utilites folder too, but no extensions manager is to be found. I wouldn't bring it up here, but I cannot find that original thread as it now has slipped into oblivion and even a search on keywords I know are in that thread does not bring it up.

That just shows me that if a thread is older than a few hours and has not been replied to since last looking at it, you are going to be lucky to ever see it again.

Again, This might be a fine forum format for those who post and don't care to go back to old conversations, but for professionals who want to carry on a conversation, it is not working.

Bottom Line.

David_Powers wrote:

 

Saskatchewanobie wrote:

 

I had posted a question about accessing the extensions manager on my computer without going through Dreamweaver and now have looked in the applications folder and the Dreamweaver folder in applications and utilites folder too, but no extensions manager is to be found.

In my MacBook Pro, the Extension Manager is listed at the top level of the Applications folder as Extension Manager CS4.

 

The Extension Manager is installed by default if you select the recommended configuration. However, if you decided to do a custom install to get rid of Bridge, Device Central, and other related programs, the Extension Manager will not have been installed.

What does this exchange have to do with the topic of this discussion.

Rather than being part of the problem, David, why do you not become a part of the solution.

Roddy