This forum

[Daniel T]

... because it doesn't look like any of these (http://www.extremepixels.com/skins_vb.php).

C'mon JupiterMedia. Surely you can spare $30. Or atleast get one of these (http://www.vbdesigns.de/styles_vb.php) (free).

[PeOfEo]

Someone here can just skin the forum for free and then we could be unique.

[Daniel T]

Originally posted by PeOfEo
Someone here can just skin the forum for free and then we could be unique. OK Peo. When can we expect you to be done the layout? :p

[buntine]

Nar. This is a forum for professionals (atleast thats the image to be portrayed). People come here for a quick answer to their problems. All that fancy crap should be for Web Sites trying to sell something or Graphics Communities.

I like the simplyness of this forum.

Regards.

[theuedimaster]

This forum is the best for what it is supposed to do. Plus, I am sort of getting fed up with these "complicated" forums. This is simple and the way I like it.

[smercer]

I agree with Buntine, looks are not everything. Personally I think its all about the functionality and usability of the site.

The one thing I don't like about this site is its download time to download a single page (just pick which one, any one) (I am on dial up at 31,000 baud).

I noticed the site has it's layout based on table format, maybe that has something to do with it. taking out those un-necessary “you are now being taken to your post” messages would improve on time

the other thing I don't like is the way it wraps coding, so that you do not know whether it’s the site, the poster, your interpretation of the code, or what, that is giving the code posted problems.

hey Jick or RHS: could you please move this to feedback forum?

[scragar]

the problem is that none of the site is cached. maybe if the CSS, javascript and others where to be external they could be cached then we wouldn't have any more slow net.

but they've already said, editing the site put's them at risk of problems from updates. All the admins can do is ask jupiter media to try and speed things along(or at least that's what it sounded like).

[KDLA]

I agree with those who've previously stated that content/usability should be valued above design.

(And, some of us don't fancy those tiny fonts used in most template-based forums. This one is just right.)

[davidbrent]

I am definatley in favour of cached CSS files over uncached tables. I heard something like this was going to happen anyway so let's wait and see eh?

Best Wishes,
David

[rhsunderground]

moved to feedback.

[Daniel T]

I agree, usability is more important than looks, but as long was we used a simple, yet attractive theme, it could only do us good.

[JPnyc]

The CSS can't be cached. It's not stored in a file, but in the database. That's the software design.

[MstrBob]

Originally posted by JPnyc
The CSS can't be cached. It's not stored in a file, but in the database. That's the software design.

The fact that the CSS is stored in a database has nothing to do with it. Creating dynamic, external CSS files is common practice. Simply create the file calling the CSS, possibly passing variables via the URL. Proper content-type and you're done. Cuts down on database calls as well, do to the storing of the files.

But I head VBulletin 3 is more standards-friendly, and even uses more CSS. Given that, we should wait around and see what this promised upgrade will bring. :cool:

[JPnyc]

It uses a lot more CSS. In fact you can set any style with any selector you wish, in vers. 3. In this version you're stuck with whatever they give you, in terms of selectors. There's also an option to store the CSS in a file, but that isn't my decision to make.

[MstrBob]

Well, my feedback for this site is that we should move the CSS to an external file if possible. Hey, it saves you bandwith and will quicken the download time for our members on dialup. Maybe you can pass that on to whoever's decision it is? We're a webdeveloper forum, we should be uber cool and on the leading edge. Because we're just that cool.

[JPnyc]

Cool or not, I refuse to get a tattoo no matter what.....



I'll pass the info on.

[Daniel T]

It frustrates me that someone changed the name of this thread. The only people in existence that are offended by the word "*****" are... well... no one, really. Doesn't seem worth it to cause my first post make no sense at all just because someone felt we weren't mature enough to handle such naughty language :rolleyes:

EDIT: More censorship? I repeat: :rolleyes:

[scragar]

the censorship was not esentialy, then again neither was the initial statement.

I'm all for external CSS and JS(for each post made the forum uses a small amount of bandwidth, this will add up...)

Does anyone mind me asking why the main page still looks so bad?

[rhsunderground]

define bad, please.

[scragar]

dodgey add's thing taking up half the page.