News:

Bored?  Looking to kill some time?  Want to chat with other SMF users?  Join us in IRC chat or Discord

Main Menu

I'm back. Why the reluctance for Mobile SMF?

Started by ge master, December 22, 2014, 05:35:13 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

ge master

I love SMF. I'll get that out there first off. When I started looking at forums again, it's SMF all the way for me. However, I have a very legitimate concern or question. I don't intend on ruffling feathers, but I may do that in the course or this discussion. I'm grateful for all aspects of SMF and I realize this is volunteer based. That said...

I understand that the next generation of SMF is going to be "responsive". However that doesn't address a glaring shortcoming.

I'm sure most webmasters are waking up to the reality of mobile devices. If not, I'm sure dwindling revenue might cause some movement on that.

So to me, the most important aspect of SMF moving forward is mobile. I do not believe that responsive is the answer.

My main point here is that I see there is in fact a moible SMF solution, but it appears not that supported. I could be wrong. Perhaps it's because it's a premium solution, that it's not welcomed as much.

The thing that I'm suggesting is that not having a true mobile rendering means a dwindling SMF community. I know this first hand. I'm not just picking a topic out of the sky here.

The project that I'm referring to, is something that could actually propel SMF to greater heights. I'm not trying to tell SMF how to run its business, but you should be pushing this solution BIG TIME. I realize that 80% of webmasters haven't clued into mobile just yet. But I will also suggest that 80% of webmasters incomes are crashing at the same time.

So my question is this. Why can't SMF endorse this persons mobile solution? Perhaps you have, but my feeling is that because it's monetized, that it is shunned. Very short sighted if that's the case. You should be working with this guy. I'm right now going to see how everything plays together, but if this is a dead end, then it's over for me. You can't run a forum in todays world unless you have a LEGIT mobile solution. You might think responsive is it, but that's misguided.

Can we discuss?

Kindred

Sorry... but you are just plain wrong.

Responsive *IS* the answer.  Make a forum template that works nicely on desktop and tablet and mobile screens and you are set.

Supporting an "app" is painful and, in the long run, a losing proposition -- and most companies are moving AWAY from apps and TOWARD responsive designes

Are you talking about tapatalk?  If so... ICK. BLAH. BLECH.
I would never install that on my device let alone force my users to use it.
There are so many issues with Tapatalk in general - and they refused to keep the mod here up-to-date that we removed the mod from our customization site.
Слaва
Украинi

Please do not PM, IM or Email me with support questions.  You will get better and faster responses in the support boards.  Thank you.

"Loki is not evil, although he is certainly not a force for good. Loki is... complicated."

Arantor

Hmm, where to start, where to start. I assume this is in reference to Dragooon's paid mobile theme.

1. You never address why responsive isn't viable.

Responsive vs dedicated mobile:
* responsive allows for one-stop mod support as opposed to driving add-on authors away by having two do things twice.
* XenForo - the biggest growing premium forum package - is responsive because they understand the benefits of it.
* responsive encourages maintaining all functionality, as opposed to dedicated mobile support cutting features to 'make it fit' like the WAP2 functionality that is so limited compared to the standard functionality.

2. The guy who made the system you're referring to is in fact part of the SMF dev team and has even been working on the responsive setup.

3. The dedicated mobile solution is virtually impossible to theme beyond basic colour changes. It limits flexibility, limits style, curtails branding.

4. You're trying to assert that a lack of mobile is the single biggest reason for a dwindling SMF community; this is not true, Facebook has actually done more damage there since.

5. Monetisation is not shunned per se, but there are limits. The funds SMF receives from adverts and so on are used to pay for the servers, they're not magically going to pay out for suitable remuneration for Dragooon for his time and energy.


You actually don't seem interested in discussion if I might say, you seem very confident in your opinions but speaking at one of the people who actually was part of the discussion about introducing responsive design, and having years of support of SMF under my belt, I have to disagree with you about so many things.

ge master

I'm not speaking to TapTalk whatever it is. Obviously responsive vs. mobile specific is a debate which will have to agreement EVER. I can only suggest that we should compare your success with revenues on a comparative basis and let that be the deciding factor on which is better.

I'm suggesting responsive isn't ideal, because for lack of a better term, it's half A$$ed. You want to catch all things with a solution and instead you get an okay experience, but not great. It's about smarphones and phablets. Tablets are going to want full, normal looking forums I would think.

What people might be overlooking is the fact that existing mobile solutions for forums are BASIC. It's bare bones for a reason. If you're on a forum and using a smartphone, glitz doesn't matter. Simplicity matters.

Please understand I'm very much interested in a discussion on this. I'm just suggesting that based on my personal experience with Wordpress and using both responsive and mobile solutions, there is only one clear winner.

I think the key aspect of a specific mobile solution is that the design is simplistic. Buttons are phone specific. Design is phone specific. I seriously would debate anyone who thinks that users on a 7-inch tablet, are going to choose responsive. It's mobile or it's full site in my opinion.

I'm not suggesting that responsive is bad. It's certainly better than not having a mobile solution. I think though the idea that devices are going to be 4-inches or smaller is really backwards thinking. Creating a strategy to deal with a dying form factor? I'm more worried about what my users are going to be using rather than what a small minority might be using. You're looking at phablets and perhaps 5-inch being the norm in a short time span. If you're thinking about long term relevance, then basing decisions on past technology seems rather unwise in my estimation.

Arantor

QuoteI can only suggest that we should compare your success with revenues on a comparative basis and let that be the deciding factor on which is better.

Considering that the *vast* majority of our forums are not heavily monetised (or at all), this would be a terribly poor basis on which to make a decision that affects them.

QuoteI'm suggesting responsive isn't ideal, because for lack of a better term, it's half A$$ed

And having a layout with half the functionality isn't, obviously.

QuoteWhat people might be overlooking is the fact that existing mobile solutions for forums are BASIC

Correct. It pisses people off. You are effectively promoting the situation as summed up perfectly by http://xkcd.com/1174/

SMF already has an uber-light mobile mode. In fact 2.0 has 3. Except they're feature limited and this discourages peopel from using them.

QuotePlease understand I'm very much interested in a discussion on this

One does not start a discussion with 'I think this and anything else seems wrong to me'.

QuoteI'm just suggesting that based on my personal experience with Wordpress

Because blog software experience automatically translates to forums, obviously.

QuoteIt's mobile or it's full site in my opinion.

Yes, we heard you the first time. The problem is, you've also made it very clear that you're not interested in listening to our opinions.

ge master

I'm okay with a spirited debate. If you're taking my points as being overly passionate? It doesn't mean I'm not listening. I'm grateful for the SMF community and it's by far the best solution out there imo. The people involved deserve all the credit in the world.

To address a few points made.

I am unaware of a dwindling SMF community. If that's the case, I would think Facebook is the possible reason for that. Really though, that's not my point. I'm just saying that if a person is looking at a new forum today, then mobile should be their biggest factor in deciding what forum system to use. That's my point on that.

I understand that a mobile only solution reduces features, mods, etc. I would suggest that having your cake and eating it too doesn't really apply in this scenario. My websites are never going to be what my non mobile sites are. This is a good thing. They need to be stripped down, simplified and made specifically for a device that essentially can be used for reading. Smartphones are still "small" in terms of real estate. It's why I'm suggesting that responsive tries to catch all things, rather than dealing with the devices that need a specific and tailed solution.

Arantor

QuoteIt doesn't mean I'm not listening.

That is how it looks, however.

QuoteI am unaware of a dwindling SMF community. If that's the case, I would think Facebook is the possible reason for that.

I draw your attention to the stats available from the main forum page here demonstrating a decline for some time, long before the current mobile trend was really a trend.

QuoteI'm just saying that if a person is looking at a new forum today, then mobile should be their biggest factor in deciding what forum system to use. That's my point on that.

Let's see... XenForo, IPB, SMF... all responsive. So, next criteria?

QuoteI understand that a mobile only solution reduces features, mods, etc. I would suggest that having your cake and eating it too doesn't really apply in this scenario

Except your opinion is wrong based on years of history.

People add add-ons to forums because their communities need additional features. Given how the *VAST* majority of add-ons don't even touch the existing mobile facilities in SMF, which have been there for years, it will fracture the platform rather than harmonise it.

QuoteMy websites are never going to be what my non mobile sites are. This is a good thing

Potentially, potentially not. The fact the ENTIRE forum ecosystem is moving in the opposite direction to the one you are advocating seems to disagree with your view point.

QuoteThey need to be stripped down, simplified and made specifically for a device that essentially can be used for reading

So despite the fact we've had a system for a nigh on a decade that does this and PEOPLE ARE NOT USING IT BECAUSE IT IS STRIPPED DOWN is insufficient evidence for you? What more do you want?

live627

I wanted to remove old wireless modes from 2.1 but people like dinosaur features, apparently.

Arantor

Quote from: live627 on December 22, 2014, 06:26:09 PM
I wanted to remove old wireless modes from 2.1 but people like dinosaur features, apparently.

No, they like the *idea* of them. Too many features continue to exist in 2.1 on the basis of 'this is how they have always been done', not on their individual merits.

The principle argument for retaining WAP2 is for the likes of Nigeria that have seriously limited internet connections, however I can't help but feel this is catering to the lowest common denominator and that this represents such a small percentage of use that it could be safely dropped.

ge master

@Arantor, I certainly bow to your experience and activity in the SMF community.

I think going back to my original question, which is why isn't SMF endorsing the one true mobile solution?

I spent a good amount of time researching and quickly came to the conclusion that when it comes to searching for 'mobile' and 'smf', there are sparse resources. The one solution I did come across, is surprisingly stagnant.

However, perhaps the response I've gotten here is the answer as to "why". It does appear that open minded isn't the first thing that comes to mind in this discussion. I'm coming at this with fresh eyes. Keep that in mind.

I suppose the key figures in SMF hold the cards on the future. If you're so quick to dismiss my views as being against the grain and hold no outside value, then perhaps leadership and vision is an issue.

There should be ads. There should be endorsements. There should be an association between the mothership (the SMF) site and the one mobile solution that seems to exist. Because the one solution isn't "responsive" and adding to the fear because it's "pay to use", perhaps that's going to explain what I'm seeing.

A specific mobile solution, like the one that exists out there today, is going to be far more beneficial to the end user. If people want bells and whistles, then go home and use your desktop. Obviously people will debate with me what the end user really wants out of a forum. However if you look at the biggest forums on the planet, what are they using? They certainly aren't responsive. They may all be wrong, but I don't think so.

To be clear, I'm not saying responsive is bad. It's certainly better than nothing. However, why on earth SMF is so distant from the world "mobile"? If longevity and relevance matters, then being a leader when it comes to mobile solutions should be the emphasis. I have fresh eyes, just keep that in mind. I'll repeat my point. Go to the biggest forums on the planet and use your smartphone and you tell me what style they have. No need, I'll tell you that it's going to render a mobile friendly forum.

The guy who created it is a savior in disguise. It's a shame that the solution is buried and few SMF webmasters would be aware that it even exists. I'll do my best to spread the word because it's brilliant. The question is will it continue or will it close down because it's not being supported??

live627

Quoteone true mobile solution
in 2011, yeah..

ge master

Quotein 2011, yeah..

I don't think I follow your comment.

If you look at the testimonials, what comment was made? One guy says he's been using it for a year a his users "love it".

One true mobile solution. Yes, that's right. A tablet doesn't need a modified forum. Or do you believe that it does?

So then you are looking at smartphones, running up to a max of around 6-inches. I don't care if you're 5.5-inches or 4-inches, the fact is they are not ideal for surfing the web. If you shrink down a desktop site, it might be better but it's not the best. A mobile solution makes your website user friendly. Responsive deals with size, but it doesn't do enough. For some people it might be good enough, but if I'm running Wordpress, responsive is flushed down the toilet because there are better solutions out there. People obviously have strong views and that's fine. I know better from experience. I've been willing to look at both solutions and to me, it's no contest. However, SMF should embrace with open arms the one solution that's out there.

Arantor

QuoteI think going back to my original question, which is why isn't SMF endorsing the one true mobile solution?

Which is precisely the arrogance I've been getting at. What you suggest as the 'one true mobile solution' is not so. It may be the ideal solution for your needs, but it is not a unilateral solution for all cases.

Go ask XenForo and IPB, see what they tell you when you ask them the exact same question. Have earplugs handy for the laughter you will likely receive, because they don't think a dedicated mobile solution is the one true solution.

QuoteI spent a good amount of time researching and quickly came to the conclusion that when it comes to searching for 'mobile' and 'smf', there are sparse resources. The one solution I did come across, is surprisingly stagnant.

Of course it is, the effort is going towards a solution that we feel would actually work better for SMF's userbase (which is not the same as your userbase)

QuoteIf you're so quick to dismiss my views as being against the grain and hold no outside value, then perhaps leadership and vision is an issue.

You're trying to take your experience from WordPress and apply it to SMF as though the same truths will apply; they will not.

Additionally, I've had the benefit of talking to many forum owners, looking around at the forum industry as a whole, including very new forum software that has grown up in this mobile environment - and even they do not have this 'dedicated' mobile solution.

This is why I'm so quick to dismiss your views - because EVERYTHING I'm seeing disagrees with your assertion and you're not really listening to any argument to the contrary.

QuoteThere should be ads. There should be endorsements.

Why?

Let us apply this to a more practical situation where there is a more valid comparison to be made that exposes the serious flaw in your logic. There are, currently, 3 gallery products available for SMF. One is discontinued, two are paid (though one of those two has a free option)

These support SMF's ecosystem, sure. But at the same time, should SMF be endorsing them? Answer is no, it should not, because if it does not endorse them all equally, it risks claims of being anti-competitive. And if a new entry to the market comes along, does that automatically have to be endorsed?

QuoteA specific mobile solution, like the one that exists out there today, is going to be far more beneficial to the end user.

Only in your world view. Many more do not agree with you.

QuoteTo be clear, I'm not saying responsive is bad.

Yes you are.

QuoteHowever if you look at the biggest forums on the planet, what are they using? They certainly aren't responsive.

Depends what you're using as your benchmark. Also depends on what niche you're looking at because this stuff is not transferrable.

For example, the largest SMF forum out there does not have a responsive layout and one would not be especially useful given that it is primarily a writing forum of sorts, meaning that longform writing is the format - and longform writing sucks on mobile in general.

QuoteGo to the biggest forums on the planet and use your smartphone and you tell me what style they have. No need, I'll tell you that it's going to render a mobile friendly forum.

That actually proves nothing, incidentally. The biggest forums on the planet are using platforms that are established - revamping such platforms for responsive design is no mean feat. It is simply quicker to implement a parallel look than it is to reimplement the main view. Do not mistake correlation (big forums have mobile dedicated views) for causation (they are big because they have mobile dedicated views).

QuoteThe guy who created it is a savior in disguise.

It's been there for YEARS.

QuoteIt's a shame that the solution is buried and few SMF webmasters would be aware that it even exists.

Because a link in the footer is buried, obviously.

QuoteIf you look at the testimonials, what comment was made? One guy says he's been using it for a year a his users "love it".

So one anecdotal example is now proof of the best possible way to do something.

QuoteA mobile solution makes your website user friendly.

In your opinion. Other people have other opinions that you are ignoring because you believe you are right. This conversation is a waste of time because despite your claims to being open-minded, you're only open minded to the opinions that match yours.

live627

QuoteResponsive deals with size,
... and everything else, too. Problem is, most implementations only deal with scaling.

Deaks

ge master I use 2.0.9, I have no mobile option, my mobile phone displays SMF as it would on my desktop and my tablet and it works perfectly, but so you know 2.1 is responsive and works well on all mobile devices its tested on.  What you are failing to grasp is "mobile" is dead its a dinosaur, responsive design and coding is the future ... if you want a mobile theme on you go but we will all laugh as userbase moves forward and you live in the past.

You have had many developers past and present of SMF tell you this, you have had the Project Manager tell you this, now here it is from someone who was not only a Project Manager for a while on here but also more important for this topic marketing, and I am sure marketing now will agree.  But here it is for you "MOBILE IN DEAD"  One of the things SMF is generally good at is watching the market, and SMF has many friends who know their stuff (not saying me) keeping the team in right direction if they like it or not :D
~~~~
Former SMF Project Manager
Former SMF Customizer

"For as lang as hunner o us is in life, in nae wey
will we thole the Soothron tae owergang us. In truth it isna for glory, or wealth, or
honours that we fecht, but for freedom alane, that nae honest cheil gies up but wi life
itsel."

ge master

@Arantor, I appreciate the fact that you are highly versed and educated on what goes into forums.

It's buried in the sense that if you go into Google and start looking at SMF and mobile? You're going to realize that there isn't an association. That's pointing to a problem. You say there is a link somewhere here. Guess I'm saying that's not doing enough...

Although I'm listening to what you're saying, then perhaps you can suggest why is it that when I visit big forum from some of the most popular websites on earth, that they show me a mobile designed forum. It's not responsive. It's a mobile solution. That's why I find it confusing about what the big wigs from the big forum companies are saying. I can only speak to what I see and if a bunch of the top sites are doing something the same, there must be a clear reason as to why. CNET, they aren't responsive. Forums should be?

At the end of the day, all I'm saying is that I personally would be touting the one existing SMF solution (for people like me) as a way of attracting potential webmasters to use SMF in the first place. That's my point for bringing this forward. And respectfully, I've heard from 2 or 3 people from this community so I won't make a judgement based on a few view points.

ge master

Quote from: Runic on December 22, 2014, 07:23:46 PM
What you are failing to grasp is "mobile" is dead its a dinosaur, responsive design and coding is the future ... if you want a mobile theme on you go but we will all laugh as userbase moves forward and you live in the past.

I'm all ears as to why the biggest sites on earth show a solution that's pretty much bang on to that "one solution for SMF" that I'm talking about. If you have a theory, I'm all ears. I can assure you that you won't see a responsive design on your mobile phone.

Given those facts, I suggest I disagree with your "take" on it.

Deaks

im sorry while you were right for a part MOST of the big sites are moving away, in 2011 when mobile was the trend then yes many were but most now use responsive, and the ones that arent will be sooner than later.  Your basis is outdated.  Their is no benefit to marketing SMF as being the mobile solution, but bigger value in saying its responsive as that will attract not only the desktop users but also the mobile users.  You are losing your argument.
~~~~
Former SMF Project Manager
Former SMF Customizer

"For as lang as hunner o us is in life, in nae wey
will we thole the Soothron tae owergang us. In truth it isna for glory, or wealth, or
honours that we fecht, but for freedom alane, that nae honest cheil gies up but wi life
itsel."

Antes

Because those "big" sites does not do the distribution, they do not create software, so they are only and only interested in optimizing their systematic, but when it comes to distribution and general benefit things change very dramaticly, also we can clearly say dozens of forums can have dozens of different customization in it.

While I read most of the stuff written in this topic, I'll point one thing which is about "Responsive does not work well with Phablets" completely wrong, I tested responsive changes on my Lumia (4'' 480p) mostly but I also used iPhone 5 - Note2/3 - Galaxy S3/4, some team members contributed with their devices iPad - HTC One etc... So I can clearly say responsive changes in Curve2 supports 90% of all Smartphones (which has 480p or better resolution).

Arantor

QuoteIt's buried in the sense that if you go into Google and start looking at SMF and mobile? You're going to realize that there isn't an association. That's pointing to a problem.

This is why responsive is the solution as we see it - you don't have to enable anything, you don't have to configure anything, you just use it, job done.

Our direct customers, the people who choose to run SMF on their site, come here, will see 2.1 here when it's done, and then will see it is responsive. Job done.

The indirect customers - the people who are users on these sites - see it is working and if they want to run their own forum... job done.

Doing a search for mobile SMF is not actually a bad sign at this point in time nor does it point to any association that may or may not exist.

Quotethen perhaps you can suggest why is it that when I visit big forum from some of the most popular websites on earth, that they show me a mobile designed forum

You're not listening. I DID give you that reason.

QuoteThat's why I find it confusing about what the big wigs from the big forum companies are saying.

It's confusing because you're not paying attention to what's being said.

QuoteI can only speak to what I see and if a bunch of the top sites are doing something the same, there must be a clear reason as to why.

Yes, it's because of the dev effort that would be required to make them responsive is less than the dev effort to make a mobile view. These sites are well established, typically on their own platforms, meaning that it's not just a simple change to add a responsive layout because it's not like upgrading from SMF 2.0 to 2.1 to make that happen.

For example, Gaia Online is originally built on phpBB, but it's so heavily modified that even if phpBB had a mobile offering right now, they couldn't just move to it. Of the choice of rebuilding everything to not break currently and also work well on mobile, or build a mobile view on top. The latter is simpler to do and is doable when you're already established like the big forums are.

But for small forums that are not established - or software providers like SMF, XenForo, IPB - it can be provided in the core and everyone can use it.

Quoteall I'm saying is that I personally would be touting the one existing SMF solution (for people like me) as a way of attracting potential webmasters to use SMF in the first place

And you managed to miss the point I made about why SMF cannot be seen to be recommending any products.

QuoteAnd respectfully, I've heard from 2 or 3 people from this community so I won't make a judgement based on a few view points.

And respectfully, you're still not listening to anything these 2 or 3 people are actually saying so any judgement would already be invalid.

Advertisement: