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

[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.

[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]

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.

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.

I'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.

What 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.

Please 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'.

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

Because blog software experience automatically translates to forums, obviously.

It'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]

It doesn't mean I'm not listening.

That is how it looks, however.

I 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.

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.

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

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

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.

My 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.

They 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]

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]

one true mobile solution

in 2011, yeah..

[ge master]

in 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]

I 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.

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.

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)

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.

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.

There 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?

A 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.

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

Yes you are.

However 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.

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.

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).

The guy who created it is a savior in disguise.

It's been there for YEARS.

It'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.

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".

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

A 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]

Responsive 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

[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]

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.

[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]

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.

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.

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

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

That'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.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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

[Biology Forums]

I've found that responsive requires mastery in knowing your CSS.

[Arantor]

I've found that responsive requires mastery in knowing your CSS.

So does building a mobile layout, so does building a decent conventional layout. Your point?

[Biology Forums]

Not as much. In responsive, conditions must be set in nearly all elements.

[Arantor]

You would have the same effort in doing a mobile layout - it's just doing the conditions by way of putting them in a separate file rather than putting them in the main CSS file.

[Antes]

Not as much. In responsive, conditions must be set in nearly all elements.

Yes kinda but I rather not output it like a very big job, once you create more generic templates/classes (like what we did in Admin Panel), you don't have to do lots of stuff to show things in good way. You define one or two things and system takes care of rest.

[Arantor]

OK, so here's the $64,000 question: if a user goes to a forum on their phone and gets a decent experience, do you REALLY think they care about *how* it works as long as it works?

[Biology Forums]

I believe it will also be problematic for future mod authors, some of which are not good with CSS and styling at all, or don't have an eye for such things. Their mods will end up breaking the natural flow of the theme.

[Biology Forums]

OK, so here's the $64,000 question: if a user goes to a forum on their phone and gets a decent experience, do you REALLY think they care about *how* it works as long as it works?

Nope, but I'm looking at this in different angles. User experience won't be compromised if they are using a stock SMF.

[ge master]

I'm not suggesting that responsive doesn't work well in phablets. I'm just suggesting that if end user sees site version A or B, which one is a better user experience?

I can understand the possible irritation of being involved with a project and having somebody like me come in and make a few counter points. It's a discussion point, or at least that is what I was attempting to do. Even with the advocacy for responsive, isn't it prudent to also push the other mobile solutions so that webmaster who don't share your views, might actually choose SMF?

Regarding phablets, it's debatable for me. I can't speak from personal experience on that. Holding horizontal? Perhaps full site/responsive is going to win out in the minds of the end user.

Would I be safe to make this quick assumption?

The reason for the lack of endorsement on the mobile solution that I speak of, is simply a matter of philosophy? I'm sure nobody can speak on behalf of SMF, but there really seems like a line drawn in the sand. To counter my point about the disassociation with SMF and mobile as being nonsense? The links and current sources are pretty much non existent on the web. If I have a stake in SMF, that would be troubling.

I find it somewhat amusing to suggest that the forums using a non-responsive solution are somehow outdated and someday will come to their senses. Really?

A note to the author of the solution, I will advocate as much as possible on your behalf. Job well done. The unfortunate part is that webmaster as a slow to respond group. I was in there, but as of late, I broke out of that mold.

[ARG01]

Just getting this out there. As long as desktops and laptops are being mass produced, there is really no reason to focus mainly on mobile. Millions around the world are constantly 4 to 5 years behind the most recent technology, a vast majority working from 10 year or older computers and many of them with no mobile devise.
Personally, I go out of my way to avoid using my mobile devices for internet use and do so only when forced to.  I see no reason for any software to specifically focus on mobile adaptation at this time.

[Arantor]

Well... on the mod author front, mod authors generally didn't give a **** about WAP/WAP2/imode, so if a dedicated mobile solution were in place, it wouldn't get any mod love anyway.

As for responsive... it really isn't like there aren't people around who can help. There are also plenty of mod authors whose styling on 2.0 mods is bad enough because they've ported 1.x code to 2.0 and it looks less than pretty (like how come SMF Gallery Pro doesn't have any proper Curve styling)

Nope, but I'm looking at this in different angles. User experience won't be compromised if they are using a stock SMF.

UX is not compromised in either direction for stock SMF, sure. But how many sites use stock SMF?

I can understand the possible irritation of being involved with a project and having somebody like me come in and make a few counter points.

No, that part is fine. Not listening to rebuttals IS FAR MORE IRRITATING.

Would I be safe to make this quick assumption?

Given how many other assumptions you've made that are wrong, why are you asking about this one which is the least insane yet?

The reason for the lack of endorsement on the mobile solution that I speak of, is simply a matter of philosophy?

FFS. The answer is NO.

I'm sure nobody can speak on behalf of SMF, but there really seems like a line drawn in the sand

Other than the project manager, current devs, former devs, members of the marketing team? What higher authority would you like to hear from?

The guy who made the mobile theme is part of the SMF dev team these days and has worked on the responsive theme.

I find it somewhat amusing to suggest that the forums using a non-responsive solution are somehow outdated and someday will come to their senses. Really?

XenForo, IPB, Discourse - companies that sell their forum software - disagree with you.

The unfortunate part is that webmaster as a slow to respond group. I was in there, but as of late, I broke out of that mold.

No, you're still there.

[ge master]

I really do appreciate the discussion and views.

So in part of listening, I'm to believe that the big forums out there are using their "solution" more as a matter of troubleshooting/updating rather than it being a better end user experience? I'm just trying to clarify the point.

I have a pretty basic view of what mobile is. It isn't about tablets first off. If people are using a 4 to 6-inch phone to view a forum, reading is paramount. Easy clicking buttons. Simple paths to get to where you want to get to. If I take any site I have currently, and think that scaling it will accommodate users via responsive? Again, it comes down to a debate which is along the lines of debating politics. People aren't going to change their views based on some random guys (take me for example) view about how or why responsive isn't the be all end all.

So I guess it's a matter of preference. I want users to first, have the best, easiest navigation and reading experience possible. I think of it this way. I can shrink down a desktop site so that it fits better on a smaller screen. However, the fact that it's not designed for a small screen in the first place, is the critical point. It will be better for sure, but it's not designed with one purpose.

If anything I appreciate the discussion because it's solidified my reason for choosing which experience my users will get.

Okay to the point about SMF cannot endorse any product? I'm not educated in such matters. I would be finding any way possible to make it happen. Even if 2.1 is the best ever mobile solution, you likely still want those webmaster using the old SMF installations to stick around? As webmasters wake up to mobile, people will be required to make a decision. I'm just saying that a vast majority of webmasters are wondering where the money went without cluing into their own mobile users needs.

So really, this comes down to SMF not being able to endorse this guys works?

[ge master]

Sorry, just to clarify, for anyone using SMF that isn't 2.1, what solutions exist in addressing mobile users coming to the forum?

[live627]

Bye bye. I must  bow out now before blurting out ad hominess.

[Arantor]

So really, this comes down to SMF not being able to endorse this guys works?

Since you appear to have fixated on this one point to the matter of irrelevancy of any real points, I will answer this for you.

1. Dragooon made the mobile theme.
2. Dragooon is on the SMF dev team.
3. Dragooon has chosen not to add his mobile theme to SMF core.
4. Dragooon could have added his mobile theme to SMF core if he thought it was a good idea.
5. More people than the SMF dev team were involved in the discussion about whether or not going for a responsive theme was a good idea.

At this point I cannot continue this discussion because you are clearly unable and unwilling to listen to what is being said and I'm sick and tired of trying to rebut your points when you're clearly not listening despite protestations to the contrary.

[vbgamer45]

I like Dragoon's mobile theme thought it was a good bridge for SMF 2.0 but in 2.1 like has been said responsive theme is the future and that is how much of the new sites are made using responsive frameworks.

For apps tapatalk works well and has a large usage base and I am sure they will update for 2.1 as well.

[ge master]

@Arantor, thank you. The fellow seems brilliant to me.

So, aside from Dragoon's solution, what options are there for people such as myself running 2.0.9 who need a mobile friendly forum? Serious question, I am all ears because I'm at the point of needing some implementation.

I know you mentioned that Wordpress experience essentially doesn't relate to the world of forums. Not sure how so, but aside from that, this is how things appear to be headed.

First, releasing any theme or website building software that isn't responsive is going to be a cardinal sin. If you have a Wordpress framework/theme, damn rights moving forward that it needs responsive out of the box. However, for those webmasters who feel differently, there are premium mobile solutions that are "specifically" built for mobile. Of course it's up to the discretion of the webmaster whether investing in a specifically designed solution for Wordpress is a good investment. For me, Wordpress somewhat breaks with responsive because of what happens to widgets. And where does most monetization happen? With widgest areas. This relates to SMF because yes, 2.1 will be responsive and that's pretty much mandatory. However for those webmasters such as myself who believe that a specific design for mobile screens is the way to go, I sure hope that Dragoon brings something along to 2.1 SMF. I could use free responsive for Wordpress and have in the past. There is a reason for not using now. That's for me, based on my experience. I guess it really depends on whether webmasters such as myself matter or not and whether there will be any specifically tailored solution for SMF moving forward.

One thing I know for sure when it comes to technology. Everyone can try and predict user behavior, but it's virtually impossible. To suggest that forum users want or will want responsive vs. a specific mobile solution is highly debatable. What I would say is this. Those folks you consulted, how would they know? As in, where are all the responsive forums to draw conclusions from? I see. Build it and they will come? I don't see how anyone can claim something is better than something else when there is no real big sites that I'm visiting that are using responsive. It's only when you change from those mobile versions to responsive that you will have the true answer. That comes in the form of widespread complaining and mass exodus. From an office somewhere making predictions? Meh.

I understand that as a base release, responsive is mandatory, but to suggest that a specific mobile solution isn't needed is highly presumptuous in my estimation. You would likely not be retaining people like myself, but I'm not drawing judgement on something I haven't seen.

[Arantor]

I know you mentioned that Wordpress experience essentially doesn't relate to the world of forums. Not sure how so, but aside from that, this is how things appear to be headed.

I wasn't going to reply but this one looks like a sensible question that deserves a sensible answer. A rarity, I know.

So, here's the deal.

Blogs: few people can write the content, most people consume it. A small percentage might reply with comments but as a general rule that's how it breaks down for the vast majority of blogs.

Forums: everyone can create content, consumption is generally more balanced than it is with blogs.

That difference - the creation aspect - is the key reason why blogs and forums are fundamentally different. The mobile experience on blogs focuses on the content because for most users, there's nothing else to play with - sure, there's navigation to other content and maybe the ability to reply but that's about it.

But when *everyone* is a content creator on the platform, it is by necessity more complex out of the box. The result of which is that people who consume on the go are still only consuming on the go - but they still want the flexibility to contribute too. That means a crippled form of the interface in the form of a mobile-centric layout is suboptimal. An interface that provides all the functionality (perhaps presented slightly differently) is much more useful in that context.

Trying to judge how forums should operate based on how blogs operate is like trying to decide on road sizes for cars when you use a motorbike - just because both go on roads does not mean that experience of one makes you particularly informed about the other. You will notice I have refrained from commenting on how blogs work on mobile because I'm not a big blog writer or consumer; I am simply not qualified to offer anything more than vague opinions.

What I would say is this. Those folks you consulted, how would they know? As in, where are all the responsive forums to draw conclusions from?

From the forum platforms that have been doing this for years already like IPB which with v4 are moving to responsive? From XenForo that went straight to responsive years ago after experience with vBulletin (seeing how XenForo's developers are former vB devs)

Every XenForo installation that's even remotely up to date is responsive out of the box. Try it. xenforo.com for example. IGN's forum (a paltry 100m posts) is another.

Or BoingBoing which uses Discourse which doesn't have the holy grail you're talking about.

Next you'll be telling me that three successful companies whose FUNDAMENTAL BUSINESS is selling forum software know less about this than you do. Maybe there is a reason they are doing this as they are doing it - and people still buy more licenses.

when there is no real big sites that I'm visiting that are using responsive

And here we reach the crux of the problem: 'no-one I know uses it therefore it is rubbish'. Might I suggest your problem is a fundamental lack of open-mindedness on your part?

[Kindred]

Ge master...   After reading all of the discussion that went on after I signed off this afternoon, all I can say is that you are still just play wrong in nearly every part of your argument.

I just worked for a company that spent well over 2 million dollars designing a new site which could be easily accessed from mobile devices. They did not take their existing site and add mobile templates.  They spent 10 months and 2million dollars on a responsive designed theme. This includes their sales site, their forum support site and their blogs and media...
They wanted one solution that would scale itself to the output screen.... And yes, scaling down to a phone size did indeed remove some functionality in the concept of simplicity and clear display... But it was done responsively.

As for blogs... I run a wordpress blog or three...  I use responsive themes, not Mobile only.

Additionally, I have been a web design project manager for 15 years... I have been involved in forums for 20+ years.  I have spearheaded multi million dollar projects and design reviews involving input from hundreds of consumers. So, if you need an authority... One has just spoken.

[ge master]

@Arantor, thanks for your insight. You have really opened my eyes on this. Please don't take my discussion as being disrespectful to you or your teams efforts. I am an advocate for SMF. Trust me when I say I hope that 2.1 is strong for mobile devices. Having Dragooon involved in the responsive aspect is exciting to me.

I appreciate what you're saying about blog vs. forum. It has given me a lot to think about for sure.

When I spoke that I haven't seen big forums using responsive, that wasn't too say there aren't. It's just the fact that I'm unaware or haven't viewed those forums. I will look at IGN now, thanks to that information. I'm not close minded. Stubborn yes, but certainly not to the point where I'm going to use something that isn't best for my visitors.

I'm not trying to harp on this, but seriously, is Dragooon's solution about the only game in town for 2.0.9? As in, are you able to give an opinion or would that be construed as being endorsing his product? Thanks.

[ge master]

Ge master...   After reading all of the discussion that went on after I signed off this afternoon, all I can say is that you are still just play wrong in nearly every part of your argument.

I just worked for a company that spent well over 2 million dollars designing a new site which could be easily accessed from mobile devices. They did not take their existing site and add mobile templates.  They spent 10 months and 2million dollars on a responsive designed theme. This includes their sales site, their forum support site and their blogs and media...
They wanted one solution that would scale itself to the output screen.... And yes, scaling down to a phone size did indeed remove some functionality in the concept of simplicity and clear display... But it was done responsively.

As for blogs... I run a wordpress blog or three...  I use responsive themes, not Mobile only.

Additionally, I have been a web design project manager for 15 years... I have been involved in forums for 20+ years.  I have spearheaded multi million dollar projects and design reviews involving input from hundreds of consumers. So, if you need an authority... One has just spoken.

Point taken. I'm not here to dispute your credentials, those obviously speak for themselves.

Your Wordpress business model likely differs from mine or you haven't actively looked at exclusively mobile options. Your strategy for monetizing is likely different and thus responsive makes sense. I don't think you or anyone else is going to convince me that what I'm doing now is "bad" or there is a better solution. Perhaps when mobile data speeds and usage changes, I might consider something else.

I think where some of the fracture of this discussion is based on different business models. If I'm selling a service, yes, of course the need for banner ads is different than my business model. If you sell one project and your site is about that product and service, then sure, you don't give a damn about banner ads.

Every company has a different philosophy. Every consultant has a different opinion. It's like armchair quarterbacks. We all know what's best. In terms of this discussion, my issue was/is that is seems it's all or nothing. If you're not into responsive, then look elsewhere because we don't support any other solutions. That's where the disconnect seems to me.

[Arantor]

As in, are you able to give an opinion or would that be construed as being endorsing his product?

Speaking personally and not in context of being a former dev, yes I would endorse it. I have used it before and find that it does work on sites that actually target mobile. That said, not all forums need to target mobile despite any assertions to the contrary.

It's like armchair quarterbacks. We all know what's best. In terms of this discussion, my issue was/is that is seems it's all or nothing.

I find it interesting because this has been my perception of you the entire time. Right from the off when you described a dedicated mobile layout as 'the one true' method, it was clear that in your mind, all or nothing was it.

I can see business cases for mobile-centric layouts, as identified above but they are increasingly rare. Certainly in SMF's position as a platform provider, it would be poor for us to offer a mobile-centric view.

[Kindred]

What the heck kind of layout are you doing where modern data speeds, even on 3G make a difference?

Seriously, if that matters, then I would say that your site is too "heavy" to begin with.

A proper design is lightweight and supports every platform that your users will be using.
Having multiple designs for multiple platforms is basically unsupportable.  I mean, are you going to have a separate theme for 1G phones? Another for 3G and 4G?  Yet another for tablets and another for desktops? What about 4k monitors? Something separate for them?

Or, do you have one design that scales itself based on the device's resolution of display? One set of templates to support, modify and tweak....

[ge master]

I think we've had some misunderstandings. Because I didn't want to blurt out the name of his product, I used "the one true". From what I've been able to garner, it's the only option available. I'm not an expert, so perhaps I'm wrong about whether there are other options for me to use.

See we do agree on something! Mobile-centric layouts are rare and yes I agree that for SMF, you can't possibly go after that. However, so long as you guys are willing to support people who are going to contribute a mobile-centric solution such as Dragooon, then all is good. All camps are happy. Yes, I do think that given what's available for non 2.1 users for mobile, that SMF itself should be endorsing his solution. If there are rules against that, then break the rules? It might help out a lot of webmasters knowing about it. I found it hard to find solid resources on it, which is more than puzzling to me.

So we do agree on something at the end of the day. I think when you look at webmasters complaining about ads not producing and dwindling business models based on Google Adsense, I think you have in fact spotted something, albeit indirectly. The fact that there aren't webmasters clamoring for a solution like myself illustrates that a lot of webmasters are still out to lunch. I was part of that group, believe me. If you want to monetize mobile traffic in the way that I do, then perhaps you would see this from a different perspective. If I can run one version without some type of other mobile solution on 2.1 SMF, then I celebrate. If it's not producing clicks, that's largely the criteria I'm going with (but user feedback takes precedent).

Sorry for being stubborn.

[ge master]

@Kindred, it's a matter of what monetizes. If you have a terrific responsive design that's filling your pockets with ad clicks, then terrific. If that's not your business model, then we aren't going to see things remotely the same.

You're saying faster is better. To that end, what I use is faster than anything responsive can provide. So the point is what?

Mobile data is not wifi. If we can agree on that point, then my solution is faster than anything that responsive can do.  But I think you're proving my point that trying to have cake and eat it too. I could go responsive, but it's going to be slower than my mobile solution. How is that better? If I'm being lazy or too cheap for a proper mobile solution, then point taken. If however, responsive monetized better or was easier than what I was using? I wouldn't get hung up on the speed or page loading. I would think though that your work experience in responsive might skew or create bias? If I'm faster using what I'm using, I don't get the downside to that. Uniformity? Not important in my monetization model.

But talking Wordpress is completely off topic so I'll leave it at that.

[Arantor]

so long as you guys are willing to support people who are going to contribute a mobile-centric solution such as Dragooon, then all is good

If there are rules against that, then break the rules?

And again the points I made about what is the case and why this is the case were completely ignored like pretty much anything I've been saying because it doesn't fit your view of the world.

I will say it again since maybe for the third or fourth time you might possibly listen.

Dragooon is on the dev team. He chose not to add his solution to 2.1. Maybe there is a reason to this.

Mobile data is not wifi. If we can agree on that point, then my solution is faster than anything that responsive can do.

Mobile data != wifi indeed, however faster? In your world, perhaps. Not in my world. The rules are a little bit different here for such things.

@Kindred, it's a matter of what monetizes

For you. We cannot build a product based on one subset of the userbase; the majority of our users (= forum admins) do not significantly monetise their forums, meaning that they cannot be a *major* focus of our time. You don't build for edge cases, corner cases or minority cases first.

I would think though that your work experience in responsive might skew or create bias?

Hypocrisy continues to be alive and well, I see. It's apparently fine to disregard Kindred's opinion in favour of one direction as bias but NOT fine to disregard your opinion in the opposite direction despite equivalent type of bias.

[ge master]

With respect, it wasn't clear from what you wrote before that Dragooon chose not to add his solution to 2.1. I don't recall you mentioning anything about his solution and 2.1. Perhaps it was implied, but it wasn't clear. Okay so now it's clear. Dragooon will not bring his solution as an option for 2.1 SMF because he believe so strongly that the responsive design does everything that he could do for a more specific niche.

I would never expect SMF to cater to my needs. However during these discussions, it seemed that thinking that anyone would want something other than responsive, "made for smartphones" solution, is simply a ghastly idea or concept. My interpretation is that because everyone is going responsive, there is no possible need for anything else. If that's the case, then yipee. I can't wait for 2.1 if that's the case. For now I will plead ignorance on what 2.1 and responsive provides. I'm a fan of SMF and Dragooon so perhaps I can breathe a sigh of relief based on my new enlightenment.

Biased? I'm not saying my business model applies to everyone. I'm not biased enough to suggest that everyone cares about monetizing smarphone traffic in the same way that I do. I already mention numerous examples where banner clicks aren't relevant in which case, a specific solution isn't necessary. If more webmasters woke up to reality, then perhaps I wouldn't be a single voice. I'm suggesting that Kindred see responsive as being the "be all end all" for all devices, all situations. If I say that there is a faster solution for mobile phones, it appears it's a non starter with Kindred and is a ghastly suggestion. If I point out something that runs faster or better for mobile devices, somebody might inquire about what it is. Of course asking would require a change in bias or belief.

So based on the conversation, Dragooon has the only mobile device solution for SMF versions lower than 2.1? If that's the case, let's lend him a helping hand on expanding his user base. Calling all webmasters! Make your SMF forums more mobile friendly! I'll work on the delivery of the message. If that's all there is right now, then let's collectively at least praise him by drumming up awareness. I think that's the key here. Lack of awareness. Might not matter with 2.1 around the corner, but I'm assuming there is still a significant < 2.1 SMF userbase. Thanks Dragooon! (I would love to hear his feelings on this btw)

[Arantor]

With respect, it wasn't clear from what you wrote before that Dragooon chose not to add his solution to 2.1

With respect you can't read. Let me quote myself from every time this thread I have brought it up.

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.

The guy who made the mobile theme is part of the SMF dev team these days and has worked on the responsive theme.

So really, this comes down to SMF not being able to endorse this guys works?

Since you appear to have fixated on this one point to the matter of irrelevancy of any real points, I will answer this for you.

1. Dragooon made the mobile theme.
2. Dragooon is on the SMF dev team.
3. Dragooon has chosen not to add his mobile theme to SMF core.
4. Dragooon could have added his mobile theme to SMF core if he thought it was a good idea.
5. More people than the SMF dev team were involved in the discussion about whether or not going for a responsive theme was a good idea.

Dragooon is on the dev team. He chose not to add his solution to 2.1. Maybe there is a reason to this.

it seemed that thinking that anyone would want something other than responsive, "made for smartphones" solution, is simply a ghastly idea or concept

No, it seemed like we looked at what everyone else was doing, followed by making an assessment of the technical, practical and logistical concerns and started working on something that met what we perceived SMF's needs to be, which are not the same as yours.

Hint: this is what happened. We looked around, saw what everyone was doing, discussed it like open minded people and concluded that for SMF's needs, responsive made more sense.

Biased? I'm not saying my business model applies to everyone.

Bull******, of course you are trying to say that. Phrases like 'one true way' imply you think anything less is inferior and you have repeatedly tried to push your views as definitive when they may well apply in your world view but not in ours based on our experience.

I'm suggesting that Kindred see responsive as being the "be all end all" for all devices, all situations.

Isn't that the very definition of responsive design? As in: responding to the current situation.

Sure, for specific sites with specific needs, a specific design may be the best tool for the job. In case you hadn't noticed, SMF is not a specific product for specific sites with specific needs; it is a general purpose tool in a class of tools we know as forums. Having something that tries to do a decent job of covering all the bases is what SMF should be doing. Not having a specific front-end that caters to a specific use case which is what you are advocating and have been this whole time.

[ge master]

@Arantor, this is the quote:

3. Dragooon has chosen not to add his mobile theme to SMF core.
4. Dragooon could have added his mobile theme to SMF core if he thought it was a good idea.

In your mind you're talking about the upcoming 2.1 version. How am I to assume you're not talking about the existing non-beta version of SMF like 2.0.9? You're assuming I know what you're referring to, which I did not know. Besides that, I would rather here from Dragooon himself about his plans about his solution moving forward.

You still didn't answer my question about what options there are for webmasters using SMF < 2.1 (beta) that require something to address mobile phone users. You're ignoring the question perhaps, I have no idea. It might speak to what I'm bringing up in the first place. Mobile and SMF are distant cousins. The lack of content when in comes to trying to find solutions while searching Google, speaks to the lack of something. I mean as a courtesy to existing SMF webmasters you should be marketing the solution on his behalf. If there were competing solutions, then the vale of silence might be valid. Can't endorse sure. But when something is counter productive to the community? If it's great, then it should be front and center. It's 2015 practically. A couple years ago might have been an astute time to market it as a solution. Grow the SMF user base how? Holding back on a mobile solution might actually create more interest in SMF.

You're obviously very militant over this. If you're embedded in a project, a view from the outside should be encouraged. Most times though, opposing views or alternate thinking is treated as spite. Shunned as it were.

Further speaking to my point, we're into page 3 and nobody have even muttered the name of Dragooons solution. Again, doesn't that speak to the mentality here?

[live627]

So based on the conversation, Dragooon has the only mobile device solution for SMF versions lower than 2.1?

SMF4iPhone is the only other one I know of.

[ge master]

SMF4iPhone is the only other one I know of.

That's welcome information! I'm glad you aren't reluctant to actually use the brand name here. Page 3 and that's the first actual mention of a solution for people wanting a mobile option for their SMF forum installations. Arantor is so quick to use the quote feature that he hasn't answered a very basic and important question. Speaking to SMF4iPhone, isn't that SMF4Mobile in essence?

The thread is why the reluctance for mobile SMF. A case in point is this discussion. I'm asking for what solutions, aside from Dragooons, that I, or other SMF users can use. Rather than get assistance on making my forum better, it's all about design rage and responsive design and a beta forum that is how long from release?

[Arantor]

How am I to assume you're not talking about the existing non-beta version of SMF like 2.0.9

Because 2.0.x is stable and does not receive feature changes? Just like the policy has been the last 3 years, and continues to have been the policy for the last 8 years for SMF 1.1.x? One does not change feature lists on stable versions.

If you're embedded in a project, a view from the outside should be encouraged. Most times though, opposing views or alternate thinking is treated as spite. Shunned as it were.

No, I'm just incredibly resentful of people who turn up, act like they know everything and refuse to listen to opposing viewpoints. And I DESPISE hypocrisy. In other words, everything you are levelling at us as our faults are behaviours you are demonstrating admirably well.

Here's a further hint for you: I was the one who led the campaign for '2.1 should have something decent for mobile in it'. I'm one of SMF's strongest supporters - I'm ALSO one of its fiercest critics, on a level you couldn't begin to believe. There is a reason my badge is not a team badge. And it isn't because the team didn't want me. I am only too aware of things SMF could/should/would be doing. I am only too aware of the challenges it faces going forward in the marketplace it is in. You trying to lecture me on something I know intimately is not helpful, especially with arrogance that is impressive even by my standards - and I can be an arrogant SOB at the best of times.

Further speaking to my point, we're into page 3 and nobody have even muttered the name of Dragooons solution. Again, doesn't that speak to the mentality here?

Not really, no, on the basis that anyone who actually bothered to care enough to participate already knows anyway. It's not some veiled secret that you're purporting to uncover; it's just that we don't need to be beaten over the head again and again and again with your perception of our failings.

Arantor is so quick to use the quote feature that he hasn't answered a very basic and important question.

Why should I when you don't do me the courtesy of actually reading what I'm saying?

Rather than get assistance on making my forum better, it's all about design rage and responsive design and a beta forum that is how long from release?

Because I have a serious reluctance to helping people who already think they know it all, stride in carrying the arrogance of someone who won't listen to people who do actually know better, and then refuse to actually listen. I can't speak for anyone else here, though.

You came here already with an answer, what more help would you like? Having an answer before you ask the question is a sure-fire way to get disappointed, too.

[ge master]

@Arantor, you are certainly one of a kind. Wow. Talk about spitting in a customers face. You obviously are very sensitive. You define bully, based on what I've read here.

You are very quick to judge me aren't you? Few posts in and you start in on it. Note, I wasn't asking for help. If Google can't find SMF mobile solutions, then I though somebody with 64K posts might be able to mention something, if there were such an option.

I won't judge a community based on one person. I think in this case, that's a good thing. I guess you saw this as a bullying opportunity? Seems that way to me. 64K vs. 40? Just cause for cross talk and bullying? Who am I to come here and speak to SMF mobile?

This wasn't supposed to be a discussion about a future release of SMF that's currently beta. It's about today.

I'm not sure if this would be considered a badge of honor, but you seem to be about the most foul person I've come across in any forum community. I'm not saying there aren't worse, self righteous individuals, but in my years, you take it.

[Arantor]

I'm quick to judge based on what I see, yes, because all I see is what you post - I have nothing else to go on. Nor do I care whether you have 40 or 40,000 posts. I listen to what you say and go on that basis.

It certainly looked like you were after help from your posts.

Will a search engine fine this post? Sure. Here's the thing: this is just my opinion, just as yours is your opinion. I already pointed out I am not a team member and do not represent SMF in any official capacity; my having the SMF Friend badge is not even my choice, I requested it be removed in the past in recognition of the fact that I much prefer having the freedom of speech to be both praising and critical when both are due - and if you think I'm critical here, you have no idea how critical I am elsewhere. I really am SMF's fiercest critic and you have seen nothing of how critical I am in that regard.

Bullying? Interesting choice of words coming from someone who makes all kinds of observations about us and doesn't respond when it is pointed out they are doing the exact same things (even when we're not). I have listened to what you say, given it fair consideration. I disagree with your stance, most of what you assert, and have repeatedly lost patience when you clearly didn't read what I was saying, but at no point did I intend to bully you. I'm sorry you feel that is the outcome of this conversation - but just consider that it is a two way street and I have felt more than a little slighted by your behaviour in this matter. Perhaps I just respond in kind to how I am treated, and do so on a more visible scale than most. I tend to be disrespectful to people who ask for my opinion then proceed to beat me over the head with why they think I'm wrong because that's actually pretty disrespectful too.

For what it's worth, I don't care whther you have 40 posts or 40,000. I don't care who you are because I don't *know* who you are. All I see is a pseudonym and some comments that I disagree with, where half the time I've been wanting to smack you over the head in all honesty because you keep reiterating the same points over and over as though magically you'll convince me (and as though nothing I've said had any merit whatsoever), while I've tried to give you more and more information to back up my point of view - you know, like happens in debates.

Consider, then, that from my perspective maybe you're being the bully just a little?

[Jade Elizabeth]

Not to be obnoxious or redundant but SMF does have wap, wap2 and imode for those who seriously cannot handle web browsing. Sometimes I use them for quick access and posting [because my design is fixed and not responsive so it's hard to browse]. I prefer the last two.

http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?wap
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?wap2
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?imode


As for the topic for discussion [which I skimmed]... Ge Master I'm studying this subject/issue right now; I've just finished a diploma 2 weeks ago on the subject of website development which had a large portion dedicated to mobile and responsive design (4 classes all year, separately). I will admit I am the first to hate on it: I hate responsive design but I also hated when things went semantic and away from tables, and I am the first person to jump up and down kicking and screaming and pulling hair out with my teeth (seriously ).....but unfortunately for me, and you too, Kindred is right. The best course of action, the best direction to take, is responsive design.

Now hear me out - it's easier to design everything to work with a smaller screen than it is to try to support a myriad of applications (or even one application) which are always changing and could possibly be insecure (I use TapaTalk and it's a pain to update all the time) and if you do your own application you have to consider that you'd have to code it three times - apple, microsoft, and android all use different code (also studied that this year). If you're asking SMF to build an app like that then that's not going to happen unfortunately. The team is working their little behinds off to make this new version, and mobile browsers are getting better each day and can give an app like experience without needing an app now. If you're referring to how some websites do m.businessname.com you could still do that and have it redirect to imode for example. With a responsive design you don't need to do that - which is make two designs for your website and maintain and update them both as needed.

Anyway, if your design is optimised - speedy, light weight, minimal markup - and responsive, it's not going to be an issue for most phones and people will appreciate that they can use the website uninterrupted for each of their devices - it's not intrusive, it doesn't require effort, it responds to you and you don't need to put any effort into it. I've never installed an app to browse a website and I can't even install TapaTalk to view my own. Phones just don't give enough space for that sort of thing .

[ge master]

@Jade Elizabeth, I appreciate being able to have a civil conversation at this point. Whew for that.

I hear what you're saying regarding responsive design and where things are headed. I don't fault the SMF team for going that direction because doing otherwise would be bizarre. I have no issue with responsive, but if somebody is going to tell me that it's superior to what I'm using in a Wordpress environment vs. what I'm currently using for my mobile users? I mock that. People have different business models and people have different target markets and goals. There is something better for what I do and it ISN'T a responsive solution. That's not wrong and it's not me suggesting that responsive isn't dandy for you or anyone else.

The bigger picture though?

One fact remains, SMF currently is NOT responsive. Does that matter to the community? Apparently not because the royal "we" already know all about Dragooons solution. I guess vision wise, SMF isn't about expanding the user base. People look every day for a forum and if lack of mobile is a deal breaker, shouldn't the ignorant fools like me be easily directed to a pretty nifty solution via Dragooon? As in being associated with a current available solution might actually bring people to the SMF community. But again, as said, I know nothing. I'm an idiot with 40 posts. I don't listen. Blah blah.

So I'm wondering for yourself, I'm assuming your running 2.0.9? If that's the case, how are you dealing with mobile and SMF? Obviously things aren't responsive currently, so what are the actual solutions right now?

I find it amusing, from other posts in this thread, that because the "community" knows about Dragooon's solution, that everyone else doesn't matter. As in, person A is looking for a forum right now, goes into Google to see what forums can handle mobile. Apparently, according to members here, who give a $h_t about person A who might actually look at SMF as a possibility. Rather, it's all about what "we" know already and who really cares about newbies or potential forum installers. Afterall, "we" know about it and that's good enough! Oh geez, the user base is shrinking. I can't imagine why (insert sarcasm).

So we can talk about the next gen forum, terrific. It's not stable. Release date unknown. It's going to be responsive and will serve all mobile users. Good and good. I'm going to be happy when it comes, however it doesn't help me at all today as I'm trying to build and keep people in my forum and community.

[ge master]

@Arantor, I just posted thoughts about somebody who says something like, "we all know about it so who cares anyways". That's a very poor outlook, especially when somebody spent time in creating a solution for the SMF community. It's premium, so what.

You've made all kinds of accusations towards myself. Too many things too mention, even though this is a 3 page thread. If somebody is attacking and trying to belittle opinions because "everyone knows this" (like I'm supposed to assume that you were talking about 2.1 SMF with Dragooon not including his solution in that build), then that's bullying. Shoving a newer forum member around and jumping in and quoting from somebody else (you defended Kindred rather than letting him respond)? Hardly appropriate IF you actually cared about good spirits and a friendly community. I know where I'm at and who I am. You refuse to offer up other possible solutions for mobile SMF 2.0.9 because you think I have some bad attitude? Really.

Like I said, I've been around a great number of forum communities over the years and I've had spirited debates. I don't feel that anyone has acted in the manner that you have. That really says something, believe me. I just know for me, if I'm so vested in a community, the last thing I'm going to do is spit in the newcomers face. It might not have impact today or tomorrow, but when the customers slowly stop coming back to the restaurant, that owner suddenly might realize how their behavior was a detriment. Detrimental isn't a recipe for success, but the growth of the SMF community appears to be the furthest thing from your priority.

BTW, I'm happy to discuss mobile SMF here.

[Arantor]

And you taking my comments out of context, putting words in my mouth etc. is obviously highly conducive to good spirits and a friendly community?

I wasn't talking about 'the community' or what the community does or does not know. I was referring to 'of the people who bothered to contribute to this debate', we happy few that discussed the matter in this topic, everyone here - yourself included - already knew of Dragooon's work. The fact you knew about it indicated a certain familiarity with matters and it seemed like it was unnecessary to actually come out and state it.

If people ask - outside of a philosophical debate like this one is - I have recommended it in the past. I will no doubt do so again. Just as I have steered people towards things that will do the job they need.

Interestingly enough, this community - and all the other communities around the forum software world - are not especially great examples of communities, precisely because of their nature. By their nature, people turn up, ask for help, receive, leave. It is a distinct minority of those people that builds an actual community in such places.

Yes, I assumed a general familiarity with SMF as a whole based on what you'd posted - as in, familiarity with the fact that 2.0 does not have a modern mobile theme and that 2.1, since 2.1 is publicly available in beta, does have responsive. The fact I reiterated several times that Dragooon was working on 2.1 might have been a giveaway, at least I thought it was clear having said it 4 times that he was working on 2.1 and in my mind it seemed obvious that if the person responsible for such a theme was now on the core team, that he would be able to add it if he so desired.

Just because I say something in one specific context does not mean it applies in all contexts. In the context of this debate, you knew about Dragooon's theme, no need to rehash it over and over. In other conversations where it is clear that the same level of familiarity is not apparent, I won't make the assumption.

The funny part is that, from my perspective, I assumed it was all clear already - and essentially it sounds like I gave you too much credit. Hardly the act of a bully to overestimate their prey like that. Having been to sleep, re-read the thread I can see exactly where my attitude changed - after the second or third time you ignored what I said in favour of your own opinions, even while flat out saying you were listening when you clearly weren't.

You talk about good spirits and a friendly community - repeatedly not listening to what's being said and making accusations of bullying is hardly conducive to these. As I said also, I don't care whether you're a newcomer - I didn't even look at your post count, because it shouldn't matter. Democracy and all that - I look at what's being said, not who said it. I would react the same way if Kindred said the things you were saying in the way you were saying them. Though that wouldn't happen because Kindred wouldn't say those things - he doesn't blatantly take my comments out of context to try to score points off me out of some apparent sense of being offended when he isn't agreed with, and while he might strongly disagree with what I'm saying, he at least listens to what I say rather than trying to assert his view is correct for extended periods of time.

You are right, to a point: I'm not that interested in building the SMF *community* because this place isn't really going to *be* a community, because it's not really *supposed* to be one. The vast bulk of users turn up, get help, leave. Amongst the small group that does come back in a sense of community, you'll notice I am significantly nicer - mostly because I'm not being confronted with people who repeatedly get nasty in their attitude. It's like how, for example, in the 'There might be cake' thread, there's 35 pages, of which at least a dozen pages are people horsing around and having a laugh - me included. It's all about the context; here I get crappy because I'm getting so frustrated trying to talk with someone who refuses to listen to any viewpoint that doesn't fundamentally agree with his own. Elsewhere I'm much nicer.

Again: I'm going off what you say and how you conduct yourself. Right from the off it sounded and felt like you wanted to have a discussion about why you were right and SMF was wrong - and even when people repeatedly disagreed with you and brought up the results of our experience, you didn't concede that maybe we had a point until after you were already highly offended that  we (and I in particular) had *dared* to challenge your point of view.

Might as well invoke Godwin's Law at this point and just declare that I am the root of all evil and the cause of SMF's decline and that I'm killing the software I love (I'm not but you seem so intent on pushing the point that I am). Wouldn't be the first time, won't be the last time and it's no more true now than it was 5 years ago when I stayed up all night trying to convince the project leaders not to just disband it at the time.

You know what's really funny? I spent half an hour trying to work out if this was a sign I should leave and take all my technical knowledge with me - because attitude aside, I *am* a serious technically competent force, just like only last night I provided a patch that fixes a sort of vulnerability in SMF 2.0.9 and SMF would hurt - though it would get through it after a while - if I disappeared.


Your last point: discussing SMF mobile. What's to discuss anyway? SMF 2.0.x has Dragooon's theme and a few others that *might* work acceptably on mobile but primarily it's just Dragooon's theme. SMF 2.1 is responsive out of the box. Nothing more to see here, especially as nothing I say will meet your approval anyway and it was clear right back on page 1 that you didn't want *discussion*, you wanted consensus that you are right.

I would suggest the moderators lock this, it's never going to go anywhere good.

[Kindred]

<click>


realistically, this should have been locked before the end of page 1....

tl:dr for the thread....
ge master thinks we're all a bunch of idiots and he has all the answers (which is specifically, mobile-only design)
the rest of us, in this thread, have repeatedly disproved his theories and been called names because of it.



asked - answered - beaten into the ground - resurrected - and beaten down again and again and again.