SMF 2.1 RC4 has been released! Try it out and help us test! Read more.
Started by ModelBoatMayhem, April 15, 2019, 11:07:54 PM
Quote from: Arantor on April 18, 2019, 05:48:26 AMThere is plenty of anecdotal evidence over a number of years both here and elsewhere to support the basis that it is *far* more than just ModelBoIyhem that wants a better user experience (fewer clicks/easier to use) and features like resizing etc. I vehemently dislike that you've reduced the argument from 'all the people on one site' to '1 person wants this' simply because you don't have the evidence at hand to realise it's the case. You really, really didn't need to labour the point, nor counter-argue for a position that is almost as fallacious as the one you claim in the start of your post. I also suspect that no amount of evidence would be sufficient for you either, having seen previous debates.The reality is vastly more complicated than argument by reduction, and it's a weird day when I'm actually arguing in favour of adding core features to a platform that I've long argued has too many features and choices, so... yeah.
Quote from: IrisadoYou will note that I did not say otherwise and nor did I dismiss the request.
Quote from: IrisadoI solely take issue with the idea that 'everyone wants'.
Quote from: IrisadoYou misjudge me if you truly believe that evidence does not satisfy me. Evidence-based argument is an essential component of my job and it is what distinguishes high quality work from mediocre or poor work.
Quoteso all I am asking is for members here to be more circumspect and/or precise in terms of who they are referring to and what they mean. To my mind, this is not an unreasonable request.
Quote from: Arantor on April 18, 2019, 06:51:44 AMYou didn't in so many words, no, but you *did* reduce it from '7000+' to '1' which in practical terms amounts to the same thing.
QuotePerhaps, but this is an essential angle of what we're discussing here - and an essential part of forum life. I don't know much about you, I can only respond to what I see. What I see is arguments that are torn apart by pedantry on rules-lawyering on a scale that even I'm shocked by (and as earlier in this thread, I'm professionally pedantic, it's essential to how I do my job). What I see is things deconstructed by the letter of the rules rather than the spirit.I see someone who with the slightest provocation jumps in to moderate - further building the impression I have long had of a rules lawyer, someone who does everything by the letter of the law rather than its intent. All of the debates around the EU certainly reinforce that impression - e.g. in the Article 13/15/whatever it's numbered now debate, getting into nitty-gritty about which bodies do what and whose responsible for what... that's not especially relevant to the issue at hand, which was 'what are the consequences of these laws on us as forum owners', with a sideline into 'why these are so damnably flawed' and 'I could see an argument for this being a way to effectively curtail what could otherwise become competition for the established powers'.
QuoteI suspect that while 7000+ people might be an exaggeration, it's very likely more than 1 person has actively outright asked for improvements, that many more have asked for help on how to do things, and that it could easily be perceived as that significant an issue.
QuoteThen you combine it with a comment that I heard many times around here - 'oh you're just a developer, what do you know'
QuoteUsers have devices that produce by default enormous pictures. Your average phone will produce a multi-megabyte monster of a picture by default (4MB would be quite small; my phone from 6 years ago routinely produced 8MB plus files based on its 41MP sensor). This has two problems: it makes a huge-ass file that you as a forum owner have to store, and the picture is probably larger than most user's screens, so what's the point in storing it in full anyway?So if you have a picture that's huge and unwieldy and annoying to work with in its raw format, why not provides options for automatically dealing with it in a more intelligent way - resize it downwards to a reasonable size, reduces space consumption, lets the user view it in a way that makes sense etc. and means that - crucially - the user doesn't have to bother with resizing an image.I can resize an image with no trouble. I'm sure many people here can too. But many of our users can't. We live in a world where it is not 'odd' for users not to understand the mechanics of things, and when I ask the users of the clients I work for, for a screenshot, several things may or may not happen. I've had users take a screenshot, put it in a Word document. I've had users take a screenshot of their laptop with their phone and send me that. I've even had users screenshot, put it in a Word document, print it out, take a photo with their phone to put it in email. (These sound like urban legends. They absolutely are not.)These people aren't idiots - we're talking people that are part-way through a multi-year degree programme (in some cases, from very prestigious schools that you don't get to unless you are legitimately capable, and in the case of the printing-it-out-to-take-a-photo, we're talking someone who is actually a college-level teacher). We're talking about people who aren't techie. These are all people who post on forums.So, resizing down to an acceptable size should be an option provided by default. Fun fact, most of the gallery mods already do this on some level anyway. And there will be times you explicitly don't want it to do that for whatever reason (maybe you're uploading a massive PNG diagram and you'd rather not have it be downsized, or converted to JPEG, so these need to not be without some kinds of controls). Auto conversion to JPEG would be neat but may be awkward.Limits per file type are a viable option - right up until we run into 'regular users' again. And ModelBoIyhem is absolutely right: people expect this to be as simple as it is on their phones with the Facebook app and similar. I'd find it hard to provide suitable qualitative or quantitative data to support it but I have more than enough anecdata to support that position, and I know the paid platforms absolutely believe that's a thing, they have definitely made it simpler. You'll end up running into 'but Facebook doesn't make me resize it, it does it for me' - and while I would certainly have some words about entitlement (because why wouldn't I?), that doesn't change the fact that I would actually agree with that.I don't *think* that the issue of uploading attachments per se is the problem; I think there is a lack of useful post-processing options, and I think the use case of somehow putting pictures in posts is a use case that is not well supported at this time but achievable, moreso in 2.1 than before. I think that it may be feasible to consider some methodology of making it more obvious of how to do it - as there are lots of different use cases for showcasing photos in a non-gallery style context but the options are difficult to balance without necessarily making it worse for a given subset of users.
QuoteI solely take issue with the idea that 'everyone wants'.
QuoteIndeed, had that been the argument articulated in the first instance in lieu of 'everyone wants', I would not have posted in this topic.
QuoteYou're conflating a range of separate issues here.
QuoteI agree. Indeed, had that been the argument articulated in the first instance in lieu of 'everyone wants', I would not have posted in this topic.
QuoteFunnily enough, this is how I feel, only not in relation to development.
QuoteYep. There also seems to be quite a few communities with a lot of senior users out there, where it might be even more difficult to teach how to do it.In my userbase it mostly fell on "they know how, but it's easier to just upload what is allowed". I allowed 5mb attachments, so they just used that. They didn't have a problem resizing it before, though they seemed less keen to take on the work and thus used attachments less often.I think resizing to same-format is preferrable. Many pngs absolutely should not become jpeg, but for photos jpeg saves much more space with no meaningful loss (granted the right compression is used). I recall this being an option for avatars, but I don't remember if it just turned everything into png or went for the same filetype as the original. Limits per filetype in my case was meant for things other than images. The only reason I increased the limit was for mp3 files used in some contests, but I can think of similar situations where you want to make a higher limit just for N files. Even with an auto-resizing I can still see it being useful, but it might be more fit for mod material. In the case of resizing you might even want to leave gifs out of the equation and limit them separately, for example.
Quote from: Arantor on April 18, 2019, 08:28:20 AMThis is also one of the things I dislike. Don't hold back on my account, say exactly what you mean. I'm assuming this is some kind of thinly veiled attempt to snipe at me because I don't actively use SMF and don't actively contribute to its development any more, therefore somehow my opinion is less relevant or important.
Quote from: ModelBoatMayhem on April 18, 2019, 04:24:47 AMQuote from: m4z on April 18, 2019, 03:26:41 AMI actually haven't used such sites too much in the last 15 years, unless you count Github, bug trackers, mailing lists, and support forums of big corporations, which are mostly glorified text-only mailing-lists with a web UI (and always terrible to use).That says a Lot!
Quote from: m4z on April 18, 2019, 03:26:41 AMI actually haven't used such sites too much in the last 15 years, unless you count Github, bug trackers, mailing lists, and support forums of big corporations, which are mostly glorified text-only mailing-lists with a web UI (and always terrible to use).
Quote from: ModelBoatMayhem on April 18, 2019, 12:58:48 AMDifferent platforms and target audience maybe .... but how did they get so big...... by making things SO EASY that it's actually intuitive.
Quote from: ModelBoatMayhem on April 18, 2019, 12:58:48 AMBut it's not just that, is it, It's the re sizing that SO MANY users seem to struggle with.
Quote from: Arantor on April 18, 2019, 12:33:37 PMI'd suggest that voting in that matter would end up like it tends to do on xenforo.com.
Quote from: Arantor on April 18, 2019, 01:43:40 PMCompletely non-sequiteur, please tell fixer that Pete says hi, and that I hope TAZ is a slightly less angry place now I'm not arguing with him.
Quote from: ModelBoatMayhem on April 18, 2019, 04:24:47 AM"In 2019, it is estimated that there will be around 2.77 billion social media users around the globe, up from 2.46 billion in 2017. Social network penetration worldwide is ever-increasing. In 2017, 71 percent of internet users were social network users and these figures are expected to grow."
Quote from: ModelBoatMayhem on April 18, 2019, 04:24:47 AM Please see statics above. Different platforms and target audience maybe .... but how did they get so big...... by making things SO EASY that it's actually intuitive.
Quote from: ModelBoatMayhem on April 18, 2019, 12:58:48 AMSMF has always been a friend to me, especially as it's "free"
Quote from: ModelBoIyhem on April 18, 2019, 04:24:47 AM"In 2019, it is estimated that there will be around 2.77 billion social media users around the globe, up from 2.46 billion in 2017. Social network penetration worldwide is ever-increasing. In 2017, 71 percent of internet users were social network users and these figures are expected to grow."