Now let's begin - I'm opening this thread in the hope that all current UBB users who are thinking of moving up to a database driven (MySQL) solution will consider Threads as the product to choose to upgrade to. I'm specifically using the word consider because there are obviously other choices available that could be taken into account before making a final decision.
I myself am in this situation and I'm still considering if I should choose Threads or a competitive product. But even if I become swayed the other way, I'm not going to give up without a fight. If there are any aspects of other software that I feel are superior (to Threads), I will first do my best to make sure that Infopop and the people developing Threads address these issues and hopefully implement these improvements at good pace. If they cannot be convinced to do so then at least I'll know that I gave it my best shot.
Before I start with my list of improvements and suggestions, I would like to ask all UBB users to add whatever they can from themselves - anything that they would like to see moved over or added (even as an option) to Threads to make it a more complete package for the UBB user thinking of upgrading. If there's anything that is preventing or dissuading you from upgrading to Threads (or swaying you towards a different product), then please post here with whatever qualms and suggestions you might have.
Alright, let's begin. To make things easier I'm going to divide what I have to say into three sections: - questions about Threads - suggestions to Threads developers from the UBB user's point of view - "sorrows" (complaints)
I Questions
1. How would you compare server load between Threads (the new version that is about to be released) to UBB 6.X? Let's assume we're speaking of the same size board (one that is fairly large since that is usually a sign that an upgrade to MySQL is inevitable). If numbers are needed then let's say 50,000 messages with that amount being added every 6 months, and an average of 150 simultaneous users - 250 record max.
How would you compare the server load? UBB is very strenuous on the server (when it grows) and an early symptom is that the search feature falls apart on the larger forums of the board. Would Threads lower the load in a significant way?
2. Bandwidth - would the same board save bandwidth on Threads, and roughly-speaking what estimate would you give for the fall in server transfer (if any)?
3. Safety - is Threads secure without adding any hacks? What is the 'firewall hack' that was mentioned in another thread and is it necessary to install it? Will it make the board safer in any way?
4. Languages - one of the most useful features of Threads is the ability to allow users to set the language that they want the board software to operate in. Are all texts listed in those separate files that can be modified, or are some still stuck in the code and unchangeable unless hacked? What I mean is can the entire board be translated, or are some texts or phrases exempt (as they unfortunately happen to be in UBB - such as Buddy List or Update Buddy List)?
II Suggestions
I have laid out my most pertinent suggestions in the two threads listed at the top of my post, but here is a short list:
1. Import Feature - the import feature and the pace at which it is updated must be changed. There are companies out there that work much harder on their import scripts so there's no excuse why Infopop shouldn't be able to do the same (at the very least). Anything less can only be deemed as a shortcoming and a disfavour to UBB users planning on upgrading.
First of all the script should be expanded. Those upgrading from UBB are almost certainly doing so for a technical reason, not because Threads looks better. Therefore, the import script for UBB users should be expanded to be able to carry over more than just posts and users. Right now only the bare minimum is being carried out. And the fact that moderators aren't carried over... well, I don't think I need to comment on that. This is a huge oversight and I'm surprised that this hasn't been dealt with instantly.
On top of this minor bug/oversight that omits moderators, the UBB import feature should bring over (optionally, to be selected when importing): - style templates (and associations) - UBB fonts - custom send/reply (etc.) buttons - smilies - message icons
2. With the template changes in Threads 6 the import feature should also contain an option that would make the new Threads board look as close to the old UBB board as is possible in terms of layout/design.
Ted O'Neill hit the nail right on the head here: Keep in mind that the upcoming Version 6 of UBBThreads has templates, which will allow for much easier customization of the display. This also means that we could develop a more UBB-like look as an option for Threads at some point, if people want it.
YES, we would most certainly appreciate such an option! Even if this vital option doesn't find its way into the import feature, it would still be wonderful news to all upgrading UBB users who would like to keep the previous look & feel of their UBB. The import feature could simply trigger it to be turned on.
You must keep in mind that many UBB users are almost forced to move because of their board size, so such a feature would instantly make Threads a certain choice for them. This feature is quite simply a necessity. When looking at the Infopop product line spanning from UBB to Threads to Open Topic, it's not exactly rocket science to spot the odd one out: UBB users would get used to Open Topic in no time; unfortunately the same cannot be said about Threads.
Thus, with the implementation of templates, work should begin on an option such as this that would make Threads look as closely as is technically possible to UBB in terms of layout/design. This would be an option of course (current Threads users needn't worry), and one ever-so-much awaited by us UBB folk. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />
III "Sorrows"
Not too much to complain about at such an early stage (and this being the first post), but if there's any disappointment then it has to lie in the importer. If third-party bulletin board systems produce import programs (for UBB) that do more than Infopop's very own (moderators, smilies, message icons, fonts...) then something has clearly been overlooked and left on a shelf to collect dust so to speak. The importer should be up-to-date and expanded. I believe that if others can do it, then Infopop can do it better. And if I didn't believe that I wouldn't be writing this post...
Anyway, I think I've written enough in one go already, and I'll add things as we go along. Everyone feel free to add to this discussion so that we can get the ball rolling...
Wow! Thanks a lot for posting! And to your question about which is faster, I believe Threads would definitely be faster. The code has become much more efficient in the latest version with less queries to the DB, making it pretty quick.
We'll be developing some alternate template sets for those who like the UBB look and feel <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> Improvements in the import script are also being worked on.
Should be available shortly after v6 goes final <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />
Having just recently made the switch from UBB 6.2.1.1 to Threads, I can attest to the fact it IS much faster, at least on my host, thab UBB was. Even with a 56K dialup the pages appear almost instantly compared to the length of time it took them under UBB. Plus, my users are loving the fact they can change the look of the board by skining templates at will and they are much happier with the PM feature in Threads compared to the one in UBB. I'm not regretted it one moment since the switch.
Allen, how close can you make Threads look to UBB/Open Topic? Will it be so flexible that you'll be able to replicate the UBB look including fonts, buttons, icons, layout, etc?
Has work begun on this yet? When can UBB users expect to see this along with a proper import script?
The most important thing to me is seamless integration. I want the added features but not at the expensive of major changes to what is already there. I don't want my users to see a different system, only an improved system.
I see upgrading to Threads as I would see upgrading to a new version of Classic... I see features in Threads I would definately like to see in Classic. So the question becomes do I wait for those features to make it to UBB7? or do I attempt to upgrade to Threads?
Hi Julie, it's probably best to collect several opinions and make your own judgement, but I would say switch to Threads - once the add-on is out that will make it look like UBB.
The technology running UBB.classic is pretty much out of date right now. Your board might be perfectly fine at the moment, but as it grows it will start giving the server a hard time and your web host could limit your server resources (without any prior notification). UBB.threads, on the other hand, runs as part of a database (MySQL) which makes it both fast and efficient. This is the way forward, without a shadow of a doubt.
If your board is growing then you'll definitely reach a stage (as I have) in which your board will outgrow the UBB.classic software. You can wait until that happens, or you can move now. But one thing is for certain: if your board will grow swiftly, sooner or later you will have no other choice but to switch over.
My verdict is 'do it now and get it out of the way'. UBB.threads is set to be become the next step forward for UBB.classic users and I'm sure that once you take that leap forward you'll never look back again.
I recently upgraded my license to UBB.threads and I personnaly do not care for the look and feel of threads. I am still running my board on the UBB.clasic, because I can't add the functionality I require. I have set up UBB.threads 6.0 br1 to see what I thought and really am not pleased. threadsdev.com just seems way behind ubbdev.com. I am no php programmer, so adding the hacks I have on UBB.classic is not possible by me. I don't see anything at threadsdev.com that is even close.
There are some hacks I cannot live without and keep me from switching to threads for my site. The main one is the UBB code hack. I have over 40 hacks installed on my UBB.classic, because, quite frankly the default functionality, look and feel just don't cut it for my needs.
The layout for Threads needs to more closely resemble UBB.classic. When posting a new topic in threads, the page in my humble opinion looks like it was thrown together in 2 minutes and by a html newbie at that. The UBB Code links look cheesy, as well as the color picker. The box for posting is small, and there is no nice table layout like there is in classic or open topic.
I personnaly want my UBB.classic license back, but my host complained about the cpu useage of my UBB.classic, so I had to move it to my linux server and run it off my DSL line from my house, I upgraded to threads to enable me to put it back on my host, but without major help hacking threads, I am stuck up a creek without a paddle.
Oh, and another point I am confused about.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="">quote:</font><hr /><font size="" face="">Originally posted by AllenAyres: Oh yes, v6 supports gzip (if installed on the server), so bandwidth should be improved tremendously, tho I don't think benchmarks have been done yet. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="" face="">UBB.classic supports zlib compression and gzip, so bandwidth improvement between classic and threads will be miminmal I would think. I would say the big savings of threads over classic is server resources due to php and mysql. I want to convert to threads, because some of the features are nice, and in all honesty, I like some of threads features, but until I can make it do what I need, I will have to stay where I am at.
I would say if you don't have a lot of hacks on your UBB.classic or you can live without them, then upgrading to threads is a good choice, but if your like me and cannot operate your board without some of the hacks available to UBB.classic users, I would seriously think twice before I upgrade.
Just my two cents worth, which in reality and with inflation these days is only worth about .5 cents, but take it for what you want.
[This message was edited by MrStormyNights on April 27, 2002 at 10:06 AM.]
Threadsdev isn't as good as ubbdev because we aren't nearly as mature a development site. UBBDev has been around >2 years now with many developers/graphics artists/html gurus, etc during that time, threadsdev has been around ~5-6 months (half of that down while fixing security problems <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" /> ). Give us some time, we will be as good if not better than ubbdev. Everything about the site is circa Spring 2000 when ubbdev (then ubbcodehacking) was building a foundation to work from. The good thing about that is, we know what it takes to get better much more quickly since we know where we wanna go from here and know what it takes to build a premier support forum... ubbdev didn't have that luxury.
The compression for .classic only works on cached pages, anywhere from 10% to 70% of the time. Compression for .threads is 100% of the time.
Anyways, to speak to the original post, threads' new template system is very easy to work with, requiring only a little practice to get the hang of it. To demonstrate some of Rick's ease of template changes, you can check out some of the "ubb.classic-skin" series I've started on here:
Click Here - you'll need to be logged in to get/view the files.
Some examples of the work-in-progress can be seen here: forum summary
One thing that I like about UBB.threads (versus UBB.classic) is that I'll no longer have thousands and thousands of annoying data files to deal with. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />
I finished reading the PHP section of my PHP/MySQL book, and found PHP to be very similar to Perl. That, coupled with the power of MySQL and the absense of caching, should make hacking UBB.threads easier than UBB.classic.
MrStormyNights, I myself had the impression that Threads didn't look like an Infopop product. I mean it was nothing like UBB or Open Topic yet it was supposed to be the stepping stone between the two.
I trust that Allen will have the templates tweaked as close to perfection as possible by the time v6 final is released. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> I just hope that there's a simple way to transfer over the styles, hopefully through the importer.
CPU usage will hopefully be a lot lower though I'd like to get hold of some tangible data just to see if we're talking of a small decrease or a fraction of the load.
Allen, good job on the templates! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> It's good to see that things are moving along at a steady pace. I think a good way of showing just how close you are to replicating the real thing would be to include the old UBB icons and match the old fonts and sizes (in their respective areas). That would be deadly! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="images/icons/cool.gif" /> On a side note, will you be working with the guys in charge of the new UBB import program to include the UBB-style templates there so that the importer would default to all UBB styles straight away?
Dave_L, I too can't wait until I no longer have to deal with the thousands of files (that keep growing on a daily basis!). <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> It'll be great to have it all in a database, nice and tidy.
One more thing, I think it's absolutely vital that when running the importer you are given a choice to import public names INSTEAD of usernames (since one or the other will certainly have to be left out).
In UBB the login is actually confidential data and shouldn't suddenly be brought into the open. There would be absolutely no harm done (at least on my board) if I told users that their public name would become their login after an upgrade to Threads.
I'm sure I'd have the opposite reaction if I told people A) your confidential logins will be shown to all B) your public names will be changed. This would cause absolute mayhem.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="">quote:</font><hr /><font size="" face="">Originally posted by Conrad:
_I Questions_
1. How would you compare server load between Threads (the new version that is about to be released) to UBB 6.X? Let's assume we're speaking of the same size board (_one that is fairly large since that is usually a sign that an upgrade to MySQL is inevitable_). If numbers are needed then let's say 50,000 messages with that amount being added every 6 months, and an average of 150 simultaneous users - 250 record max.
How would you compare the server load? UBB is very strenuous on the server (when it grows) and an early symptom is that the search feature falls apart on the larger forums of the board. Would Threads lower the load in a significant way?
2. Bandwidth - would the same board save bandwidth on Threads, and roughly-speaking what estimate would you give for the fall in server transfer (if any)?
3. Safety - is Threads secure without adding any hacks? What is the 'firewall hack' that was mentioned in another thread and is it necessary to install it? Will it make the board safer in any way?
4. Languages - one of the most useful features of Threads is the ability to allow users to set the language that they want the board software to operate in. Are all texts listed in those separate files that can be modified, or are some still stuck in the code and unchangeable unless hacked? What I mean is can the entire board be translated, or are some texts or phrases exempt (as they unfortunately happen to be in UBB - such as Buddy List or Update Buddy List)?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="" face="">Can someone help me out here?
1 - server load for the same forum on the same server under the same # of concurrent users would be significantly less for threads. That said, the search in .classic 6.3 is much improved - it's not lightning-fast, but complaints about the search should be a thing of the past now <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />
2 - all things equal, bandwith will be less for threads if compression is enabled, significantly less.
3 - all known security bugs appear to be squashed for threads. The "firewall hack" is for those who are trying to run their forums from behind their firewall from home on their dsl/cable line - probably against their ISP's TOS to start, and on an OS that really isn't a server OS to boot.
4 - there is still a few spots that need to be moved to the language files.
About the templates I posted above, they'll be improved once threads is final, as some of the changes will need to be made in the .php files to make them perfectly duplicates <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />
Thanks Allen, your help is always appreciated. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />
It's good to know that the language files will be tweaked up. Infopop leads the way on this and is miles ahead of the competition with regards to accomodating multiple languages.
As far as bandwidth is concerned, it's not that important in my case. It's all a question of money. I can buy chunks of bandwidth at around $80 (yearly) for 5 gigs (monthly). Right now I'm using about 20 gigs a month but I can always spend a few bucks on raising that to 25 or 30 GB.
The biggest problem I face is server load. My IPS(s) have been giving me lots of trouble over UBB.classic as it's enslaving the server so to speak. The system resources required are enormous and I'm hoping that UBB.threads will alleviate the situation.
You are welcome <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />
If you haven't made the jump to threads yet, I would upgrade to 6.3... the search is much better on the server than previous versions. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />
Actually I switched off the search function (as well as 'who's online'). Can't afford to take any risks right now with my ISP.
I'm basically waiting to move over to Threads 6 final, with the UBB templates and importer hopefully providing that good 'ol UBB look and feel. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="">quote:</font><hr /><font size="" face="">Originally posted by Conrad: One more thing, I think it's absolutely vital that when running the importer you are given a choice to import public names INSTEAD of usernames (since one or the other will certainly have to be left out).
In UBB the login is actually confidential data and shouldn't suddenly be brought into the open. There would be absolutely no harm done (at least on my board) if I told users that their public name would become their login after an upgrade to Threads.
I'm sure I'd have the opposite reaction if I told people A) your confidential logins will be shown to all B) your public names will be changed. This would cause absolute mayhem.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="" face="">I fully agree with Conrad on this issue. We have been progressively planning the migration of our site from ubb.classic to ubbt6 over the last few weeks. Now that the 6.0 release is final, and the ubbc -> ubbt import script is functional, this issue of ubbc login names being used as display names in ubbt is possibly our only major stumbling block.
Like Conrad said, a lot of our users on ubb.c use a (private) real name as a login name, and a pseudonym as their displayed name.
I was kind of hoping that the released version of the import script would address this issue...
A change to the import script notwithstanding, could someone perhaps post the necessary modifications to the import script to use the ubb.c display name as the ubb.t login name? I have had a quick look at the import script, but am not 100% sure which lines/fields need to be modified.
Yes, this is an absolute necessity. UBB.c users pick their login name knowing it will not be shown if they choose a different screen name. I don't think it would be right for Infopop to breach this trust.
It would also mess up the board itself because some of the users would suddenly appear to be someone completely different. It makes much more sense to port over the screen names and then have people use those to log in.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="">quote:</font><hr /><font size="" face="">Originally posted by Conrad: Allen, how are the templates coming along? Will they be ready in time for the release? Also, will the importer be ready by then too?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="" face="">I have seen another (full) set of templates done, they look really good, hopefully the author will share <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" /> Infopop has commissioned an "official" set, but there hasn't been anything posted yet. We have a few more templates getting there, tho the ones that make the most difference (posting pages, search, etc) are done. I'll be working on some for the private messages now so they look like the regular posting pages (a la ubb.classic) <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />
In every IP product, Previous is on the right pointing <- and next is on the right pointing ->
Now Previous will always go to older messages, whilst Next will go to newer messgaes.
Except in threads, which for some reason Previous means newer and Next means older <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" />
So it should be the same way as every other product - I am surprised that this is not uniform, as I also do not know of any other board which has it the other way round.
So yes please <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> a template for this would be exellent.
What us UBB.c users need most are the templates. Is there any ETA for their unveiling?
One of the main issues that should be set is that of fonts. As soon as all the font styles and sizes match that of UBB.c we'll all see a much more readable and recognizable piece of software in Threads.
Font styles and sizes are set in your css file, as such they are totally up to your consideration. It's possible you have been seeing a font not normally used in ubb, I think some of the css styles were using Trebuchet MS or something similar and not Verdana. We are using the .threads css files in our new css templates at ubbdev, I don't see a difference from the standard ubb.classic templates aesthetically speaking <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />
The fonts still look different. Definitely. I just opened up the main forum page at Threadsdev and a regular UBB.c board and they don't match. Is it possible for Infopop to simultaneously (along with the templates/skins) release a css style sheet that would match UBB.c? You guys know exactly what fonts+sizez are used in UBB.c everywhere on the board so to make a replica style sheet would take you hardly any time at all.
Like I said, all of that depends on which style sheet you are using <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> You may have had a large-type stylesheet, or one that uses a different font... we have maybe 10 or so at threadsdev so people can choose the style they like. Fonts are done a bit differently in ubb vs. threads. threads uses css, while ubb uses hardcoded font sizes for the most part.
I'll bet that ubb moves closer to the way threads does fonts in the not-so-distant future... it makes for savings in bandwidth, allows for handicapped accessability to be more easily accomplished, allows for individual choice, etc. Again, check out the different styles at ubbdev, you can't tell the difference between what we have and what comes out of the box in a ubb, and we are using threads stylesheets to do this...
OK if the import feature from UBBc version 6.3 and the stylesheets to make UBBTreads emmulate UBBc in appearancee are ready we will probably move to UBBthreads right away. My only other question is gzip, exact where on the server is the module supposed to be installed? Supposedly we have mod perl and access to all the modules already installed. I want to be sure we everything necessary to run the BB at max speed.
If it don't come out in the wash it'll come out in the rinse<BR>Jimmy<BR> <A HREF="http://www.morelerbe.com/cgi-bin/ubb-cgi/Ultimate.cgi" TARGET=_blank>www.morelerbe.com/cgi-bin/ubb-cgi/Ultimate.cgi</A>
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="">quote:</font><hr /><font size="" face="">Originally posted by Conrad: Allen, how close can you make Threads look to UBB/Open Topic? Will it be so flexible that you'll be able to replicate the UBB look including fonts, buttons, icons, layout, etc?
Has work begun on this yet? When can UBB users expect to see this along with a proper import script?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="" face="">A beta version has been posted here:
Wow, this is great! Now I'm finally convinced that Threads can look just like UBB.classic! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />
At Threadsdev you mentioned some language problems (in the templates?). Do you just mean that some things are yet to be translated or are these coding issues?
If it's ok with you then after my transfer to Threads I'll take care of one of the language versions, offering you a complete translation.
Sure, thanks <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> I added language support the other day, thanks to comparing my english version to stefan's german version. There's one file to translate (ubbskin.php), then upload it to your language directory or choice (german, french, etc.) <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> Let me know if you see any buglets, I think most all are gone now <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />
Good stuff! I remember some language issues with UBB.classic, such as the "From" field. Being 'from' a certain place (user profile) and receiving a private message 'from' somebody were in the same Worldlet field. I reported this problem because in some languages you need to use separate words in both case, as being from somewhere and recieving something from someone simply couldn't use the same word.
I recall that it was quite quickly fixed in the Worldlet feature and that two separate fields were formed. How are things in Threads? Can such issues be resolved quite easily when reported?
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="">quote:</font><hr /><font size="" face="">Originally posted by AllenAyres: We'll be developing some alternate template sets for those who like the UBB look and feel <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> Improvements in the import script are also being worked on.
Should be available shortly after v6 goes final <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="" face="">Allen, your post dates back to April 16, and v6 was released two months ago.
How much longer will it be until the release of official UBB.classic skins?
And what has changed in the import script since April 16?
I believe the import scripts have also been updated again, I am not handling those tho, you might ask in another thread so Rick, Navaho, or Philipp might see it <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />
