News: THE MULE, directed by and starring Clint Eastwood: now on disc and streaming!


0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this board.
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Hey this site rocks!  (Read 15971 times)
Matt
Global Moderator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14581



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #20 on: December 07, 2002, 08:47:39 AM »

Hey Philo,

That's a groovy av you've got there.  Looks real good.
Logged
philo
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3715


"Slightly advanced"


View Profile Email
« Reply #21 on: December 07, 2002, 01:59:19 PM »


Thanks Matt ,

Bob Peak certainly was something .



                                                             Philo .
Logged

"I won't be hitting you with my face"
Lilly
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2801


"If she looks back..."


View Profile Email
« Reply #22 on: December 07, 2002, 08:24:04 PM »

Just want to add my voice to the chorus of praise for this excellent new web board.  Thank you Cal, and all the moderators for making it so great.   :)
I especially like the avatar feature; now I have a whole new way to procrastinate my way out of studying.
Logged
Agent
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1738



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #23 on: December 10, 2002, 03:10:03 PM »

Hey I noticed the font changed up on the "Web Board" title, like the old style board. Tryin' to pull a fast one on us, Cal?  ;D
Logged

"I tried being reasonable, I didn't like it." - Clint Eastwood
Christopher
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6454


The real me


View Profile Email
« Reply #24 on: December 10, 2002, 07:08:28 PM »

Oh wow, I didn't notice that until I just read Agent's post. Didn't it used to say "The original" along with it?
Logged
Cal
Administrator
Full Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 229


Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try.


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #25 on: December 13, 2002, 10:18:23 PM »

Luminous beings are we... not this crude matter  ;)
Logged
KC
Administrator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 32013


Control ...


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #26 on: December 13, 2002, 10:47:48 PM »

Cal, the new background is very handsome indeed, and I can read all the "outside the board" text just fine now.

Is it just me, though, or does it take a bit longer for things to load on this site than they did on the old one ... and with the new background, even a bit longer than that?  ???

KC
Logged
Brendan
Classic Member
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6028



View Profile Email
« Reply #27 on: December 13, 2002, 11:10:13 PM »

Hey Cal, what happened to the thing that said, 'recently posted posts' or whatever it was. It was the thing that showed the last five posts on the board. I kinda liked that. Any way, would it be possible to add it back on?  :)

And I've noticed that if I go to click on the MSN 'add me' logos, to add someone to my list, I get a message that pops up and says: ERROR - A Runtime error has occured, do you wish to debug?

Huh? ???
« Last Edit: December 14, 2002, 02:21:34 AM by Nightwing » Logged
Cal
Administrator
Full Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 229


Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try.


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #28 on: December 14, 2002, 06:26:37 AM »

Yeah there seems to be a bug with the MSN stuff. Looking into tit. The receent posts is now al ink that shows the top 10. The top 5 were a bit redundant and in order to have a link to the Privat Messages at the bottom, we could only have one or the other.
Logged
Agent
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1738



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #29 on: December 14, 2002, 08:53:19 AM »

Cal -

Really like the new woodgrain background, adds a nice touch of class!  
Logged

"I tried being reasonable, I didn't like it." - Clint Eastwood
Cal
Administrator
Full Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 229


Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try.


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #30 on: December 14, 2002, 09:00:44 AM »

Cal, the new background is very handsome indeed, and I can read all the "outside the board" text just fine now.

Is it just me, though, or does it take a bit longer for things to load on this site than they did on the old one ... and with the new background, even a bit longer than that?  ???

KC

All the images are optimized for quickloading but the reason you probably see a slight descrease in performance is because when the new Board was first launched, it was text only. Now the links for all the buttons, etc are actually tiny gifs. There other main issue though is that be default the code does not ask for Width and Height attributes for these images which is not code coding practice. If these buttons had these attributes in the code, the page load would be quicker. I have informed the developers of this. Hopefully they will listen and add this functionality.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2002, 09:01:41 AM by Cal » Logged
KC
Administrator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 32013


Control ...


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #31 on: December 14, 2002, 03:37:39 PM »

Thanks, Cal ... however, what I meant to say is that since the very beginning (when it was text only),  this site has been slower to load for me than the old Eastwood Web Board.  ::)

Sorry ...

KC
Logged
Cal
Administrator
Full Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 229


Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try.


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #32 on: December 14, 2002, 03:59:09 PM »

In that case, that is really weird. For me, the new board blows away the old one and it should. It's databasae drive, not text file based.
Logged
KC
Administrator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 32013


Control ...


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #33 on: December 14, 2002, 04:12:10 PM »

OK, I timed it with a stopwatch ... clicking the mouse on the "Reply" button and hitting "Start" on the watch as nearly simultaneously as I could ... then clicking "Refresh" on the browser menubar, same deal with the watch ... in both cases, it took between nine and ten seconds for the page to load completely. I never timed the old site, so it's only subjective, but it just seemed like I didn't usually have to wait that long.  But, if it's just me, no problem.
Logged
Christopher
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6454


The real me


View Profile Email
« Reply #34 on: December 14, 2002, 04:45:33 PM »

Sometimes, it does seem to take a little longer to load these pages.
Logged
Cal
Administrator
Full Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 229


Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try.


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #35 on: December 14, 2002, 09:55:26 PM »

OK, I timed it with a stopwatch ... clicking the mouse on the "Reply" button and hitting "Start" on the watch as nearly simultaneously as I could ... then clicking "Refresh" on the browser menubar, same deal with the watch ... in both cases, it took between nine and ten seconds for the page to load completely. I never timed the old site, so it's only subjective, but it just seemed like I didn't usually have to wait that long.  But, if it's just me, no problem.

Yes but again this is with images turned on so it may take longer for the whole page to load until that is resolved. BUt I am not sure what else to do. Maybe the Web host is not as fast than the old one. We did switch hosts too.
What speed are you connected at - actual speed in KB please.

Not sure what that is? - test it here:
http://bandwidthplace.com/speedtest/
Logged
KC
Administrator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 32013


Control ...


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #36 on: December 14, 2002, 10:10:03 PM »

Cal, according to that test, my speed is 1011461.22 bits per second. I have cable modem.

Oddly, the images, including the background image, seem to load right away; it's the messages ... or the "Post reply" window, or whatever ... that seem to take a long time.

When Matt and I were playing trivia back when we were testing out this board, we both commented on how slow it was in comparison to the old one, but we thought maybe it was because it was just a test. And it does seem to be faster now that it's up and running "for real" ... but it still seems slower, to me, than I recall the old one being.

It's no big deal, though ... did you ever figure out how to get someone who posts something directly back to his post, instead of landing back outside the thread and having to click back in (two steps instead of one)?

KC
Logged
Cal
Administrator
Full Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 229


Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try.


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #37 on: December 14, 2002, 10:15:42 PM »

There's going to be a new release in a month or so that is supposed to have this mod built in. Waiting to see how that unfolds. There is also some code improvemtns that may help with the page load time but we'll see what happens. With a cble modem I am very surprised that it takes you 10 seconds for the site to load. My speed is less that yours and it completely loads in only a few seconds. Oh well.  :-\
Logged
Conan
Classic Member
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2941


JP


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #38 on: December 15, 2002, 08:00:52 PM »

  Mine loads fast.  My only minor beef is that sometimes different varieties of fonts in a single post can be hard to read, or maybe annoying is the right word.  Everything else is great.  Overall, I dig the new board over the old one.
Logged

little_bill
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1354



View Profile Email
« Reply #39 on: December 17, 2002, 06:42:15 AM »

i timed ,ime with my new quantun singularity stp[owatch and she take .0000044 nanoseconds longer to load, i cannee take it captain, i cannee take it no more.
Logged

He may look like an idiot and talk like an idiot but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot.- Groucho Marx
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Go Up Print 
 




C L I N T E A S T W O O D . N E T