Anyone else think Fusetalk is poorly programmed?

[NikPreviousAcct]

Originally posted by: Amol
Fusetalk isn't perfect, but then again, what is?

It's better than other things I've used

My exploration of forum software and upgrades has brought me to the point where I understand that the company that produces the software tends to listen to the people who actually use it and code in the features that everyone wants to use. They also, however, are not so seemingly disassociated or unattached to the pulse of the users that they can't figure out the simple sh|t like not taking features away that everyone loves or if they're going to remove a feature to change it and reimpliment it, they could at least give everyone a heads up.

We used to have huge conversations with Zuni (Jason) back in the day over in Forum Issues about how things should be done. We, the USERS, were involved in the decision making process. It was awesome because the forums just got better and better with each upgrade. "Zuni" used to listen. "Jason" doesn't seem to give a fvck anymore.

 

[ggavinmoss]

My only gripe is that when I tab from quick reply it doesn't go to the reply button... other than that it seems fine to me.

(And quite frankly, without looking much much deeper, we wouldn't know if it's bad programming or bad requirements.)

-geoff

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: NightCrawler
The features are definitly lacking compared with other boards out there but i guess it's what Anand wants to use.

http://www.big-boards.com/ In the top 25 of boards AT is the only one using Fusetalk.

how come the stats for AT look some much more "uneven" than the other forums?

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: Nik
Careful, OP. Back in the day, Jason used to take criticism constructively and use it to his advantage, making the next copy of FuseTalk seriously kick ass --upto and including FuseTalk 4, it just kept getting better. Then something seemed to happen with Jason. This new craptastic version seriously went down the sh|tter and all he does is ban people and bitch at them for their criticism. If enough people bitch about it fast enough, something *MIGHT* get done about whatever someone at FuseTalk just fvcked up in the current release, but it's rare.

FuseTalk (both the company and the software) just aren't user friendly anymore.

woah! didnt know about this!

/slowly backs away from thread

 

[NightCrawler]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: NightCrawler
The features are definitly lacking compared with other boards out there but i guess it's what Anand wants to use.

http://www.big-boards.com/ In the top 25 of boards AT is the only one using Fusetalk.

Hmmm... I'm not sure if I've used vBulletin, but it looks like a souped up phpBB to me, and fusetalk is wayyyy better than phpbb.

1. phpBB is used by the biggest board on the net that's says something to me.

2. It also has features that Fusetalk doesn't and they are features I actually find useful.

3. It's free

PS: My favorite board is still Invision but that cost money now, I hope phpBB 3.0 can give Invision a run for the money.

 

[konakona]

do you know what the LOAD TIMES would be for some threads if there were custom avatars??

if the difference was so great, i would say it is a worthwhile tradeoff. why cant AT forums do it when head-fi could do it with 600+ post threads? as for the mods having more workload i will have to agree. after all AT is a bigger place and the maturity level of most posters isnt quite as high as the forums that get by just fine with custom avatars.

plus we have a good selection

says who? wanna do a poll on this?

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: NightCrawler
The features are definitly lacking compared with other boards out there but i guess it's what Anand wants to use.

http://www.big-boards.com/ In the top 25 of boards AT is the only one using Fusetalk.

whoa, imdb has over 4 million members ?

 

[Slickone]

I do see a lot of the same issues get brought up over and over in FI, but never fixed.

 

[sao123]

PHPBB its free.

 

[imthebadguy]

imo its the best bb that ive run across

 

[WisMan]

.

 

[geno]

Poorly programmed? No, thought it could stand some tweaking, just like every other piece of software in the world

 

[mwtgg]

Originally posted by: Nik
Careful, OP. Back in the day, Jason used to take criticism constructively and use it to his advantage, making the next copy of FuseTalk seriously kick ass --upto and including FuseTalk 4, it just kept getting better. Then something seemed to happen with Jason. This new craptastic version seriously went down the sh|tter and all he does is ban people and bitch at them for their criticism. If enough people bitch about it fast enough, something *MIGHT* get done about whatever someone at FuseTalk just fvcked up in the current release, but it's rare.

FuseTalk (both the company and the software) just aren't user friendly anymore.

Didn't it take a year to have a cookie emoticon? Honestly, how hard is it to add a damn :cookie;?

 

[Nocturnal]

The thing I hate most is when you edit your post and you start typing away, once everything loads it takes the cursor back up to the topic and 9/10 times you're just hitting whatever and it will automatically post what you wrote without you finishing the entire post.

The rest I LOVE, I don't have any other problems. I love Fusetalk. It's just I edit my posts quite frequently.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: VanillaH
no custom avatars = bleh

I hate custom avatars. Their absence is a major feather in the Anandtech cap.

 

[dartworth]

fusetalk is weak and very buggy. vB would be a much better solution IMO.

 

[Zim Hosein]

Originally posted by: Amol
I.B.T.L.

never question our master

:roll:

 

[artikk]

It's a piece of software that has bugs. There's no reason to whine about it. Just swtich forums with a better interface if your heart desires.

 

[Pepsi90919]

it's quite buggy in the pages that you don't hit very often. they should just use vbulletin, really.