Please add spellchecker.net feature

[Pilot]

Please add the free http://www.spellchecker.net feature to VB - it is wonderful to have spell checking - it's free as well.

Should NOT have to hack to add this - make it a standard (cp panel selected) option.

Plus add the "UBB" code buttons if possible as
standard on VB. These are really great!

Having installed these "hacks" on UBB - I won't migrate unless they are available on VB also.

----

On a different note, I see comment on InfoPop's site about people wanting a VB to UBB importer - some VB people are unhappy after migrating to VB and ending up with corrupt
databases and SQL problems. They wish they had stuck with
the crude (but simple and reliable) flat files of UBB.

[Edited by Pilot on 07-15-2000 at 04:01 PM]

[JimF]

Considering the info at this URL:

http://www.spellchecker.net/features/bb.htm

I think you should be talking to Speelchecker.net about this - not vBulletin. And from my experience with Spellchecker.net, it was inefficient and truncated many long posts. This didn't make my users too happy.

-jim

PS: You're right - those "UBB" code buttons are important. Much more important than the rest of the vB program http://forums.bronx-bombers.com/images/smilies/erm-ah.gif

[Mike Sullivan]

On a different note, I see comment on InfoPop's site about people wanting a VB to UBB importerActually, that was discussed here and decided that it should be posted over there instead :)

About the other features, I'm more or less indifferent - never really like either much. *shrug*

[Martin]

honestly, I can't see anyone wanting to switch back to flat files. they are super inefficient and the structure for UBB takes a LOT of space.

I guess people should realise before purchasing that this is the first version of the software and that there are still going to be a few bugs to be worked out.

[eva2000]

spellchecker.net was added to my old forums at ezboard and all it did was freeze and crash my browser when used... if it was ever added to vbulletin, make it a toggle on/off feature

[Pilot]

They have updated Spellcheck.net to store it's javascript on your server so that it won't cause problems if theirs is down or slow (other than the spell checker won't work of course).

Maybe you guys think typing in [ b ] etc is OK? That's the trouble with both UBB and VB - they are written to be used by programmers not ordinary humans. (I work in IT so I KNOW that I am not normal, right?).

I mean the UBB guys think that an eight character mixed case random character password is both acceptable and necessary! (I have detuned mine to 5 char lower case only...!).

You lot really have to get to grips with the facts that most BB owners DO NOT want to code hacks and most BB users do not want to code tags.

Users want features - they don't give a damn whether it is SQL based or not. Think human not programmer to succeed in the wider market.

Presumably spellchecker.net have not heard of VB or consider it too unimportant to support it - both "companies" should work together to resolve that one.

Add it to the list for the development "team" to consider here!

[Edited by Pilot on 07-15-2000 at 06:28 PM]

[Martin]

I think adding a spell-checker is a great idea, but I would have to scoff at the idea of a remotely hosted spellcheck.

I don't know how much of a server load a locally hosted spell check would add, though.

[JimF]

So vB should automatically include every single idea that can be easily hacked in? I think that there is a fine line between features and backend - I would rather pay for a program with less features as long as it was coded in an efficient way, than get features for free on a board that has a terrible architecture.

Considering that vB has a "built-in" preview feature, I don't see the need to incorporate another "companies" product into theirs. "preview" = "feature" :).

Does anybody want to start work on an open source BBS program that has every single possible feature integrated into it?? And you thought UBB was inefficient in it's coding...

People aren't drawn to drive a Mercedes Benz because of the neat Blaupunkt Stereo that is in the dash board - they want to own a Mercedes becaues it is built solid, extremely safe, and very fuel efficient. vB already has more "features" standard than most of the hacked UBB's that I've seen - not to mention that vB hacks are 100x easier to do than UBB hacks.

A spellchecker.net hack is in order, but I don't think that vB "must" make it standard because somebody is too lazy to install it themselves.

The code buttons are another issue - personally I don't like them, and the people that care about formatting their posts usually have the brain power to type "[ b ]". I'm sure they could be implemented somewhat easily, but seems like a frivalous issue for a standard feature.

-jim

[Mike Sullivan]

Martin - there is a PHP "module" ("extension" actually) called Aspell ( http://aspell.sourceforge.net I think). Unfortunately, it's latest version have not been PHP compatible, IIRC. And not too many people have it installed (it didn't come with my standard Win32 pre-compiled build). I'm not sure about load amounts using it, but it can't be THAT bad if it's functions are listed on official PHP page :D

[Edited by Ed Sullivan on 07-15-2000 at 09:29 PM]

[Pilot]

I prefer the spellchecker remotely hosted. No way do I want my IPP closing my board down due to spellchecker loading!

If a low load local version was available free - then great (but where is it?).

I don't believe it - people here STILL think that typing in [ b ] instead of clicking a "bold" button is acceptable.

Really - I suppose punched cards are a perfectly good way
of editing a program as well? DOS is better than Windows right - and of course VI is a great editor...!

Get real - 95% of my users never use bold text or any other UBB codes - BECAUSE IT IS NOT INITUTIVE... they are used to WYSIWYG graphical interfaces like WORD etc. Every now and then one will pitifully ask "how do you guys use bold text?".

I would have thought a Merc car comes loaded with features - imagine if when you bought a Merc - and the car was delivered with only the basic features. You want AC, you want music, you want power steering, you want heated windows - fine - just install these optional extras yourself....

99.9% of users ARE NOT technical. BB owners should not need to be either.

[Martin]

actually, if you're going to be a BB owner, you should be at least a *little* technical.

the biggest problem with the UBB buttons that I have seen is that they are javascript driven which locks out a lot of users, like webtv.

The second biggest problem, relating to the Word type GUI that you refer to, is that it just puts the code there and the user has to type between the tags. It's really nothing like Word, where you can highlight the text, hit a button and it does it for you, is it?
What about the users you say can't figure out how to use [ b][ /b]? Can't you just see them trying to highlight and losing their post?

I would definitely like to see something like this but not in the form it is now. If it's a hack then people have the choice to add it or not. If it's added to the core program then you either don't have the choice or you add a routine to see whether it's on or off.
I think to get it in the same form it's used in Word, etc, you would have to be running your BB as a compiled application.

[Pilot]

WebTV - can't believe that anyone uses it - not this side of the Atlantic anyway!

UBB buttons aren't perfect but better than nothing.

No, my users don't try and use [ b ] etc - they simply have no idea that such a thing is possible. They expect to see a button for such features.

The idea of using tags manually is totally alien to them. I even have retired people as users - they are not 20 yr old college students with a high degree of computer literacy.

Remember most people can't program their video recorder - let alone code tages in postings!

Make it simple - sell more copies - it's that easy. It's why Bill Gates is so rich.

[JimF]

It's funny, you say "I can't believe anyone uses WebTV", and then you say, "my users are retired - not 20 yr. old college kids...keep it simple". Most people over 50 or 60 that I know use WebTV. And a large number of my visitors use WebTV. Like it or not, it is there, and it's "easy to use".

Unless the code buttons can be done as Martin so eloquently said, where it would have a genuine Word style interface, I think it is best suited for a hack. Something like that makes the board look very cluttered - most people I know that are retired would be scarred of all those buttons and wouldn't even think of posting.

-jim

[Martin]

Originally posted by Pilot
WebTV - can't believe that anyone uses it - not this side of the Atlantic anyway!


I can't believe that someone who wants to give users every available option wouldn't take WebTV into account. Last I checked it accounted for about 5-10% of the internet market and is keeping pace with PC sales for home/internet use.

Also, iCab, which is a very popular browser among Mac users, has some real issues with javascript, as does Opera, a low-end browser for PC's which is somewhat popular with users on older machines because it takes less RAM than Internet Exploder and Nutscrape.

All together that would account for between 15-25% of the internet market.

Which side of the Atlantic are you on anyway? WebTV being popular here in the states is it safe to assume you're in Europe?

[Pilot]

Look - I didn't write UBB code buttons.

I like the feature. I want it on VB. That's all there is to say. Keep VB basic if you like, I will stick to UBB v6 then...

Yes, I am in the country that invented the language we are
all writing in (as opposed to the country that makes movies which rewrite & distort our history!) :)

We have no web-tv here. But it can't be that difficult to detect the availability of javascript and enable or disable these features as required.



[Edited by Pilot on 07-17-2000 at 03:14 AM]

[Martin]

and I'm from the coutry that *saved* this language by writing it down while most of you brits were still the unwashed masses;)

yes, every well written javascript has a function at the beginning of it that disables it for browsers that don't support it but it won't keep the buttons from being seen so the users who don't have Javascript enabled won't be able to use it, though they can see it. I also forgot to mention that many veteran surfers turn off javascript because of piss-poor cross-browser compatibility.

Like I said before, I would be all in favor of something like this if it didn't have such limitations as it does in it's current form.
Adding as a toggled CP option just adds another check to the routine every time someone posts or edits. While adding a single check won't noticably slow down the program, by the time you add up all the things that some people want and others don't you will soon have a code as bloated and slow as UBB.

Also, as far as UBB 6.0, if they do as they say (like they ever do?) and rewrite it from the ground up to be cleaner, all the hacks will have to be redone...

[bira]

urgh, even I - who expressed concern vocally on the future of vB - don't even imagine, let alone contemplate going back to UBB. I'd be surprised to hear there are actually users who want to! If there's anything I want improved or changed in vB, I'll ask for it here or try to hack it myself. But even the basic product is better than a very hacked ubb.