Which vB version do you personally prefer... ?

[Scott MacVicar]

I dont the vB3 system is very different from vB2 to a users perspective.

I'd say the WYSIWYG even makes it easier.

[Quillz]

Yeah. But not everyone uses WYSIWYG, or even know it exists.

[Zachery]

Yes I understand your personal opinion I just don't agree with those points for because of the reasons above.

[Dave#]

I dont the vB3 system is very different from vB2 to a users perspective.

I'd say the WYSIWYG even makes it easier.

Depends what your users want - we could bet away with a quote button, the more formatting the further it moves away from the underlying content - the post.

There are some other end user changes in VB3 that I disagree with - the quick reply for example is a horror story and the default forum display still confuses me to this today - why move the thread starter under the tpoic - it's madness. I haven't even mentioned the Javascript menu system (shudder)

I could probably make Vb3 look and behave very similarly to VB2 but what is the point? Interesting to see two things on this thread posted by VB staff.

I also can't personally see vBulletin 2 being supported forever and ever.

vB3 is more secure than vB2 overall

Speaks volumes I think.

[filburt1]

The appearance is not much of an issue for me because I completely rewrite most of the major templates so I can obtain a unique look. However, I do not like having to keep so many Javascript-related elements in place like an assumed document structure and everything for the message editor.

I still strongly support an abstract view for vBulletin more than anything else, but that's more available in enterprise languages like JSP, not little PHP. IMO, vBulletin should be able to publish its view to an abstract view model, and an implementation of that model is then responsible for generating markup, XML, etc. The current implementation assumes a table-based, alternating color, etc. HTML view. An abstract implementation would allow HTML, XHTML with CSS, XML styled with XSLT, proprietary formats including hard-printed formats, etc.

[Dave#]

Are you taling about MVC?

[filburt1]

Are you taling about MVC?

Yes. vB's design blends them too much for my opinion (for example, there is "compiled"-for-want-of-a-better-term HTML in the database; the database should exclusively be the model, not a combined model/view).

[Dave#]

I don't think PHP can support MVC anymore than JSP's/servlets can - it's an ebedded scripting language.

Personally, this is why I think PHP rocks, it is what it is.

[Erwin]

What I'd want to know is how vB 3.5 copes with very busy forums compared to vB 3.0.

[Zachery]

I think it should cope better, esp with the filecache which should help with some larger querys to the datastore.

[mr.lu2y]

3.5

[MRGTB]

I like vB2 for for simplicity and speed. Plus I like the fact everything is template driven instead of using phases. Plus the server load is much better.

But my vote still has to go with vB3 for sheer power and features compared to vB2. Even something as simple as a Quick Reply box and the better SEO that vB3 gives you swings it for me.

But I am a vB2 fan though. If vB2 had the option to highlight text and then click a BBCode button to wrap around that text automaticly, instead of you having to manually insert BBCode in between the text by hand (which I thought was a big let down in vB2). I would probably use it over vB3 for server load reasons as it offers enough important features to get along with.

Fix that automatic BBCode highlighting in the next update and add a Quick reply box!

[Zachery]

I've not had any issues with vB3 as far as overall server load goes, and considering i sysadmin several "big-boards". It works well.

[MRGTB]

Well I don't think it causing server load problems, becuase you server admin Zack and know about vB3. Your more aware about the ammount of vB Boards to allow on a shared host better than most server admins who are not used to vB and what it requires.

Most are used to using phpBB and treat vB as such on shared hosts unless they understand what vB requires. This I think is the main problem. Not enough space and thought given on shared hosts in terms of how many they allow on it and treating vB to much like phpBB, which is why they finish up complaining about server loads later down the line when they spot your board is using more server resources that the other websites and forums boards like phpBB on the same shared host. When in fact they should cater better for vB and not be so greedy to cram as many people on one shared host then blame vB for it after becuase they know they can get rid of you and have two phpBB boards there instead.

[MRGTB]

For example, my host has just setup there own support forum. I pointed things out to them that would benefit them as a host like offering eAccelerator and FastCGI on there shared host (pointing out that asmallorange) do this as default on all shared host account and there booming in trade.

I also explained to them that vBulletin is the most used forum board and they should give a much more better support for vB users if they want there company to grow better and cater for vB board users looking for a host. Sending them here to read up on vB after it became quite obvious they knew nothing really about vB. Also telling them that there current version on ImageMagick 5 would not work with the latest version of vBulletin. I told them all this for there own best interest and mine also as a person hosted with them.

But I was quite amazed at there ignorance really of vBulletin and how they showed themselves to be a typical example of a one minded phpBB server host. Who didn't really give much thought for better forum boards like vBulletin in catering for it better.