Ajax quick reply

[Klisis]

Ajax this. Ajax that.

It sure is a trend...

[Wolfie]

Ajax this. Ajax that.

It sure is a trend...

Let's use Ajax on Ajax. Seriously, from certain pages on the board, be able to use (html) Ajax clean around the house with (household) Ajax.

[Razasharp]

For those unconvinced I'll just post what I did in my test thread to another user:

It may not be essential but it's what users are used to nowadays.

If you took 100 people, gave them the exact same page apart from one with AQR and one without, and told them to post a reply and then tell you which they prefer, how many do you think would say the one with the AQR? (At a guess I'd say over 90%) Go on to ask them how much more they prefer it, a little, moderate, or considerably more... I think the results would support my argument :D

[bfarber]

Everyone needs to remember that we have many thousands of customers who each have their own laundry list of features they would like to see us add, and there's maybe 4 or 5 of us developers. You do the math. :lol:

We simply, point blank, do not have enough time to add every single suggestion made. As Josh said, we pick through the suggestions made, prioritizing them internally on what we feel would benefit the most number of customers, and then work on the features that have a higher "priority" to us. If we can squeeze in other things (i.e. the topic preview feature Matt just blogged about last week), then great! But we simply cannot include every single feature suggested. Even ones we REALLY want to include (there's some things suggested I totally agree with and want to get done asap) we don't always have the time to include in the very next release. It simply comes down to time.

[.Ian]

Wasn't this on another topic just a few days ago?

1) I for one would love to see an improvement in the current fast reply - even just a button from each post to the quick reply box would help greatly.

2) An ajax quick reply could also point out new posts that may have been made since you started to respond to the post - how many times on here do you see 2 or 3 people posting the same thing in response to a question? Such a quick reply would eradicate that overnight.

[bfarber]

Wasn't this on another topic just a few days ago?

1) I for one would love to see an improvement in the current fast reply - even just a button from each post to the quick reply box would help greatly.

2) An ajax quick reply could also point out new posts that may have been made since you started to respond to the post - how many times on here do you see 2 or 3 people posting the same thing in response to a question? Such a quick reply would eradicate that overnight.

I think the reply you're referring to was in a blog entry.

1) I totally disagree with this. It adds clutter to the interface that doesn't enhance the user experience. That's my opinion, personally, but I'm pretty sure Rikki agrees, as this suggestion was posted before.

2) The problem with this is resource usage. Not that it couldn't be overcome, but sending a request to the server every second or two starts to add up quickly.

Someone else suggested, similarly, not using AJAX to check for new replies, but checking when you actually submit your post and then just showing you a notice with "do you want to submit anyways?", however that has less usefulness with an AJAX fast reply feature naturally (it's better suited to an actual form submission setup, like we have now).

[Razasharp]

I think the reply you're referring to was in a blog entry.

1) I totally disagree with this. It adds clutter to the interface that doesn't enhance the user experience. That's my opinion, personally, but I'm pretty sure Rikki agrees, as this suggestion was posted before.

2) The problem with this is resource usage. Not that it couldn't be overcome, but sending a request to the server every second or two starts to add up quickly.

Someone else suggested, similarly, not using AJAX to check for new replies, but checking when you actually submit your post and then just showing you a notice with "do you want to submit anyways?", however that has less usefulness with an AJAX fast reply feature naturally (it's better suited to an actual form submission setup, like we have now).

How about on submit it just scrolls to the first unread post (if any have been made in that time)?

[3DKiwi]

Strange how we have a quote reply button and a multi quote button but the most common action (in my opinion) is a Fast Reply. Guess I'll have to keep adding my own Fast Reply button that just scrolls the page to the bottom i.e. a reverse of the top button.

Also strange how some or at least one person think that one really useful button will clutter the interface. Yet in the last week or two we've seen the addition of a Contributor button / icon.

Nigel / 3DKiwi

[Noles]

Guess I'll have to keep adding my own Fast Reply button that just scrolls the page to the bottom i.e. a reverse of the top button.

Do you have something like that for download? :o

[3DKiwi]

Do you have something like that for download? :o

I just modified the Top Button mod here. I create my own icon and for the scrolling I recall it was 0,10,000. I also tweaked the topic view template.

Hope this helps.

3DKiwi

[.Ian]

I think the reply you're referring to was in a blog entry.

yes, thank you - my mind goes at times ;)

1) I totally disagree with this. It adds clutter to the interface that doesn't enhance the user experience. That's my opinion, personally, but I'm pretty sure Rikki agrees, as this suggestion was posted before.

2) The problem with this is resource usage. Not that it couldn't be overcome, but sending a request to the server every second or two starts to add up quickly.

Someone else suggested, similarly, not using AJAX to check for new replies, but checking when you actually submit your post and then just showing you a notice with "do you want to submit anyways?", however that has less usefulness with an AJAX fast reply feature naturally (it's better suited to an actual form submission setup, like we have now).

1) It is a shame when people from IPS totally disagree with suggestions - it tends to kill suggestions dead (not a dig at the author ;) ) - not every skin is the same and therefore some forums might prefer the quick reply to say the multiquote as the quick reply is probably used a thousand times (if not more) more than the multiquote. Or leave it up to the admin to decide.

2) Not sure why it should - it would not matter to the user if it checked every second or once on submission - the user is too busy typing a reply and probably does not want to know of any replies until he/she has finished composing their reply

Strange how we have a quote reply button and a multi quote button but the most common action (in my opinion) is a Fast Reply. Guess I'll have to keep adding my own Fast Reply button that just scrolls the page to the bottom i.e. a reverse of the top button.

Also strange how some or at least one person think that one really useful button will clutter the interface. Yet in the last week or two we've seen the addition of a Contributor button / icon.

Nigel / 3DKiwi

Thank you. My thoughts exactly. I do wonder how many staff actually run reasonably busy forums? (again not a dig at the author ;) )

[Wolfie]

How about on submit it just scrolls to the first unread post (if any have been made in that time)?

1

[The Geek]

A true ajaxed fast reply can't be argued against logically. Its a significant savings on resources, user time and it enhances user experience.

Here is the response process now:

Regular reply (IMO only needed for new threads)
Click Reply
Load reply page
Type Reply
Submit
Redirect to your post

Fast Reply:
Scroll down to the bottom of the page
Type your reply
Submit
Redirect to your post


Ajaxed FR:
Click reply (jump to FR box)
Type Reply
Submit
Your post (along with any others that happened since you last viewed the page) appears.

The last option works like Facebook. Could you imagine if FB reverted to clicking a page to reload an editor that then reloaded the page you were viewing after submission? ;)

It makes perfect sense that an Ajaxed FR would make it to IPB as that type of approach is right up their street, I suspect its just a matter of prioritisation and lets face it, its not like going without it is going to make a massive difference in usability, just that having it would make things MUCH smoother.

[.Ian]

Agree - it is time the regular reply box was put as the secondary option on forums, not the primary. Quick and simple is how people are used to posting now on social networking sites - why do forums insist on being long winded?

It was suggested that adding a quick reply button was too crowded - why not therefore replace the 'reply button' with a 'quick reply button' - after all there is a link in the quick reply box to go to the full reply screen anyway. Of course this would only be an option if the quick reply was turned on - but how many forums in reality have it off?

[Wolfie]

A true ajaxed fast reply can't be argued against logically. Its a significant savings on resources, user time and it enhances user experience.

Here is the response process now:

Regular reply (IMO only needed for new threads)

...

Fast Reply:

...

Ajaxed FR:

...

Unless you provide statistics (real, not an 87.35% version) of actual usage, time, etc, based on dedicated and shared servers, then to summarize it with words that make it either seem longer or shorter doesn't really prove anything. It's not to claim you are wrong, just that it's not a fact only opinion.

The last option works like Facebook. Could you imagine if FB reverted to clicking a page to reload an editor that then reloaded the page you were viewing after submission? ;)

I'm sure FB has plenty of funds to put towards their own multiple heavy duty servers that are dedicated to performing the work you are used to seeing. Not to mention that I'm quite sure that they have a group of developers (more than IPS has) to handle the programming/design of their services. Thus they are able to develop and implement new features much faster.

Agree - it is time the regular reply box was put as the secondary option on forums, not the primary. Quick and simple is how people are used to posting now on social networking sites - why do forums insist on being long winded?

I rather like the idea of having a screen where there are power options that are only made available (ie, loaded into the page/html) when I might actually be using them, instead of on every topic view.

Of course this would only be an option if the quick reply was turned on - but how many forums in reality have it off?

You'd be surprised.

[Peter F.]

Unless you provide statistics (real, not an 87.35% version) of actual usage, time, etc, based on dedicated and shared servers, then to summarize it with words that make it either seem longer or shorter doesn't really prove anything. It's not to claim you are wrong, just that it's not a fact only opinion.

Ajax'd fast reply would only involve loading the post itself and any posts that had occurred in the mean time. So say a user is viewing a thread and has their view options set to be 40 posts per page, each time they reply to a thread currently up to 40 posts need to be loaded, with with an AJAX Fast Reply only a few posts would need to be loaded each time they reply to a thread.

[Wolfie]

Ajax'd fast reply would only involve loading the post itself and any posts that had occurred in the mean time. So say a user is viewing a thread and has their view options set to be 40 posts per page, each time they reply to a thread currently up to 40 posts need to be loaded, with with an AJAX Fast Reply only a few posts would need to be loaded each time they reply to a thread.

If you only point out the potential 'good points' of an idea, then it'll always sound good. But that doesn't mean that it's going to work exactly as intended, nor that it'll be flawless or without drawbacks.

Also, as I mentioned, just using words to make something seem better or worse than it really is doesn't prove anything. I'm not saying that the claims are wrong, only that the claims aren't proof.

Here's a way to look at it. If someone says, "Hey I made this mod that makes the pages load much faster. Without the mod, I would sit there and the pages would seem to take forever to finish loading. But with this mod installed, I would click a link and when I finished (insert something for them to do while the page loads) the page was already loaded!"

Yeah, there are claims of it being faster and even an example of it, but it's not proof. Comparing server CPU load, client end time load/bandwidth used, compatibility, etc, is the way to demonstrate the benefits.

To use the argument of "it takes less time" and such by itself.. Let's just ajax the entire board. Someone just signed in? Let's have a notification so we know how many members are signed in (have it update). While we're at it, let's get instant notifications of new PM's, friends online and constant updates on the number of topics/posts. It'll all save time on page loads because you'd be doing everything via ajax and it would only load content that isn't already shown on the page. Sounds great doesn't it? Just think, this would revolutionize webbrowsing as we know it and put IPS over the top with this amazing new can't-be-beat feature!

See, any idea can be made to seem great and pointed out to have benefits.

[.Ian]

Surely the more important fact is whether it improves the use of the forums for members - if it does then it is to be encouraged, if it does not then maybe it should not be.

I believe that it does improve the enjoyment of the forums for members.

I think at times companies and admins are guilty over overlooking the wishes and desires of ordinary members who have no interest in behind the scenes operations and only have an interest in how easy or difficult it is communicate with others.

[Razasharp]

Have to agree - AQR (or AFR) just makes it better for the end user and creates a better user experience. I would also go more with something like FB's version that is clean and fast. One thing I noticed about the ajax 'edit' is it seems to scroll up and then edit? (I keep losing my edit buttons so can't remb for sure) - I think a leaner cleaner ajax would prob be better for the end user, esp one who posts a lot :)

[Wolfie]

Surely the more important fact is whether it improves the use of the forums for members - if it does then it is to be encouraged, if it does not then maybe it should not be.

I believe that it does improve the enjoyment of the forums for members.

Have to agree - AQR (or AFR) just makes it better for the end user and creates a better user experience.

Let's keep in mind that implementation and resource usage are important factors as well. If it makes for a better experience for the member but can potentially bring a server to a grinding halt if a few hundred members happen to be on the board at once, then how is the members experience at that point? Is it still a better experience at that point?

I'd say that the more important factor is in making sure that a feature or function (regardless of what it is, not just in regards to AQR) doesn't cause other issues. If it's going to cause issues and it can't be resolved, then it may be necessary to not include it until it can be fixed. AFTER that, then I could see it being said that it's important what improves a members experience. Keep in mind that what improves it for one member may not improve it for another. In fact, it could make it worse.

[bfarber]

1) It is a shame when people from IPS totally disagree with suggestions - it tends to kill suggestions dead (not a dig at the author ;) ) - not every skin is the same and therefore some forums might prefer the quick reply to say the multiquote as the quick reply is probably used a thousand times (if not more) more than the multiquote. Or leave it up to the admin to decide.

Well, we can be honest and open, or we can sugarcoat things and lead you on. I prefer to be honest/open myself. :P Though it does get me in trouble.

The "reply" button has an action against the specific post you click it on. You "reply" to that post. It is quoted, and in the database is associated with your post (which only has relevance if you use the outline view mode in topics, but it's still a relationship nonetheless).

The "multiquote" button again takes action against the specific post you click it on. You HAVE to have multiquote and reply buttons on every post, because they operate on that specific post.

The general "fast reply" button however is NOT specific to any post. Adding a button to submit a generic reply on every single post is just clutter on the interface. You have topic-specific buttons (which reply is one of) at the top and bottom of every topic view page, and you have a fast reply box at the bottom of the topic view. To me this is logical. It's personal opinion, I realize that, but this discussion has come up before and our designer has expressed his opinion on the matter, and other customers have agreed (and disagreed).

We can't implement every suggestion made. Sometimes it just goes against our vision for the product, or the direction we want to take it. That doesn't mean we won't listen to the suggestions, but when making a suggestion it's good to keep in mind that sometimes we just have to say no.


This has nothing to do with the ajax fast reply feature mind you.

[bfarber]

Let's keep in mind that implementation and resource usage are important factors as well. If it makes for a better experience for the member but can potentially bring a server to a grinding halt if a few hundred members happen to be on the board at once, then how is the members experience at that point? Is it still a better experience at that point?

I'd say that the more important factor is in making sure that a feature or function (regardless of what it is, not just in regards to AQR) doesn't cause other issues. If it's going to cause issues and it can't be resolved, then it may be necessary to not include it until it can be fixed. AFTER that, then I could see it being said that it's important what improves a members experience. Keep in mind that what improves it for one member may not improve it for another. In fact, it could make it worse.

FWIW, I don't think an AJAX quick reply would have a negative resource impact on the site. Generally speaking when you replace full page loads with AJAX you save resources, because less has to be processed and put into memory.

5 people submit a normal fast reply. You have a form submission bringing you to a new page, and then that page redirects you back to the topic.

5 people submit an AJAX fast reply. You have an AJAX request to a page that returns the HTML to show.

With the AJAX fast reply, not only do you halve the number of total page requests, but less HTML has to be returned for the end result (only the specific post or posts to show, rather than the entire topic view page).


That's not an endorsement (I'm not a big fan of ajax fast replies for other reasons, but that's just personal opinion), but I don't think resource usage is a good argument against them either, as I agree they ultimately save on resource usage in most cases.

[Razasharp]

Well, we can be honest and open, or we can sugarcoat things and lead you on. I prefer to be honest/open myself. :P Though it does get me in trouble.

I prefer honesty - because at least that way we get a chance to try to convince you by saying _why_ we think it's a good idea. In the hope you'll come round to our way of thinking. I don't think any of you (devs) are close-minded, and if we put forward a convincing argument you'd be open to change your mind on things - well that's the impression I get.. I hope I'm not wrong :lol:

[3DKiwi]

The problem with not having a fast reply button on each post that I encountered at my site many times was members using quote reply when they wanted to make a simple reply. I added the fast reply button. Bingo, a dramatic decrease in the number of quoted replies. Hey if if it makes the screen look cluttered then tough. Much less cluttered than the many excessive signature images / messages allowed here.

3DKiwi

[Razasharp]

For the record, I would probably add it too. It's just much easier to click on a link that takes you straight to the reply box. However, as it can be added via a template edit I'm not bothered it being made a default feature or not.