First of all, the automated patching should be able to be disabled on every level. I am not a fan of automated patching and would no use it.
Checking for updates is also a touchy one. I personally don't care but several of my clients only agreed to purchasing GT products when assured there was no "phoning home" for privacy reasons/paranoia.
I personally don't care as I don't (and won't) use any default templates.
But if this means a bunch of CSS will then be controlled by the software I wouldn't like that. Me, I like the amazing template syntax and I'll handle the markup and style from there.
How important is backwards compatibility with older browsers to you? When we say compatibility, we are talking about extremely old browser versions - that is, Netscape 4 and IE 4 - which already are incapable of displaying much of what is on the internet successfully.
Ideally designs can degrade gracefully. For example, I have some bleeding edge CSS designs that can still be viewed on old browsers, they just look plain (like professor's pages, with header tags and text) and all a logical order.
But either way, I'm fine with CSS.
Are you generally opposed to or in favour of using javascript to add functionality? Up to now, we've taken the policy of using javascript to augment existing capabilities or provide convenience features, with some notable exceptions such as the advanced editor in Gossamer Forum and Gossamer Mail. In the new versions however, we are planning some features that absolutely require javascript in order to work rather than to simply augment existing capabilities.
Depends on the features. I keep JavaScript to a minumum, and hope that such useability and compatibility principles will be taken into consideration. Any browser specific code would be a bane, IMO.
I prefer multiple html pages. But this is a very low priority for me.
Scalability. Gossamer does pretty well, but what's preventing me from using the product on some of my sites is lacking scalability (e.g. distributed files over multiple servers).
Data integrity. The file uploads, settings and database could really use a powerful backup/restore function with incremental and remote backups.
I'll also note that the license changes are unwelcome here, I chose Links SQL for the basis of my development with many clients, and would prefer a higher price to a limited license.
Or maybe one benefit of people who send a lot of business your way with multiple liscenses and many referrals would be lifetime licenses.
cdkrg
Able2Know :: Ajooja Directory
Checking for updates is also a touchy one. I personally don't care but several of my clients only agreed to purchasing GT products when assured there was no "phoning home" for privacy reasons/paranoia.
Quote:
What do you think of the XHTML+CSS design described in the announcement? Do you think this is a good or poor move, and do you have any suggestions, alternatives, or other ideas that we might consider?I personally don't care as I don't (and won't) use any default templates.
But if this means a bunch of CSS will then be controlled by the software I wouldn't like that. Me, I like the amazing template syntax and I'll handle the markup and style from there.
Quote:
How important is backwards compatibility with older browsers to you? When we say compatibility, we are talking about extremely old browser versions - that is, Netscape 4 and IE 4 - which already are incapable of displaying much of what is on the internet successfully.
Ideally designs can degrade gracefully. For example, I have some bleeding edge CSS designs that can still be viewed on old browsers, they just look plain (like professor's pages, with header tags and text) and all a logical order.
But either way, I'm fine with CSS.
Quote:
Are you generally opposed to or in favour of using javascript to add functionality? Up to now, we've taken the policy of using javascript to augment existing capabilities or provide convenience features, with some notable exceptions such as the advanced editor in Gossamer Forum and Gossamer Mail. In the new versions however, we are planning some features that absolutely require javascript in order to work rather than to simply augment existing capabilities.
Depends on the features. I keep JavaScript to a minumum, and hope that such useability and compatibility principles will be taken into consideration. Any browser specific code would be a bane, IMO.
Quote:
What suggestions do you have, if any, for the product manuals? Do you find the current format (PDF) useful, or would you consider that we make the manual available in another format, such as MS Word (.doc) or perhaps even broken down into multiple HTML pages?I prefer multiple html pages. But this is a very low priority for me.
Quote:
Are there any specific weak spots in our programs currently that you would like to see addressed, with respect to how the overall programs work? We do not refer here to individual product feature requests for this question - but rather areas that affect all of our programs, such as installing, modifying templates, upgrading, etcScalability. Gossamer does pretty well, but what's preventing me from using the product on some of my sites is lacking scalability (e.g. distributed files over multiple servers).
Data integrity. The file uploads, settings and database could really use a powerful backup/restore function with incremental and remote backups.
I'll also note that the license changes are unwelcome here, I chose Links SQL for the basis of my development with many clients, and would prefer a higher price to a limited license.
Or maybe one benefit of people who send a lot of business your way with multiple liscenses and many referrals would be lifetime licenses.
cdkrg
Able2Know :: Ajooja Directory
