Is PHPClasses.org "2.0" in my opinion not really. sure it is based on user input, I don't see your sites content displayed on other peoples sites, and I constantly see page reloads, and the design of your site goes against the norm web 2.0 site a clear user interface.
Don't get me wrong I use this site all the time and like what I get from the site, but this is not really a 2.0 site. If this is a "2.0" site than any web forum site is "2.0".
but thats just my 2 cents.
}//end if 2.0 statement
|2006-06-02 18:29:29 - In reply to message 1 from Chris|
|The design of the site was optimized to maximize advertising revenue.|
It is financially unrealistic keep investing on site improvements that do not guarantee the viability of the site. Many Web 1.0 sites died because of that. So will some Web 2.0 sites that do not take care of their financial viability.
There are several Web 2.0 site enhancements being developed. Most of them will only be made available to subscribers of the premium services.
This is something that has been announced for a long time. It will include better internal site search and much faster navigation.
It is something that will not cost much (say USD $5 a month) but certainly can't be made available free for all.
Some users are already having the privilege to experience the new features that have been announced here:
If you are considering to become a premium subscriber to benefit of these exclusive services, feel free to apply to a beta account:
|2006-09-21 06:57:48 - In reply to message 2 from Manuel Lemos|
Clearly this site is not a WEB 2.0 site. why?
1 - User experience is crap, is hard to navigate on your site. I know that you are looking for constructive opinions. Here is my 5 cents on that, trash the site you currently have and build a new one. I am not talking about design here (for now) I am talking about content arquitecture.
2 - No AJAX, DHTML, Drag and Drop, etc. At least as far as I can see.
3 - Just because you have a blog and RSS feeds it does not make it 2.0
4 - The website design sucks big time. But I mean big big time. Cluttered interface, lack of alignment, 19 Century colours....Please compare your site design with for instance delicious or Flickr, just to name this two.
As the other user, I find this site really helpful but it sucks and you know that. And cut the crap that users have different tastes...I am sure that even you dont like this website (except if you are colour blind).
Abracos Lusitanos da Australia
|2006-09-21 07:58:54 - In reply to message 3 from Luis|
|First of all, moderate your tone. Using offensive words is not going to get you more credit.|
Apparently you did not read the whole blog post with proper attention. Web 2.0 has nothing to do with most things you claim.
As it was explained in the post, you are confusing features that you seen in so called Web 2.0 sites, but in reality those things have not really anything to do with Tim O'Reilly Web 2.0 definitions.
1 - You are not saying anything concrete. You just made vague criticisms just telling that the site is bad, without giving specific examples of would be make it good.
Rewriting the site from scratch is unrealistic. This site have over 100,000 lines of PHP code and it has been developed for over 7 years. Nobody would wait more 7 years to redo the whole site.
2 - AJAX has nothing to do with Web 2.0 . Tim O'Reilly defined Web 2.0 in 2003. AJAX was baptized in 2005 . Many Web 2.0 sites use AJAX, but AJAX is not what makes them adhere to the Web 2.0 definitions.
The PHPClasses site uses AJAX too. You just seem to be new or absent from the site, so you have noticed what uses AJAX. If you look at the new search page or the new login page that is in beta testing, you will figure what you have been missing.
See the previous replies in this thread and other blog posts to learn more what I am talking about.
3 - Nobody said that having blogs and RSS feeds makes any site Web 2.0 .
4 - If you read the past posts, you may realize that the site will allow the users to configure design presentation details and create their own themes.
Try to create a design that pleases everybody is impossible. Providing tools to build a new design and let the users choose is the Web 2.0 way to solve that problem.
That is something that is on the to do list since at least 2002. It is not yet available because there are many other urgent things to do first.
5 - The site uses whatever HTML works consistently in all browsers since it was created in 1999. If that means using tables, tables will be. Changing from tables to whatever, just to make it look the same for the user, it is a total waste of time.
As you may imagine, time is certainly something that I lack. So I focus my scarce time on developing things that make it look different for better.
|2006-09-21 18:23:44 - In reply to message 4 from Manuel Lemos|
|I am sorry but your sites design is not user friendly at all, you can defend it and your reasons for the design, but plain and simple your users don't like it.|
It took you 7 years and a 100,000 lines of PHP code to create this?
I would hope that a re-write would not take so much time nor code. Using classes, or even better a MCV framework would greatly reduce that.
Here is a specific list of why your design is not good.
1. You say your site is this way because of ad revenue, however all ad statistics show your ad sizes and placement are the worst preforming ads. (a redesign would increase revenue!)
2. The menu system is confusing, my eyes go all over the place, their seems to be no structure.
3. Your login system is not user friendy:
3.1: To download sends you to a login screen, you login and it says "thanks for logging in!" then I have to click to proceed to the download (should do this automaticly)
3.2: After clicking on proceed takes me to an ad splash screen. (no content an ad that I have seen a thousand times for "cool cursors" almost no web developer would ever buy or download)
4. For the reasons above I avoid logging in. And that brings up a list of problems with your mirrors solution... Mirrors that say they are ok but most of the time are missing portions of information, and selecting a mirror takes to much user interaction. Especailly when you could use my IP to send me to a mirror that is "OK" closest to my current location.
5. Did I mention the ad splash screens?
If your sites design is 7 years old, it is time to redo it. And releasing your "web 2.0" improvments to paid users only is a mistake, some one will come along and create a phpclasses type site that looks nice, is easy to use, and more friendly... when that happens you will loose your user base. For a "tech" website it is very low tech and old school.
|2006-09-21 19:45:07 - In reply to message 5 from Chris|
|If you read the previous post with more attention, you realize that I am not defending the current design.|
I am just telling you that redesigning takes a lot of time and there are more urgent things to do first. So, for now, I can only perform small changes.
Other than that, the plan is to allow the users to configure the site design, not impose a fixed design. That will be made available later when possible.
I don't know what makes you think the site does not use classes or MVC. You are making assumptions about the site code that you never seen.
1. I have no idea about what site statistics show the ads are in the worst performing places. On contrary, the site follows the heat map placement. The ads must be where the users see them before they leave the page. You may want to learn more about Poynter EyeTrack III study conclusions to know where is the ideal ad placement.
2. You just criticize the menu is bad but you do not make any improvement suggestions. That is not a constructive criticism.
3.1. The welcome page does not redirect users to the original page intentionally. As you may see, the site show there the list of PHP user groups of your country. Its the PHPClasses site help building local PHP communities. I wish other PHP sites would do the same.
In the future it will show more interesting things about PHP related to your country. This may not be useful for you, but many users appreciate it.
3.2. The splash screen is an ad placed by ad agency. I wish the ads appearing there were more interesting to the users. Unfortunately I do not have that power to choose. As long as the ad agency pays, it helps the site keeping financially viable.
4. You are only redirected to mirrors if you are not logged in. Once you login you are not redirected to anywhere. If you do not logout or loose the session cookie, login sessions last at least 30 days.
OK mirrors are never outdated more than 24 hours. If you are redirected to a missing page in a mirror, you are redirected back to the main site transparently. So, you should never miss a page.
The site does not choose a mirror for you because it does not know in advance if the mirror is really ok in that moment. Redirecting automatically to a broken mirror could be disastrous. This happens with php.net once in a while. Users get lost when that happens.
Finally, the site is being improved all the time. Most of the improvements come from suggestions of users that know how make serious criticisms, preferably without being rude or offensive, providing suggestions that are viable to implement.
Some improvements are being made available to all users. Others can only be made available to premium subscribers, either because impose further to costs or require more time from the people maintaining the site.