I hate this new forum

PSOVLSK

I like what you've done with it GospelTruth. Much better in my opinion.

maximillian

Whatever Polk paid, they should just send you some free stuff/speakers and get the new CSS file from you. It would easily make this site better and get rid of a lot of negativity. And it would cost them very little. Although what you did is excellent work, it is not a whole lot of work so they could even send a little cash and it would be a drop in the bucket.

All I can do is click the little "like" icon on your posts. Thanks again for doing this, GospelTruth.

Dennis Gardner

I like the simplicity and more professional look of each treatment that you have shown. As far as how Polk is treating this, no one truly knows because they are mute on the subject of this forum, but I am sure that they are working on the Main site homepages and current items sections before worrying about how the forum looks.

I also personally don't think that it is being outsourced, I think it is simply one person that is overwhelmed and hasn't learned the software yet. It is evident that you have a comfort with it yourself and understand how easy it is to change views to make them easier to glance at and find what you need. The change you made to the recent discussion page is so much easier to look at, simply because titles are single lines instead of over flowing into a second line that breaks up the visual flow. The extra junk (avatars etc.) on the right hand side are forcing the overflow.

Thanks for taking the time to show how this could be changed for the better, and I hope that the powers that be, can use this to the betterment of our forum.

Only time will tell.......

GospelTruth

Dennis Gardner wrote: »

I also personally don't think that it is being outsourced, I think it is simply one person that is overwhelmed and hasn't learned the software yet.
.

I'm pretty sure this is outsourced. In looking at the underlying pages and stylesheets, it is credited to someone at vanillaforums.org for making the Polk Audio Theme. This isn't someone in Polk's IT department and that is part of the problem right there. Outsourcing stuff like this just makes it that much harder to get changes implemented if needed or wanted. I'm guessing they paid once to have this theme generated, and per contract would have a hard time getting anything else done without shelling out more money. I also don't think anyone at Polk has an idea of how to make these type of changes and that is why it was contracted out in the first place. This is also why I think Ken says that no more changes are coming. Changes won't happen because no one at Polk can make the changes and they already paid for this theme and would have to pay to have changes made. Working in IT, that's typically how things go with outsourcing stuff. Additionally, it is my opinion, the contractor who did this for Polk doesn't have a lot of experience with good website UI design - the initial red font color was the first clue.

I'm not a big time HTML/stylesheet guru by any means. I don't even know Vanilla, but I'm just trying to show that it's not that hard for someone with a little experience in stylesheet editing to make some nicer changes. I'm sure if I downloaded Vanilla to my local machine and got it running that with other edits to the HTML I could make a site like this even better. I don't have the time to do that right now as family takes precedence over continued tinkering with this.

maximillian wrote: »

Whatever Polk paid, they should just send you some free stuff/speakers and get the new CSS file from you. It would easily make this site better and get rid of a lot of negativity. And it would cost them very little.

I'd give them a complete site redesign with Vanilla for a LSiM surround sound setup. What I've shown hasn't been fully baked with HTML5 responsive design (smaller browser and windows changing the layout). It's close, but I would have to test things out more to ensure it worked well. It works pretty good right now, but I like things to be as close to perfect before putting it in production. I don't think Polk would want what I currently have as it isn't fully baked - and I don't think they have the staff to support of fix any issues that would come up with my changes. I've got about 6+ hours into this stylesheet edit right now. I do it for my own satisfaction and to show that things like this can be done. However, it takes away from time with my wife (I would say kiddo, but he's asleep by the time I work on this) and it's not paying the bills so I'm going to give it a rest for right now.

Thanks for the positive feedback though!

cfrizz

You all keep forgetting that Polk is no longer a privately owned company, it is just one of the many brands of DEI. They are the bosses and whoever is left at Polk has to dance to their tune. If DEI says that Vanilla will be used for all of their brands, then that is what is going to happen.

Like it or not, stay or go, trust me DEI does NOT care. We are just a tiny segment of the population, and most would consider us out of touch dinosaurs.

Do we make up a good percentage of the population...yes, but we are tiny in the share of disposable income, since most on here prefer to buy OLD used products rather than buying something new at full price from Polk or anyone else for that matter. So all the ranting and raving won't matter since they aren't really making any money off of you.

AND THAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE FOR ALL MAJOR CORPORATIONS!

voltz

so true!! After we got bought out by Textron -they remove all of our old management and brought in all their own upper management and and everything is so messed up I think they want us to fail so the have a reason to move it all to Mexico...

GospelTruth

cfrizz wrote: »

You all keep forgetting that Polk is no longer a privately owned company, it is just one of the many brands of DEI.

You're right. When I refer to Polk, I'm really referring to DEI. I should have made that distinction better. Regardless, I stick by my assessment that DEI paid for this theme for Vanilla from a third party and is not going to put any more money forward to "fix" it. I agree that what is being presented is what they are sticking with based on the above statements. Personally, I think the look/feel reflects bad on the brand. If you can't have a polished forum site, what does that say about your corporation or products? Image is everything, and this image doesn't look good.

gce

Ya know why I don't hate the forum...cuz I'm sitting here listening to "Division Bell" on my turntable through my new tube preamp and loving it. This wouldn't have happened without this forum and you guys!!!

F1nut

Personally, I think the look/feel reflects bad on the brand. If you can't have a polished forum site, what does that say about your corporation or products? Image is everything, and this image doesn't look good.

BINGO!!!

That's what I've been saying from the beginning.

mrbigbluelight

The root of the situation (note that in a positive fashion I didn't say "problem" ) doesn't lie with DEI. Sound United is the source for the changes. NOT DEI.
Perhaps things look spifferrific on a tablet or smartphone. I'll have to leave that assessment to others. On a laptop it doesn't flow as smoothly as I think it could or should.
GospelTruth has, in true Polkie fashion, offered up some positive constructive "mods" that give an improved professional appearance.
Mods that are worth considering, IMO.

tonyb

If mods are worth considering, then why was there a lack of interest to mod the Vbulletin format from corporate ?

GospelTruth

tonyb wrote: »

If mods are worth considering, then why was there a lack of interest to mod the Vbulletin format from corporate ?

Good question as Vbulletin doesn't really cost that much in my opinion. I bet they paid more for the services to "brand" vanilla than it would have cost to buy a license for the updated vbulletin.
vbulletin.com/faqsales.php

We'll never know "why" they made the choice they did though unless someone at corporate chimes in here (never happen). When I make decisions at work, I let people know why I made the choices I did. They may not agree with me, but if I let them in on why things were done the way they were, they at least feel informed and part of the process even if they don't agree. Same goes here. If we knew why, maybe it would be a little more palatable, even if we don't necessarily agree with the choices made. Maybe someone at corporate is getting heat for how this turned out and we don't even know it.

My only hope is that people come back to (let alone find) this forum. The people made this place before. I learned a lot of good things from folks here - all because I was trying to find a replacement badge for one of my old Polk 5jrs. Now I have a set of SDA 2Bs and 3.1TLs. I also got a nice Parasound 2250 amp to power them all because of folks on this site with their recommendations. I don't think it's just a bunch of old folks trying to relive the glory days of Polk either. There has been plenty of help for newbies who buy new Polk speakers who want to know how to get the most out of them. More power, better AVR, go separates, you name it. I've learned a lot here and hope that continues. Wisdom comes with age. There are a lot of wise people here who can help a younger generation discover a better audio.

Pastor Bill

The vintage speaker information was one of the things that attracted me to this forum/website. Helpful and courteous people are still here...but the website has been diminished in my humble opinion.

vcwatkins

I noticed DefTech site has vintage product info. No pics, but specs - at least for the couple I looked at - are there. No link to a forum. Is/was there ever a DefTech forum?

Looking at the Boom site just made me sad.

polrbehr

gce wrote: »

Ya know why I don't hate the forum...cuz I'm sitting here listening to "Division Bell" on my turntable through my new tube preamp and loving it. This wouldn't have happened without this forum and you guys!!!

+1, I don't hate the forum either, I am sure a lot of people feel that way(?)... in fact my current 2 channel rig exists only because of people I met and knowledge I acquired here. So I understand exactly what you mean.
And that only serves to reinforce the overall sentiment - that those days seem to be gone, and that future generations will be denied the opportunities we had because that part of the forum is no longer here.

gudnoyez

I am learning to tolerate the new forum. I just like hanging with all of you, and yes thanks to all the old members who have answered my questions, and have helped me put together some decent rigs & spend my money, and whom I will not hesitate to bug them for more helpful advice when the time comes.

BlueFox

GospelTruth wrote: »

We'll never know "why" they made the choice they did though unless someone at corporate chimes in here (never happen).

If I remember correctly, Polk selected some forum members to review the new forum. I would assume that the review team either said "Good job", or their comments were ignored.

F1nut

Their comments were ignored.

warren

I'm starting to, the remember me check off is broken. It won't remember me..

GospelTruth

BlueFox wrote: »

GospelTruth wrote: »

We'll never know "why" they made the choice they did though unless someone at corporate chimes in here (never happen).

If I remember correctly, Polk selected some forum members to review the new forum. I would assume that the review team either said "Good job", or their comments were ignored.

I guess I was wondering why they made the choice of Vanilla over Vbulletin. I doubt it was because Vanilla comes before Vbulletin when ordered alphabetically. I was under the impression the forum members reviewed the Vanilla version of the forum, made comments and those comments on the look/feel/functionality were ignored. Did the "review" team recommend keeping Vbulletin over Vanilla and that was ignored as well?

F1nut

Did the "review" team recommend keeping Vbulletin over Vanilla and that was ignored as well?

I did and yes, it was ignored.

tonyb

Actually, the review team, which I was also a part of was shown something different, similar....but different than what we have now. I actually liked that version better than this one.

If I knew keeping the old format was an option, I certainly would have voted in that direction, but it never was. I did offer up some suggestions as well as I'm sure all the others did too.

I also think we have to remember who's ball and bat this forum is. It's not ours to decide it's future, we can only give input. Imho though, the status of the forum is only part of a bigger picture of where Polk is going as a company that stirs the dissatisfaction of the older members. Which is probably why we all seem a tad grumpy these days.

maximillian

Nevermind. Sry.

potee

I like the old forum better and that might be because I don' like change very much.

engtaz

Probably the biggest complaint was all the work that was done on the showrooms are now trashed. Clearing new messages is total not obvious. If the old software was so bad why are so many still using it?

Erik Tracy

I still feel like the new look is jumbled, chaotic, distracting.

It's like walking into my son's room, which is a messy disaster and I feel better after I leave.....

codyc1ark

I hate to agree, but I don't check in nearly as much as I used to. Posts are way down, new topics are down. What I've noticed most is that we don't get much newbie traffic with questions. I just wish we could get a reason from Polk's brass, otherwise I see this site kind of fading away. I know the people on here make it, but if they aren't posting/visiting... Sad

dkg999

Welcome back Ricardo. The RAS is now a FB Group. The new forum is one of those case studies I use to show CMO's what not to do to your user communities. Someone didn't understand UI change management. D

F1nut

dkg999 wrote: »

The new forum is one of those case studies I use to show CMO's what not to do to your user communities. Someone didn't understand UI change management. D

That's going to leave a mark, the kind that really hurts.

exalted512

Yup - forum still sucks.