Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 16 replies
  • Subscribers 188 subscribers
  • Views 1594 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

The big NNTP vs HTML forum war collection

e14 Contributor

For the ones that can't hold it back, here you can put your pro's and con's

and flame as much as you like. And Klaus can happily ignore (or read only)

if he wants:)

 

PLEASE PROVIDE FACTS BEFORE FLAMES.

 

Here is my list. I have triedto be neutral here!

 

NNTP pros:

-

  • Quick access. Personally I always have my email reader open, and the NNTP

is within the same app.

  • Quick overview. You can see instantly how many posting and a list of

topics

  • Cheap serving. There are lot of free noad servers out there.

  • Fast navigation.

  • Compact view

  • More spam resistant (that does not go for NNTP in general, but cadsoft's

forum has very little of it, if any at all)

  • Lowcost bandwidth

  • Low complexity

  • Several free apps to use it

  • It takes a lot less time to get through all messages than on HTTP.

  • No need to register

 

NNTP cons:

-

  • Port access. Some paranoid network administrators block NNTP port access.

  • Not very noob friendly. If you havent used a NNTP reader before, you need

to learn and get used to it.

  • Messages may look "boring" in plain text.

  • Text wrapping and quoting easily get messed up; in general not very

formatting friendly

  • Search unfriendly. All search has to happen on local copy of the message

list.

  • First time access load of all old messages takes a long time (maybe

Cadsoft has a low bandwidth to their servers?)

  • Sometimes need an extra app

 

HTTP pros:

-

  • Colors, emoticons, larger attachments (well, that is possible with NNTP

too, but not likely). In theory NNTP can do HTML content, but that is not

likely to happen.

  • Easier to get to

  • Normally doesnt need an extra app; most users already got a browser

installed.

 

HTTP cons:

-

  • I normally don't have a browser open at all times, and it takes a few

seconds to load the browser, even if I make a shortcut link to the site.

  • Navigation complexity. I have only see one forum which has a nice way of

navigating, but it only does plain text too.

  • Navigation speed. Moving from one message to the next is slower than NNTP.

  • Currently two custom 'accents' (element14 or eaglecentral) that needs to

be learned. There exist some common web forum formats, but afaik none of

them are used.

  • Higher cost and complexity of serving

  • Spam protection is harder

  • User account normally needed

 

 

Ok, thats all I can think of right now. Maybe you have something to add?

 

 

 

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

    "Morten Leikvoll" wrote:

     

    >"Olin Lathrop" <eagle@embedinc.com> wrote in message

    >news:i99hb5$afm$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

    >>...

    >> problem can be solved in various ways.  If I were doing it, I'd eliminate

    >> the silly emoticon icons from the web interface and be done with it.  If

    >>...

    >What is the difference between your ideal way of doing it and a GOOD (maybe

    >vaporware) nntp web interface?

     

    from Olin's postings, I extract

     

    • "HTML-like links",

    • inline pictures,

    • larger attachments.

     

    Maybe I missed something, but I don't expect something important

    beyond this.

     

    The other things like displaying /italics/ bold underline etc. can

    be done also with a NNTP web interface (if the user wants such

    gadgets).

     

    Hidden links and inline pictures are also cosmetic, so remains storage

    for large files. That can be an upload area dedicated to the

    discussion groups (I already mentioned the SwitcherCad mailing list).

     

    Oliver

     

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

    Olin Lathrop wrote:

     

    >Clearly Element-14 has a problem translating emoticons into text, however

     

    Mainly I meant that the happy.gif picture is not better than three

    ASCII letters ":-)". The stuff around is just another e14 issue.

     

    But the lack of a thread view (and therefore the unsorted postings

    from e14) is much worse.

     

    Oliver

     

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

    Morten Leikvoll wrote on Fri, 15 October 2010 08:51

    What is the difference between your ideal way of doing it and a GOOD

    (maybe vaporware) nntp web interface?

     

    Many, as I have already enumerated above and earlier.

     

    --

    Web access to CadSoft support forums at www.eaglecentral.ca.  Where the CadSoft EAGLE community meets.

     

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

    "Olin Lathrop" <eagle@embedinc.com> wrote in message

    news:i99hb5$afm$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

    >...

    problem can be solved in various ways.  If I were doing it, I'd eliminate

    the silly emoticon icons from the web interface and be done with it.  If

    >...

     

    What is the difference between your ideal way of doing it and a GOOD (maybe

    vaporware) nntp web interface?

     

     

     

     

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

    Oliver Betz wrote on Fri, 15 October 2010 03:34

     

    (displaying

    http://www.element-14.com/community/4.5.3/images/emoticons/happy.gif)

    is of course much better than a simple ":-)" which can't be understood

    by today's users.

     

    I know you said you're being cynical, but this kind of comment doesn't

    help.  Let's keep a clear distinction between problems with the existing

    implementation, and issues with the underlying concept.

     

    Clearly Element-14 has a problem translating emoticons into text, however

    that is not a fundamental problem of forum to text interfaces.  This

    problem can be solved in various ways.  If I were doing it, I'd eliminate

    the silly emoticon icons from the web interface and be done with it.  If

    you really wanted to keep them, just have each expand to a predefined set

    of characters.

     

    Again, let's not have the Element-14 bashing (much of it well deserved)

    confuse people into thinking the problems are inherent to web to text

    interfaces (which most of them are not).

    --

    Web access to CadSoft support forums at www.eaglecentral.ca.  Where the CadSoft EAGLE community meets.

     

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

    Olin Lathrop wrote:

     

     

    >posts are stored and organized as forum posts.  That means the richer

    >meta-information like formatting, in-line images, HTML-like links (you can

    >make clickable words with the actual link text hidden), and a number of

    >other nice features are all preserved in the database.

    >The rich features would be converted to a plain text format on demand by

    >the NNTP interface software.  Most features have obvious enough mappings to

     

     

    I see. image

    (displaying

    http://www.element-14.com/community/4.5.3/images/emoticons/happy.gif)

    is of course much better than a simple ":-)" which can't be understood

    by today's users.

     

    For so much benefit, we can also give up correct threading. Not to

    mention well-considered postings.

    </cynical>

     

    Will June 2010 be as eternal as September 1993? At least it seems to

    be worse.

     

    SCNR

     

    Oliver

     

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

     

    Morten Leikvoll wrote on Fri, 08 October 2010 04:01

    • Not very noob friendly. If you havent used a NNTP reader before, you

    need to learn and get used to it.

     

    >"Olin Lathrop"  replied

    ............Don't understimate this.  Anyone who didn't use newsgroups in

    the 1990s

    simply isn't going to use NNTP.  ........They will also view Farnell as

    stuck in

    the stone age if they don't have a good web forum.

    ......

     

     

    Wrong! I am a recent adopter of NNTP (only for Cadsoft). I'm a fan and

    prefer it by far over the many and varied web forums for reasons of speed.

     

    "On the go" web access for mobile devices will see the modern revival  of

    NNTP (or similar). The smart company will repackage its NNTP as a light

    weight mobile service. Out of the stone age in one leap!

    So I see all three avenues coexisting. NNTP and a mobile service (view)

    along with the full experience desktop web site.

     

    Warren

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • in reply to e14 Contributor

    Morten Leikvoll Inscribed thus:

     

    "Klaus Schmidinger" <Klaus.Schmidinger@cadsoft.de> wrote in message

    news:i8mk94$pqg$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

    >> Our server is connected through a 100Mbit/s line - should be fast

    >> enough.

     

    Hmm.. Do you have any explanation why downloading the full, say

    eagle.userchat.eng takes so long?

    Is it just something in NNTP's nature, or is it just file access of

    several small files that does it?

    Loading headers only is fast, but messages is at the rate of 1-10 pr

    second. Having 5209 messages, this is enough to give up waiting..

     

    I'm on 50Mbit and here is my tracert:

     

    Tracing route to cheetah.cadsoft.de

    over a maximum of 30 hops:

     

      1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  10.20.0.1

      2    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  79.161.3.29.static.lyse.net

     

      3    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  209.81-167-101.customer.lyse.net

      4    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  233.84-234-190.customer.lyse.net

      5    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  138.213-167-114.customer.lyse.net

      6    14 ms    13 ms    13 ms  118.81-166-123.customer.lyse.net

      7    14 ms    15 ms    14 ms  init7.dix.dk

      8    26 ms    26 ms    26 ms  r1ams1.core.init7.net

      9    32 ms    32 ms    35 ms  r1fra1.core.init7.net

    10    32 ms    32 ms    32 ms  gw-hetzner.init7.net

    11    37 ms    37 ms    37 ms  hos-bb1.juniper2.fs.hetzner.de

    12    37 ms    37 ms    37 ms  hos-tr3.ex3k2.rz10.hetzner.de

    13    39 ms    37 ms    37 ms  cheetah.cadsoft.de

     

    Trace complete.

     

    Here is mine FWIW. I'm in the UK.

     

    traceroute to 188.40.46.46 (188.40.46.46), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets

    using UDP

    1  Lan  17.768 ms   12.271 ms   100.270 ms

    2  * * *

    3  * * *

    4  * * *

    5  * xe-9-2-0.edge3.London1.Level3.net (212.113.15.69)  21.757 ms 

    22.860 ms

    6  ae-34-52.ebr2.London1.Level3.net (4.69.139.97)  23.002 ms   23.766

    ms   24.037 ms

    7  ae-45-45.ebr2.Amsterdam1.Level3.net (4.69.143.69)  30.528 ms

    ae-46-46.ebr2.Amsterdam1.Level3.net (4.69.143.73)  31.964 ms

    ae-47-47.ebr2.Amsterdam1.Level3.net (4.69.143.77)  30.667 ms

    8  ae-1-100.ebr1.Amsterdam1.Level3.net (4.69.141.169)  30.620 ms 

    29.451 ms   31.002 ms

    9  ae-47-47.ebr2.Dusseldorf1.Level3.net (4.69.143.206)  33.580 ms

    ae-45-45.ebr2.Dusseldorf1.Level3.net (4.69.143.198)  34.502 ms   35.209

    ms

    10  ae-1-100.ebr1.Dusseldorf1.Level3.net (4.69.141.149)  37.921 ms 

    42.508 ms   41.281 ms

    11  ae-45-45.ebr2.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.143.166)  37.459 ms

    ae-46-46.ebr2.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.143.170)  40.167 ms

    ae-45-45.ebr2.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.143.166)  36.962 ms

    12  ae-82-82.csw3.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.140.26)  37.093 ms 

    41.820 ms ae-62-62.csw1.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.69.140.18)  44.650 ms

    13  ae-1-69.edge3.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.68.23.11)  38.717 ms

    ae-3-89.edge3.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.68.23.139)  38.018 ms

    ae-2-79.edge3.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (4.68.23.75)  38.350 ms

    14  HETZNER-ONL.edge3.Frankfurt1.Level3.net (212.162.40.206)  36.456 ms 

    36.184 ms   35.698 ms

    15  hos-bb1.juniper1.fs.hetzner.de (213.239.240.242)  43.514 ms

    hos-bb1.juniper2.fs.hetzner.de (213.239.240.243)  41.793 ms

    hos-bb1.juniper1.fs.hetzner.de (213.239.240.242)  41.623 ms

    16  hos-tr3.ex3k2.rz10.hetzner.de (213.239.227.195)  41.380 ms

    hos-tr2.ex3k2.rz10.hetzner.de (213.239.227.163)  40.579 ms

    hos-tr4.ex3k2.rz10.hetzner.de (213.239.227.227)  42.186 ms

    end

     

    --

    Best Regards:

                         Baron.

     

  • "Morten Leikvoll" wrote:

     

    >For the ones that can't hold it back, here you can put your pro's and con's

     

    Good compilation.

     

    Threading and efficient user interface are my most important

    arguments.

     

    >NNTP cons:

    >* Text wrapping and quoting easily get messed up; in general not very

    >formatting friendly

     

    most forum software makes smart quoting very, very complicated. Ever

    tried to quote several parts separately, and to trim quotes? So this

    is a NNTP con only if someone makes a really web good forum software.

     

    >HTTP pros:

    >----

    >* Colors, emoticons,

     

    I want to transport facts, not play with fancy emoticons. I found that

    most people don't need long to understand ASCII emoticons. And it's

    typed much faster than selected with the mouse. Well, no problem for

    me if the gateway translates it. BTW: IM clients use ASCII to encode

    emoticons.

     

    larger attachments (well, that is possible with NNTP

     

    File storage can be separate (IOW an addition) from the discussion

    solution. Look at the SwitcherCad mailing list.

     

    Oliver

     

  • Oops, sorry for that posting. It was the horrible ctrl+enter thing in

    outlook express....

     

    "Morten Leikvoll" <mleikvol@yahoo.nospam> wrote in message

    news:i8n521$fpv$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

     

    "Olin Lathrop" <eagle@embedinc.com> wrote in message

    news:i8n337$2ua$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

     

    (Catching up here)

    <deleted:too many arguments>

     

    The BIG con of html after reading you comments is that the perfect html

    interface is vaporware.

    Who wants to pay for the development and testing?