Number of "items" per page...

Xyzzy · 2002-10-20, 05:32

I set the BBS to have ten threads per page in the thread view and ten posts per page in the page view...

Is this too much or too little?

Remember, there are people on dialup still... I imagine 100 posts per page takes some time to download... (The old setting was 100!)

Deamiter · 2002-10-20, 05:35

I'd like to see at least 20-25... It's nice to have a better feel for where the threads have been ending, and of course, when the boards are really hot, it's a pain to switch pages to find a recent thread.

[edit] oh yeah, it DEFINATELY needs more. those hot threads are now out to 6 pages! On other boards I've seen a user option to set the number of threads when they're logged in... maybe you could keep it at 20 for default, and give us the option to change it? With a T1, I'd definatly like to see the entire thread as fast as possible, though I understand why some might not (I too ran on a 22.8 once

) [/edit]

garo · 2002-10-20, 05:36

Yeah I'm on dialup here and 10 is way too less. Make it 20 or 25.

Xyzzy · 2002-10-20, 05:38

I turned this into a poll... If you vote please explain your answer so we can take your needs into consideration...

pro · 2002-10-20, 13:09

I'm on dial-up and I agree that 10 posts or threads per page is too small. I belong to another board where this figure is set to 50 and this has always seemed a suitable figure. So my vote is for 50.

Peter

Lord_Humungous · 2002-10-20, 15:05

I'm on crappy dial-up and 20-25 loads just fine.

adpowers · 2002-10-20, 16:54

10 is too small for the hot threads because it is hard to go to a particular spot (if you don't remember the page) and you it is a pain to switch between pages. I voted for 50.

Also, have you considered mod_gzip (if you are on Apache)? This considerably cut down my bandwidth usuage (which was a lot of text).

Andrew

Xyzzy · 2002-10-20, 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by adpowers

Also, have you considered mod_gzip (if you are on Apache)? This considerably cut down my bandwidth usuage (which was a lot of text).

We have gzip... Look at the bottom of every page...

:)

As many hits as this site has, we really use very little bandwidth...

http://www.teamprimerib.com/WWW_REPORTS/www.html

Note that this is for more than one website... It is broken down by URL somewhere in there...

Deamiter · 2002-10-20, 19:46

the more I think about it, the more I'd like to see a user option in the profile page. Just thought I'd throw it at you again in case you missed my edit 8)

dswanson · 2002-10-20, 20:12

I voted 25, but I agree with Deamiter - it would be really nice to make this a user preference.

I hadn't really noticed a problem with the length of the page views, but the thread view was definitely getting too long in a couple of the forums (fora?)

[edit] Actually, now that I'm paying attention, 10 per page in the thread view looks pretty good [/edit][/code]

Xyzzy · 2002-10-21, 00:00

There are several BBS programs out there that have excellent features, but there isn't one that has all of them... :(

In our case, a user option is not available...

Another option I'd kill for is sorting the thread view by different criteria on the fly...

The poll is set for three days so get your votes in!

View Poll Results: How many "items" per page do you want?
0, I am not currently running gimps, there is no client for my PDA.	3	1.45%
1, I believe GIMPS is a good use of my time, but am not so in to it as a hobby.	21	10.14%
2-3, I have a small home network, or have my home and work machine on gimps.	23	11.11%
4-6, I have a small network at home/a few machines at work I admin.	22	10.63%
7-15, It is an obcession, true, but one I dreadfully enjoy. This is my mark on history.	14	6.76%
16+, I have the warmest apartment/have access to a large number of business or school-lab computers. My(coworkers/students) enjoy that they are making a difference and history.	20	9.66%
C	2	0.97%
D	6	2.90%
A	7	3.38%
B	3	1.45%
E	3	1.45%
F	3	1.45%
G	6	2.90%
H	1	0.48%
I	1	0.48%
Yes! Subforums are a great idea!	7	3.38%
No! I like thing the way they are!	12	5.80%
Yes!	8	3.86%
No!	10	4.83%
There are other projects?	5	2.42%
10	1	0.48%
20	1	0.48%
25	13	6.28%
50	9	4.35%
100	2	0.97%
All of them (!)	4	1.93%
Voters: 207. You may not vote on this poll

2002-10-20, 05:32	#1
Xyzzy "Mike" Aug 2002 2⁵·257 Posts	Number of "items" per page... I set the BBS to have ten threads per page in the thread view and ten posts per page in the page view... Is this too much or too little? Remember, there are people on dialup still... I imagine 100 posts per page takes some time to download... (The old setting was 100!)

2002-10-20, 13:09	#5
pro Aug 2002 Liverpool UK 5 Posts	Number of "items" per page... I'm on dial-up and I agree that 10 posts or threads per page is too small. I belong to another board where this figure is set to 50 and this has always seemed a suitable figure. So my vote is for 50. Peter

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
NFS@Home "Status of numbers" page to update	pinhodecarlos	NFS@Home	2	2015-07-04 11:18
Suggestions for the "Classic Summary" page	davieddy	PrimeNet	26	2011-06-13 09:38
Only 10 threads per page for "New Posts"?	Mystwalker	Forum Feedback	6	2007-03-04 14:45
suggestion: "check exponent status" page	ixfd64	Lounge	3	2004-05-27 00:51
"Factoring only" results / stats in account details page	schneelocke	PrimeNet	3	2004-01-07 22:12

2002-10-20, 05:35	#2
Deamiter Sep 2002 3²×13 Posts	I'd like to see at least 20-25... It's nice to have a better feel for where the threads have been ending, and of course, when the boards are really hot, it's a pain to switch pages to find a recent thread. [edit] oh yeah, it DEFINATELY needs more. those hot threads are now out to 6 pages! On other boards I've seen a user option to set the number of threads when they're logged in... maybe you could keep it at 20 for default, and give us the option to change it? With a T1, I'd definatly like to see the entire thread as fast as possible, though I understand why some might not (I too ran on a 22.8 once ) [/edit]

2002-10-20, 05:36	#3
garo Aug 2002 Termonfeckin, IE 2²×691 Posts	Yeah I'm on dialup here and 10 is way too less. Make it 20 or 25.

2002-10-20, 05:38	#4
Xyzzy "Mike" Aug 2002 2⁵·257 Posts	I turned this into a poll... If you vote please explain your answer so we can take your needs into consideration...

2002-10-20, 15:05	#6
Lord_Humungous Aug 2002 23 Posts	I'm on crappy dial-up and 20-25 loads just fine.

2002-10-20, 16:54	#7
adpowers Sep 2002 2⁴·5 Posts	10 is too small for the hot threads because it is hard to go to a particular spot (if you don't remember the page) and you it is a pain to switch between pages. I voted for 50. Also, have you considered mod_gzip (if you are on Apache)? This considerably cut down my bandwidth usuage (which was a lot of text). Andrew

2002-10-20, 19:46	#9
Deamiter Sep 2002 3²×13 Posts	the more I think about it, the more I'd like to see a user option in the profile page. Just thought I'd throw it at you again in case you missed my edit 8)

2002-10-20, 20:12	#10
dswanson Aug 2002 2³·5² Posts	I voted 25, but I agree with Deamiter - it would be really nice to make this a user preference. I hadn't really noticed a problem with the length of the page views, but the thread view was definitely getting too long in a couple of the forums (fora?) [edit] Actually, now that I'm paying attention, 10 per page in the thread view looks pretty good [/edit][/code]

2002-10-21, 00:00	#11
Xyzzy "Mike" Aug 2002 2⁵×257 Posts	There are several BBS programs out there that have excellent features, but there isn't one that has all of them... :( In our case, a user option is not available... Another option I'd kill for is sorting the thread view by different criteria on the fly... The poll is set for three days so get your votes in!