RM 1.0 Resource Manager Feedback and Thoughts

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mike

XenForo developer
Staff member
There has been a considerable amount of discussion and comments on the Resource Manager since it has been implemented... not all of which has been positive. ;) However, I do want to mention that it is still early days and what you're seeing borders on the "minimum viable product" (MVP) concept and will be improved. You can't develop a product solely in a vacuum -- you need to see how it works when people use it and that's when you discover things that need to be changed.

We have taken a lot of feedback on board, and there are various features that we're looking at. Some of these include:
  • Purchase support for resources (both for a "single owner" like a shop and "app store" style)
  • Custom resource fields (by category, ideally)
  • Category hierarchy
  • Review support for ratings
  • Better limits on who can rate
  • And some others :)
Conversely, there are some suggestions that we don't necessarily agree with and some considerations that need to be taken into account that might not be immediately obvious. I want to cover some of these suggestions to let you know what we think and to try to foster some in-depth discussion. I feel that a lot of the initial thoughts that have been posted have not necessarily thought about other perspectives or what the purpose of X is.

The Resource Manager is a "general use" add-on

This means that despite it only being used on XenForo.com, it's designed to be used by other people with different requirements and desires. As such, when we implement something, we can't just hack in something specific for XF.com. It needs to be approached in a more generic way. Sometimes this way is obvious and most ideas can be spun into something more generic, but it always means more work -- the amount more is what varies, sometimes orders of magnitude more.

The category sidebar should be on the right to be consistent

I find this a slightly weird suggestion and one I don't really understand completely.

First, you'll note that the right sidebar you see on most pages contains less important information. In most cases, if it weren't there, you'd still be able to get around. The category sidebar is the primary navigation system within the resource manager, so it deserves a more prominent display. Most sites either use top- and/or left-based navigation system; I can't think of one with primary navigation in a right column.

Second, it's not actually inconsistent. There are various other places in XenForo that use left-column navigation: Help, the account pages, and automatic page node navigation.

The Resource Manager is a shop front for digital downloads / discussions in resources

(I'm aware of the irony of me calling it that when you can't sell individual items directly, but as we've repeatedly said, it's something we want, but wasn't part of the MVP.)

The talk about whether discussions should be in resources gets to the heart of what the purpose of the Resource Manager is. Foremost, the RM is designed to be a shop front for digital downloads - like Amazon (they do digital downloads :)) and your pick of app stores. The primary purpose is to make it easier to discover resources and to keep up to date with them.

Going back to just using threads means that updates to resources are intermixed with general questions, so if you're running add-on X, you have to watch the thread if you want to be informed of updates, but then you're forced to wade through the other stuff to find updates. The RM solves that by allowing you to watch a resource and be notified whenever it's updated, not when there's a comment. Always keep in mind that there are a large number of people that don't post in the add-on threads at all; they just use them. (The same way we have plenty of customers that never post here and probably haven't even registered and have never had "human" contact with us.)

So, this leads me into a few philosophical sounding questions...

In the context of resources, what are discussions? Is it saying that you love it or it worked well (or you hate it)? The reviews system (which would display within a resource) seems to handle that. Is it saying thanks (or other form of appreciation)? The like system and possibly reviews can solve that, but regardless that doesn't make for compelling reading for most others. :)

So, then we have functionality questions, support, and suggestions. (Anything else I can't think of?) So if the thread is made up of that, what is the distinct value of including that in the resource? Keep in mind that you can always watch the thread if you're interested in more than just the resource (which a lot of people aren't). As a matter of fact, doesn't using the thread system make it easier to work with the comments on resources if you feel they're very important? They keep the visibility via new/recent threads, whereas they wouldn't be there if they were in the resource. There's also the question of whether it's actually worth it to implement all the additional functionality when we have a thread system, though that may vary on a case by case basis.

I do take that allowing the resource author to moderate their own thread would be cool.

Then, the next philosophical question, what is in a resource? Is it just keeping the layout? Is it showing when you view the resource from the list? I'm genuinely curious about this. In theory, we could make the resource threads not show up in what's new and only be discoverable via the resource system. You'd only get updates to them if you watched them. While that would appear to be "in" the resource (the technical implementation notwithstanding), but what's the benefit?

I am after some serious discussion on this, as I'm trying to understand the mindset -- the discussion just seems to pale in comparison to the importance of the resource (for people looking for resources), and the fact that I don't need to ever visit the resource itself to keep up with the discussion means that I don't see a disadvantage to the thread system.

Resources as a "forum" (multiple discussions)

I understand this idea, and it's not unreasonable as a general concept, though it isn't a priority based on what I mentioned earlier: the focus of the resource is on the resource and keeping up to date with it. It's also a big undertaking. :)

In terms of XF.com, there are some add-ons (in particular) that it'd be useful for, but there's nothing preventing authors from setting up their own areas that consist of more than one thread. People will have different approaches and desires with this, so I don't think they should necessarily be shoehorned into a particular approach. You might say that the thread is a particular approach, but the thread isn't required--we have locked one as the author requested support via his site--and there may be some changes to emphasize that down the line. I'm not sure yet.





I'm sure there are more things I'll come up with, but I think that's enough for now...
 
Here's my rather rough mock.

I'm not too good with GIMP so didn't rename those forums there but you can image those saying
  1. (Resource Name) Feedback
  2. (Resource Name) Support
  3. (Resource Name) Modifications
One forum category for each resource seems to be a bit overboard. Wouldn't one forum with pinned Feedback, Support and Modifications threads be sufficient enough? The RM might end up being one big bloat.

Not sure if forum even needed at all. I still very much like the way add-on and style threads are designed at vB.org.
 
I have to disagree with the menu on the left comments Mike.

It is inconsistent, despite there being a few "little used" places like help, pages etc where left menu is used on XF, the majority of the time the eyes are looking right to the sidebar, to content within threads, currently within the RM our eyes are instantly drawn to the rating stars, which, as has already been discussed ad infinitum are not working out so great... the info you are drawn to is not important, thus it is easy to get visually confused, add to that the user avatars (more unimportant visual information) and over all the experience is not clean is not clear, is not XF.

On the threads/discussions within Resources... I am infinitely glad you have removed that out, nothing worse than when one is considering installing an Add On, and then faced with a 50 page discussion with every minor problem, or change etc, that are no longer relevant... I like the suggestion of displaying the forum list for discussions/support whatever below the Resource, that is a beauty.

I have great hopes for the RM, and am sure once it is bedded down it will be fantastic.
 
One forum category for each resource seems to be a bit overboard. Wouldn't one forum with pinned Feedback, Support and Modifications threads be sufficient enough? The RM might end up being one big bloat.

Could be overkill then again for the larger more widely used mods it could be better, I take your point though. More than anything I was just trying to illustrate that you could have a forum per resource and it wouldn't look out of place. :)

Not sure if forum even needed at all. I still very much like the way add-on and style threads are designed at vB.org.
Indeed the system worked well there for years upon years but overall I do like the XF take on it.
 
Overall, developing this behind closed doors didn't yield a superior product.
I heard someone say earlier that the release of the Resource Manager wasn't very "Xenforo"-like.
And I can understand those sentiments.

Everything is developed behind closed doors up to a point, xF was no different than RM. There isn't a product delivered yet, there's a reason its a beta and not for sale. If K&M thought it was "done" and "good enough", it'd already be up for sale. The fact that it was done the way it is, says "There are issues, it's not complete, we want your feedback.".

Look back at how many requests for changes, features and whatnot were done (and still happen) for xF alone, it's no different here. Not everything is for everyone and ultimately if you don't like something, you can change it yourself or pay someone to code you what you want, even if that's a modified RM.

Unfortunately, when asked for feedback, most people (not calling you out) think that that means if they don't personally like something, the devs are going to change it. Not even close to the truth. If the majority of the people dislike something, things get changed. If there's wisdom in the requests, things get changed (as referenced by the suggestions made that have already been completed).

Also, M&K define what is "XenForo like", no one else. So to say such a thing makes no sense. To say it's different than the forum, would make sense. But the overall design and philosophy behind xF is not determined by us.

All in all, you're not going to find me saying the RM is perfect, but then again, K&M aren't saying so either. Work needs to be done, will be done and is being done.
 
Also, M&K define what is "XenForo like", no one else. So to say such a thing makes no sense. To say it's different than the forum, would make sense. But the overall design and philosophy behind xF is not determined by us.
It's obvious what DD meant was that this time there was no wow factor like the one XenForo generated upon its introduction. And I agree with him on that.
 
I have to disagree with the menu on the left comments Mike.

It is inconsistent, despite there being a few "little used" places like help, pages etc where left menu is used on XF, the majority of the time the eyes are looking right to the sidebar, to content within threads, currently within the RM our eyes are instantly drawn to the rating stars, which, as has already been discussed ad infinitum are not working out so great... the info you are drawn to is not important, thus it is easy to get visually confused, add to that the user avatars (more unimportant visual information) and over all the experience is not clean is not clear, is not XF.

Yeah, I have to finally agree on that one. The "visual confusion" comes from the sidebar being first at the left, and then at the right.

http://xenforo.com/community/thread...and-not-in-line-with-xf-easy-interface.26813/
 
It's obvious what DD meant was that this time there was no wow factor like the one XenForo generated upon its introduction. And I agree with him on that.

It's got the wow factor from me if you consider that i went wow xenforo thinks it's acceptable for those wanting to use the RM your going to have to loose an arm and a leg and what i mean by an arm and leg your resources, members resources on your site your posts and their posts which chances are will not be re-posted. WoW indeed.

On that matter, I guess like notices initially disappointed. I feel the same with the RM considering I just can't see anything positive coming from separated resources/discussions. Hopefully I'm wrong about the whole thing but I can't see myself ever warming up to the separated resources/ugly unorganised discussions forum where it's all listed erratically only to keep the resource area clean. :sick:
 
Where has anyone said that the purpose for the resource manager would be anything but downloading resources?

I am talking of "Resources" which are e.g. images rather than files, e.g. a "Product Catalogue" consisting of images.

Having a permission of not being required of uploading a file, would do the trick.
 
I'm asking for genuine input. I have laid out quite a lot of the reasons it's approached like this and am open to feedback. A post like "if it doesn't do X I'm not buying it" doesn't really help if X is going to take months to develop properly and/or we don't think it's a good feature.

I have given (what I believe to be) a logical and reasoned explanation. I've been asking for people to tell me why they disagree, not just that they do. We can't do anything with that. I've asked open ended questions and given my interpretations, but if you want a different approach, then we need to understand it.

Another reason why I personally disagree with you (already posted and overlooked Mike) is and I'll have to repeat:

1. I click on what's new and find a resource i want to view
2. I get redirected to the discussion topic where I'm thinking "hmm before i respond I'll need to check the resource out".
3 clicks link to venture to the resource page
4. after viewing resource, click discuss button to venture back to the discussion thread to provide feedback, and/or ask for support or a suggestion

culprit - seperate dicssions/resources threads

It's just too much hoping around from one page to another which I have pointed out and posted. while you may not see this as a reasonable logical concern it's definitely a concern.

If it's going to take months to develop to make integrated threads/discussion a reality I can understand that and prepared to wait I'm not sure how complex it is to make this happen considering quite a few people don't want to loose resources on their sites. If you have no intention of ever including threads/discussions as an option it would be nice to know so I can probably still purchase the product and still support xenforo regardless. I can't be much clearer that that.

And this is genuine input considering I have a site providing resources and your asking me to throw away 90% of my posts (okay I have just over 300 not much ) only because I've held back posting resources waiting for the RM.
 
Shelley, not trying to argue with you here, you have your own reasons for wanting to keep things together (I want it that way as well). But can you refer me to what exactly is the problem you're facing that you'd have to "throw away 90%" of your posts? Just trying to understand the issue, could easily be something I have overlooked or something.

But, lets say things stay they way they are currently (split discussions in the RM and forums). Couldn't you create the initial entry in RM, that'd start the thread, then merge your old thread into the new one created by RM?

Like I said, I admit I don't understand the problem so... heh
 
Reminds me of the problem with no XenForo sponsored VB 4 importer and a member created that. It would be possible that another member could create a thread to RM importer. Anything is possible... Going to be tough for XenForo staff to create an importer that covers everyone's setup they currently have.

If you want to use the RM, there is probably going to be some growing pains getting old content into the new system...
 
The talk about whether discussions should be in resources gets to the heart of what the purpose of the Resource Manager is. Foremost, the RM is designed to be a shop front for digital downloads - like Amazon (they do digital downloads :)) and your pick of app stores. The primary purpose is to make it easier to discover resources and to keep up to date with them.

Going back to just using threads means that updates to resources are intermixed with general questions, so if you're running add-on X, you have to watch the thread if you want to be informed of updates, but then you're forced to wade through the other stuff to find updates. The RM solves that by allowing you to watch a resource and be notified whenever it's updated, not when there's a comment. Always keep in mind that there are a large number of people that don't post in the add-on threads at all; they just use them. (The same way we have plenty of customers that never post here and probably haven't even registered and have never had "human" contact with us.)

Hi Mike,

I highly appreciate you posting and sharing your thoughts. This approach is what excites me towards Xenforo, makes me feel that even if Xenforo doesn't suit all my needs, I would rather be on the XF ship than elsewhere as we have developers who actually care for customer feedback.

I posted some points on why I think that discussions should be within resources itself... Here's one point which I think is important...

It is bad from a search engine discovery point of view

At the most basic level, search engines like Google rank a page based on the content and keywords present in the page. Having discussions on the resource itself on a different page from the resource release distributes content and prevents one page from being the authority page on that topic. It won't be a problem with something like Add-On releases for Xenforo, for obviously there is no competition between two sites for say a XenPorta discussion, but for people releasing Resources on other things, like Documents or Wallpapers etc. this would be a major impact.

That point above goes at the heart of why some of us run websites. At the end of the day, we all want visitors, and as much as we debate on it, there is no escaping the fact that search engines, and primarily Google, provides traffic for most people.

Resources by their nature can be content rich or content poor. For our case, a resource is a document, where all the content is already present in the document itself and the resource interface is to be used for the purposes of sharing, version control, access control and separation. So In our case, there are always suggestions for improvement or additions to a resource which are very specific to the resource and hence valuable content. Distributing the two across two channels hurts us from a discovery point of view in a highly competitive niche.

In addition to above, let me address some of the specific "philosophical" questions you addressed...

So, this leads me into a few philosophical sounding questions...

In the context of resources, what are discussions? Is it saying that you love it or it worked well (or you hate it)? The reviews system (which would display within a resource) seems to handle that. Is it saying thanks (or other form of appreciation)? The like system and possibly reviews can solve that, but regardless that doesn't make for compelling reading for most others. :)


So, then we have functionality questions, support, and suggestions. (Anything else I can't think of?) So if the thread is made up of that, what is the distinct value of including that in the resource? Keep in mind that you can always watch the thread if you're interested in more than just the resource (which a lot of people aren't). As a matter of fact, doesn't using the thread system make it easier to work with the comments on resources if you feel they're very important? They keep the visibility via new/recent threads, whereas they wouldn't be there if they were in the resource. There's also the question of whether it's actually worth it to implement all the additional functionality when we have a thread system, though that may vary on a case by case basis.

The bold emphasis on reviews is mine in your above quote. I am sure you have looked at the Joomla Addons site. If the reviews system is planned to be like how they have (for instance take a look here) it would satisfy both camps. One who says that discussions should remain within threads, and others like me who want feedback on a comments system below the resource itself.

But to answer your original question, in the context of resources, from my planned usage point of view, discussions are feedback on the resource and suggestions for improvement lying on an authority page for the resource. It is important for almost everyone who downloads the resource because it presents the evolution path of the resource immediately to a new comer reading the discussion and prevents him from making the same conclusions as others who did not have the same info courtesy of the discussion on the resource.

This point, i am aware, is also true if discussions are kept within separate threads. However, for instance, if a resource is misleadingly labelled the discussion would pre-warn someone instead of having them suffer the same frustration as others might have already experienced. Again, if the review system allows for comments to be posted below the resource, that makes this point moot.

I would say that if the reviews system allows for comments below resources, I would in fact disable the auto resource discussion thread and remove the link and it would still serve my purpose. If however the review system again takes us to another page for reviews, we get back to where we started.
 
Reviews system sounds like music to my ears.
We need a way for people to submit reviews for a certain product, anonymously if at all possible.
We also need a way to separate reviews and comments. Maybe we can use a form so that reviews are formatted certain way.
 
Here's my rather rough mock.

I'm not too good with GIMP so didn't rename those forums there but you can imagine those saying
  1. (Resource Name) Feedback
  2. (Resource Name) Support
  3. (Resource Name) Modifications
EDIT: Shrunk the pic a bit

View attachment 24671
Agree!
that's something similar i posted here:
hrhr-png-rb-png.24198
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom