[02/03] and [2005]

**mendhak** · Mar 30th, 2006, 04:55 AM

This is a good feature implemented in the VB.NET forum, but can those strings be changed to something a little more coherent?

**RobDog888** · Mar 30th, 2006, 04:56 AM

So your saying that "[2005]" is to vague to determine if they are running VS 2005?

**conipto** · Mar 30th, 2006, 05:25 AM

Maybe [VB2002/3] and [VB2005] might be a little better...

Bill

**RobDog888** · Mar 30th, 2006, 05:31 AM

Maybe but then it makes the thread subject longer. Especially when its resolved.

"[RESOLVED] [VB2002/2003] Help me fix my program. I am a noob!"

Besides if they cant figure out that its a VB thread in the VB forum then there are other issues going on.

**penagate** · Mar 30th, 2006, 05:35 AM

I like the 1.0/1.1 and 2.0 better (C# forum). But I guess they refer to language versions rather than framework versions. Maybe the question should be what version of the framework - then it could be shorter.

**RobDog888** · Mar 30th, 2006, 05:39 AM

Yes, but it was felt that many members may not know the framework version in the vb.net forum until they come into issues with it or get more advnced. Its hard enough trying to get a member to post their year version let alone their framework version.

C# probably has a bit more of the advnaced programmer in there as many members come from the C++ or Java/JavaScript background making the transition to .NET. Most will usually know the framework version and plus dont forget that there is also LINQ in the C# forum. So framework versions are better suited in there.

**penagate** · Mar 30th, 2006, 05:41 AM

Well, it can be

Please select your version of the .NET framework:
1.0/1.1 (VB 2002/2003)
2.0 (VB 2005)

If anyone finds this confusing they shouldn't be programmers.

**RobDog888** · Mar 30th, 2006, 05:45 AM

During thread creation that is true but at the forum level view it will still only show - "[1.0/1.1] Please help me. Gimme code!".

**penagate** · Mar 30th, 2006, 05:48 AM

Well if you are advanced enough to need to know if the member is using 2002/2003 or 2005 in the first place then you obviously know the difference between the framework versions so I don't see the issue

**RobDog888** · Mar 30th, 2006, 05:52 AM

Its more of the way things work in vb.net forum I guess as usually we always have to ask - "What version of vb are you running?" and "Is it VB Express?" etc. From that we know what framework version they are running. Even if they say [2.0] you still need to know if its Express so its a toss up either way.

I'm sure in a while we will get others opinions on this but so far everybody seems to be able to figure it out as it is. No announcements needed either.

**mendhak** · Mar 30th, 2006, 08:05 AM

Originally Posted by RobDog888

So your saying that "[2005]" is to vague to determine if they are running VS 2005?

Yes. 02/03 is even more un-understandable.

**mendhak** · Mar 30th, 2006, 08:06 AM

Also, the ASP.NET section could really use this new feature.

**RobDog888** · Mar 30th, 2006, 08:21 AM

Yes, we are currently getting this feature optimized and streamlined for use where appropriate and ASP.NET is the next in line if we are able to implement it in another forum. Also, the Databases forum is a good candidate but it isdifferent from the others in its versions as it has more options so it will be harder to put in place there.

**kleinma** · Mar 30th, 2006, 12:43 PM

its funny but this thread and its feedback are very very similar to the thread in the admin forum about creating this new feature.. all the things you guys suggested were mentioned by moderators, and we weighed the pros and cons of using VS version versus framework version, or both, etc....

we felt what we picked was the shortest while still giving the needed info to the potential answerers of the question...

not to say it may not be changed at some point. I just wanted to let you know we didnt just go with our first thought..

**conipto** · Mar 31st, 2006, 02:47 AM

Rather than put it at the thread level, can you change the "What VB Version are you using" in the profile to a combo box and display it on the left with the user info? One of the options could be "Multiple", in which case one might expect that users using multiple versions would probably have the forethought to mention which version they were using in the thread..

Bill

**si_the_geek** · Mar 31st, 2006, 04:33 PM

In theory that's good, but typically the people who need to let people know which version they are using are new to the forum - and hence are less likely to have their profile set up 'properly'.

**gigemboy** · Mar 31st, 2006, 05:11 PM

what was funny is when I first saw "02/03" I thought it was a typo... then realized my stupidity when I figured out it was "2002/2003".. i had even used 2002 for quite some time before getting 2003, but hadnt read anyone mentioning it for quite some time... (even edited my thread to say "[2003]") before realizing)

**conipto** · Mar 31st, 2006, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by si_the_geek

In theory that's good, but typically the people who need to let people know which version they are using are new to the forum - and hence are less likely to have their profile set up 'properly'.

Couldn't you make it mandatory on signup, like.. location is?

Bill

**RobDog888** · Mar 31st, 2006, 08:29 PM

No because it would involve more coding then just the new post template. Too much work for the little benefit.

Plus, what about when they upgrade .net versions? Or if they are running multiple versions side by side?

Location, you mean time zone?

**|2eM!x** · Mar 31st, 2006, 09:34 PM

Can it be added to the post instead of the topic title?

**RobDog888** · Mar 31st, 2006, 10:02 PM

Why would you want it in the message of a post? You wouldnt be able to see what verswion the thread was about.

**|2eM!x** · Apr 1st, 2006, 07:39 PM

I just find it annoying.

Why not have an 05,03,02 picture to go at the button where it says "You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:" and have it set the icon to something else..That would definately be a better solution.

**kleinma** · Apr 2nd, 2006, 08:07 AM

I am sorry, but

1) You don't HAVE to use the feature
2) if you don't know what version of Visual Studio you are using, you really should not be programming. Period.

I think sometimes people just like to complain because they have nothing else to complain about at the moment.

**|2eM!x** · Apr 2nd, 2006, 12:18 PM

Well isnt that the point of the feedback forum? So I should not post my opinions?

**kleinma** · Apr 2nd, 2006, 03:20 PM

well you guys need to understand that making changes to the way the forum software works is a big deal. We are limited to what we can do because each time the forum software is updated, we need to reimplement and test any "hacks" we have made to it, because an update could break the functionality, and by default an upgrade "erases" the hacks and they need to be added to the code again.

We are generally limited to JS only modifications, so what we can offer can be limited at times.

You can post your opinions here, of course that is what FF is for, but for you to say

I just find it annoying.

is really pretty useless to us as far as feedback goes. A feature that is 100% optional, that you DON'T have to use, that is only there for people who want to make their questions easier to answer, but you find it "annoying"....

thanks for the feedback

**szlamany** · Apr 2nd, 2006, 04:08 PM

Come spend some time in the DB forum where people say SQL and mean just about anything under the sun...

It usually takes 3 posts just to land on what the DB is and I've actually seen it called one thing and in reality be something else...

**si_the_geek** · Apr 2nd, 2006, 04:47 PM

Oh yes... and it's not the only thing there either!

We thought about the same kind of thing for the DB forum too, unfortunately there are so many things we could ask (and so many answers for each) that it seems to not be worthwhile, eg:

Database: Access 97 / Access 2000 ... / SQL Server 2000 / SQL Server 2005 / MSDE / MySQL 4.1 .... / Oracle / ...

Front-end language: Access VBA / VB (5 or 6) / VB.Net (versions!) / ....

Connection method: None / ADODB / DAO / ADO Data Control / DataSet / ...

I think we'll just have to keep on pushing for the info from people who dont volunteer it!

**brad jones** · Apr 2nd, 2006, 04:55 PM

I wanted to chime in and say that I do appreciate all feedback that is constructive. Stating that you believe the 'date selection' is annoying is a valid opinion, so I have no issue with it being shared here in the feedback forum if that is what you truly feel.

Brad!

**|2eM!x** · Apr 2nd, 2006, 08:57 PM

Originally Posted by si_the_geek

Oh yes... and it's not the only thing there either!

Database: Access 97 / Access 2000 ... / SQL Server 2000 / SQL Server 2005 / MSDE / MySQL 4.1 .... / Oracle / ...

Front-end language: Access VBA / VB (5 or 6) / VB.Net (versions!) / ....

Connection method: None / ADODB / DAO / ADO Data Control / DataSet / ...

We thought about the same kind of thing for the DB forum too, unfortunately there are so many things we could ask (and so many answers for each) that it seems to not be worthwhile, eg:
I think we'll just have to keep on pushing for the info from people who dont volunteer it!

Thats where I think it should be put inside the post instead of the post title, dont you agree?

**jmcilhinney** · Apr 2nd, 2006, 10:29 PM

There is no perfect solution to this issue. Surely though anyone who is looking to PROVIDE help can work out what [02/03] or [2005] mean. Those seeking help have a slightly more informative description when making a selection in the first place. To say that it is annoying seems odd to me. I find it way more annoying to spend time creating a solution for someone only to have them say that it doesn't work because they are using a different version, or find that their would have been a better or simpler solution had I known that they were using 2005. I think that this is as good as or better than any other imperfect solution would be. It's concise: brief and clear. It's possible to avoid opening threads for a particular version if you want with the version in the title.

**|2eM!x** · Apr 2nd, 2006, 10:37 PM

Originally Posted by jmcilhinney

There is no perfect solution to this issue. Surely though anyone who is looking to PROVIDE help can work out what [02/03] or [2005] mean. Those seeking help have a slightly more informative description when making a selection in the first place. To say that it is annoying seems odd to me. I find it way more annoying to spend time creating a solution for someone only to have them say that it doesn't work because they are using a different version, or find that their would have been a better or simpler solution had I known that they were using 2005. I think that this is as good as or better than any other imperfect solution would be. It's concise: brief and clear. It's possible to avoid opening threads for a particular version if you want with the version in the title.

I just think its rather obtrusive in the title of the thread. For me I would rather it be a picture on the side or something inside the post. I do see your side of the argument though..

**RobDog888** · Apr 3rd, 2006, 02:10 AM

I see your point on using the subject icon to differentiate the versions but that is beyond the possibility and effort with what have have to work with.

Basically its a plus to have the versions in the thread titles as if you only know one version you dont have to read a thread and find out you cant help with it because you dont have that version.

**|2eM!x** · Apr 6th, 2006, 08:58 PM

Its growing on me

Anywho, is there a reason that its [2005] when the others are 02 and 03? Just wondering if its a mistake and should be [05] ?

Just wondering

**Hack** · Apr 7th, 2006, 07:01 AM

Originally Posted by |2eM!x

Its growing on me

Anywho, is there a reason that its [2005] when the others are 02 and 03? Just wondering if its a mistake and should be [05] ?

Just wondering

It was a decision made based on string length. We wanted it to be sufficient enough to be able to distinguish between the versions but not so long that it could interview with the actual thread title. This is why it isn't [2002/2003]. However [02/03] and [2005] are the exact same string length (6 characters)

**RobDog888** · Apr 7th, 2006, 08:09 AM

Hey Hack, "[02/03]" = 7

**Hack** · Apr 7th, 2006, 08:39 AM

Originally Posted by RobDog888

Hey Hack, "[02/03]" = 7

I just wanted to see if anyone was paying attention.

*Slinks off*

**RobDog888** · Apr 7th, 2006, 09:06 AM

I guess the Hack will need to be upgraded with Orcas comes out in less then a year.

**penagate** · Apr 7th, 2006, 09:10 AM

Maybe this thread has outlived itself

**JPnyc** · Apr 7th, 2006, 10:42 AM

No biggie. I'll just add another radio button.

Thread: [02/03] and [2005]

Thread Tools

Display

[02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Re: [02/03] and [2005]

Posting Permissions