Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
A few months back, they adapted a two-tier system for display of emails- 'Focused' and 'Unfocused'. You have to keep switching between two screens to process your email and there seems no way to code mail from certain sources to be sure it appears as focused.
IMO far worse is what is now appearing in my 'Junk mail' box. Things I cannot even repeat on here with four letter words in the title, etc. Obviously trash that was just chucked off before it even got to my box under their previous setup.
Probably they are trying to get users to pay for an upgrade to something better.There seems no way to contact anyone at the service. Yes it is free, this just seems ridiculous even at that.
Login to Like
this post
Snick,
Just above your e-mail list, is a drop-down named "Filter". You can turn that dumb "focused" feature OFF from there. I also unwittingly gave myself the annoying focused feature, and it took me a while to find out how to quash it.
Good luck!
Login to Like
this post
When it went to Outlook from hotmail/live. I gave up then and went to Gmail.
Unfortunately Gmail are "improving their system" at the moment so goodness knows what scatterbrained idea they will come up with.
What is it with these companies? They have good systems and then they make "progress" by implementing a system, I presume designed by a 2 year old, that takes longer, and longer, and longer, and longer, to use.
Ebay's "Quick" listing system is the same. They done away with Turbolister, never replaced it, result it takes a lot lot lot lot longer to list items.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
"...What is it with these companies? They have good systems and then they make "progress" ..."
It may be hard to believe but developers do not lie awake at night trying to make a user’s life miserable. They are just like everyone else in a workplace; they would rather have everything stay the same. No one wants their job constantly changing. No one wants all the work they have previously completed to be tossed out and started over. No one wants to relearn new skills and tools just so they can get their job done. No one wants to go out and buy all new development tools.
I like to turn wrenches and I know more than anyone should know about fixing Studebakers. But I pop the hood on a new car and just shake my head. Is it the car companies or the engineers fault for moving ahead? They are simply keeping up with the passing of time and advances in technology.
The issue is that time and technology moves ahead and those who do not keep up get left behind.
Don
Login to Like
this post
I don't blame the developers.
It is the senior manager(s) who actually decide to implement these "improvements".
How can a system "improvement" be implemented if it takes your "customer" 65% to 85% longer to use your system?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Thanks to Benque for the tip, it seems to have worked. I am also noting what looks like a reduction in the awful stuff I was getting in my Junk box.
Some sites just cannot leave a good thing alone. They hire outside developers who, in turn, feel expected to come up with 'improvements' and 'new' concepts. I saw this during my employment in the public sector. It is wasteful and in the end, adds unneeded expense to both the owner and user.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
This thread is very timely for me, I appreciate the honest feedback.
I have been involved in many, many upgrades and changes with systems over the last two decades. The overwhelming majority was due to the world changing around a company, not because some manager simply decided to pull the trigger and change something.
The key to this kind of change is to ‘sell’ it before the changeover; having users buy into the change is key for it to be successful. I have been trying to get folks here to understand that this website needs to make substantial changes. This is not based upon my opinion. Nor is it because David, Tim, or any of the other managers of this site simply would like to change things for the sake of change or ‘improvements’.
This site has to change to stay current with user habits, search engines, and device/browser evolutions. It will require a total rewrite and redesign to correctly position it now and for the future. Having been asked to assist, I would be donating several hundred man-hours in helping make the necessary changes. If we cannot get folks to understand that change is required, and buy into the justification(s), then the odds of a successful update are greatly diminished. Obviously my efforts to ‘sell’ the need to change has so far failed.
Given the feedback it is pretty clear that change is not desired.
Don
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Don,
It is human nature to resist change, because change is "unknown". Few people have John Lennon's attitude regarding the unknown - “It's fear of the unknown. ... And to be frightened of it is what sends everybody scurrying around chasing dreams, illusions, wars, peace, love, hate, all that--it's all illusion. ... Accept that it's unknown and it's plain sailing."
That said, many people like to try something out and give their opinions on it (not myself - spent way too much time playing in the sandbox for the Feds).
What very few people like is to open a familiar website and find major changes and be FORCED to try to figure them out. It is particularly egregious when you opened the website to do a business task and now find yourself struggling to try to figure out what happened and how you can get the information necessary to complete the task. That 5 minute project turns into a half day disaster.
I'm sure that most of us would try out a beta if one was available. That way everyone can go in at their own pace. It also aids in finding those "unintended consequences" that occur with every change. The beta MUST run concurrently with the present system.
Just my two cents - I played devils advocate for three years of system development AFTER a program was released - it was a nightmare. Cost over-runs considerably north of $10,000,000 (multiples of, actually).
Login to Like
this post
Webpaper,
I agree with much of what you wrote. We are indeed creatures of habit, we strongly prefer doing things the same way today as we did them yesterday. As you say, it is just human nature that change is hard.
I have been responsible for implementation of massive business systems such as SAP and other ERP type business systems across large companies where thousands of users replied upon them to get their jobs done every day. In two specific situations I was project manager and was directed to put into place dual systems to allow users to ‘get their feet wet’ and as part of the ‘buy in’ process. In both cases it was an abysmal failure.
This will not be a trivial or simple upgrade. If SOR were to try to upgrade the site using paid contractors the costs would easily be north of $25k and probably more like $50k. But whether a paid project or a volunteer effort, a project this large demands there be a full commitment to the switch.
And note that running duel sites would also require users to participate in both sites. In other words, folks would have to be willing to spend large amounts of time entering auctions, approvals, and forum posts in both sites. Many users are likely to give the new site about 10 minute test drive and not bother beyond that. Heck, just finding a solid number of testers, folks who would be willing to test a new site for 10-15 hours, would probably be a challenge.
With overlapping sites also comes confusion. Buyers and sellers will forget which site has which listing. But I concur that it is indeed critical that users have opportunity to offer input and feedback. It would be nuts to go off into a corner, develop a new site the size of this one without giving everyone in the community input and review authorities.
But before we even get there we should have a firm understanding of the reasons that the site needs to change. Without this, the resentment and push back will constantly undermine the project.
Don
Login to Like
this post
Boy has this topic ever CHANGED from how it started....LOL
I feel strongly about the comments presented by Brechinite, Don, Snick1946, Webpaper.
Throughout my career, I witnessed and participated in many changes to my company's procedures and processes. Like Don, I also participated in the implementation of SAP......a manufacturing process ERP splotched onto a repair/overhaul facility. Was that ever fun...OK, it was in retrospect, and did I ever learn alot. That change took years longer than expected.
Anyhow, it was truly necessary to put that in place, to continue seamlessly working with head office (the manufacturer) and most customers.
However, too many times I have seen CEOs, Directors, and Managers try to kickstart their lackluster careers by announcing "wonderful" changes. Occasionally they worked, despite the reluctance of most of those impacted (ref Don's observation); but most times, they were ill conceived and abject failures. Much time and money flushed down the drain.
Then there are the "innovators", hired into management positions because they proclaim that "change is good, and I'm all about change...just watch me go!" I remember the grocery store manager hired to manage a jet-engine component repair division. It was awful. This guy didn't have the wisdom to know that he was comparing turnips to turbines. He left, sporting cherry-picked production data in his CV, just as the crap started hitting the fan. Who picked up the pieces? Those left behind, of course. The cost of those changes, and the repair of the damage increased our overall costs, and affected our competitiveness.
If someone tells me I have to work harder at what I do, because it's progress, they'll get a jaundiced look from me. I want changes that make my life easier, and I care nothing for complying with the wishes of "everyone", in the name of progress.
This topic reminds me of my Mom, and I paraphrase what she used to say to me as a youngster: "Just because all the other kids are playing in the dog poop, doesn't mean you have to as well". That still works for me, but I think the majority of people these days are only to happy to play in the dog poop, so to speak, if they perceive "everyone else" to be doing so.
So, if I am happily married, should I dump my wife for a younger one, because that is the change that "everyone else" seems to be making? Hey, hey, hey...viagra and hair-dye here I come...look out ladies a changed man is on the scene!
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
I am NOT against change.
I am against, ILLOGICAL change.
For example:-
Mobile phones may account for 55% of your business, so you change your system to serve this section of the market in such a way that your 45% find it more difficult to use your system.
Result:- You may drive away about 20 - 25% of your business. Plus it has cost you time and money to make the changes.
Like Benque:-
"However, too many times I have seen CEOs, Directors, and Managers try to kickstart their lackluster careers by announcing "wonderful" changes. Occasionally they worked, despite the reluctance of most of those impacted (ref Don's observation); but most times, they were ill conceived and abject failures. Much time and money flushed down the drain"
As far as Stamporama is concerned, YES the system MAY need to be "improved" but please, please, please "Do NOT throw the baby out with the bath water".
To all those that have criticisms please REMEMBER this site is run by UNPAID VOLUNTEERS, with NO cost to the average Member
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
My thoughts are that before we make any changes lets know what our members are actually viewing the site on, laptop/phone/Desktop etc.
Do they encounter any problems, what or how?
What web changes are coming that will need the alterations, specifics?
Will conversion programs enable us to adapt the site without major rewrites?
I'm sure that there are many more questions that we as members and our webmaster will be able to pose and answer.
Maybe we start with an online survey for anyone logging on to Stamporama before going to the home page.
I'm not against change where it is necessary but the old adage "if it ain't broke don't fix it" sometimes is very true.
It has become apparent from recent net problems that despite all the alterations that have gone through since W95 there are still holes being found in the base code which does not fill me with trust of any new systems.
Viewing on my laptop at present but also using my desktop on occasion both on W10.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Well, I must have missed part of this discussion. Is there a secret location that hides part of it? I was trying to find out what specifically needs to be changed. I am viewing on a laptop and running W10. This discussion, so far, is like a political debate, no specifics and a lot of generalities. Some input would help this reader.
Tad
Login to Like
this post
Tad,
Sorry, I have been bringing up this topic across a number of threads to raise awareness. I jumped in the end of this thread once I saw that the OP question had been answered.
To summarize the issue; online traffic passed a tipping point in 2015 when more users are accessed websites on mobile devices than on desktop computers. Around 2008 many website owners realized that websites designed for desktop monitors did not display correctly on smart phones and other mobile devices.
During that time many web site owners ran two separate websites, one for desktops and one for mobile devices. Obviously this cost more and introduced new problems as the two sites always had to be kept in sync. So a new approach was introduced called ‘responsive web design’. Without getting too technical it introduced a way to have a single website that dynamically resized itself by recognizing the browser and display resolution. This allowed website owners to have a single website that reached any user on any device. It should also be noted that this was not just a new technology, it also brought a new set of design requirements to the table. IT professionals have known for long time that computing was leaving the desktop, it used to be called ‘ubiquitous computing’. People want to be able to reach their information when and where they want it, not just at home on their desk. Additionally, computing power was being mated and embedded in all kinds of devices; appliances, watches, cars, etc.
Philatelic websites got a bit of a reprieve because our users tend to be folks who have not quickly adopted these new technologies and devices. Well, that grace period ended 2-3 years ago when philatelic website owner began to see more and more user accessing the site on smaller displays. This has caught some site, like SOR and the APS site, with poor support for users with device other than a desktop computer. Other sites addressed the issue earlier and now have responsive designs and code in place. After a lot input, APS has finally decided to upgrade their site (see Scott’s column in this month’s AP) to a responsive design.
I would estimate that about 45% of the philatelic websites have been updated to responsive designs. To view a good example of responsive design look at the US Classics Society site (http://www.uspcs.org/). After viewing the site on your desktop you can easily test the responsive design but resizing your browser window to a size of a tablet of smart phone. Note how all the screen elements dynamically resize, shrink, and reposition themselves as you drag the window smaller and smaller.
All major website, like eBay, Google, Amazon, etc have long ago updated to responsive designs. Some users are still fussing about the changes. They do not understand that these site were dropping things like ‘active content’ and Flash because responsive design does not support them.
There are even online tools from Google and other that help website owners test their sites and display what mobile users are facing trying to go to their site.
Note that some of the problems are design issues to support people navigating with their fat fingers instead of a mouse. But typically every single page of a website has to be recoded. Responsive design also drives the purchasing of new development tools for those who have to code the site. It is neither cheap or easy and many of us dragged out feet in making the switch.
There are also other implications that are forcing website owners to make this change. A huge issue is that Google and other search engines are now penalizing non-responsive websites by putting them last in the search results. This started about 1-2 years ago and will become a bigger and bigger issue over the next few years.
So SOR and other non-responsive sites have to make a choice. Either they can stay desktop only and become less visited, less relevant and eventual just fade away or they can upgrade to a responsive design and continue to thrive and grow.
So this has absolutely nothing to do with changing SOR because someone thinks they have a better idea. This has nothing to do with making a change just for the sake of making a change. There is no need for a survey since this change is being driven by the world around us, not by SOR members. The decision here is really with the owners/admins of SOR. It is my understanding that they desire to make the change but I am uncertain if this decision is final.
My personal perspective is that I have a very limited amount of time to contribute. My cancer and renal failure has progressed to the point where doctors say I have a 15% chance of living more than a year. There are other philatelic sites which I donate time to and I also am sole administrator and developer for Stamp Smarter (huge site with over 45,000 files).
Sorry for the long post, I hope this provide the context you were seeking.
Don
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Don,
Thanks for the summary and excellent explanation. I mostly use an iPad for SOR but occasionally will use a desktop when I want to post photos.
I am with those who aren't fans of change just for the sake of change. I suspect, however, that most of us just don't know why the changes have to be made. Your summary helps me understand just how much I don't know and actually take for granted when I use a computer daily.
If SOR needs to change to stay relevant, I hope it can. I know very little about the computer world but would be willing to help if possible.
I am sorry to hear of your health concerns and thank you for your contributions to SOR and Stamp Smarter. Hope you will be with us for a long time yet.
Sally
5 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Is anyone else using outlook getting frustrated lately with changes in formatting and security on that service?
A few months back, they adapted a two-tier system for display of emails- 'Focused' and 'Unfocused'. You have to keep switching between two screens to process your email and there seems no way to code mail from certain sources to be sure it appears as focused.
IMO far worse is what is now appearing in my 'Junk mail' box. Things I cannot even repeat on here with four letter words in the title, etc. Obviously trash that was just chucked off before it even got to my box under their previous setup.
Probably they are trying to get users to pay for an upgrade to something better.There seems no way to contact anyone at the service. Yes it is free, this just seems ridiculous even at that.
Login to Like
this post
02:35:54pm
re: Outlook Email Issues
Snick,
Just above your e-mail list, is a drop-down named "Filter". You can turn that dumb "focused" feature OFF from there. I also unwittingly gave myself the annoying focused feature, and it took me a while to find out how to quash it.
Good luck!
Login to Like
this post
Auctions - Approvals
re: Outlook Email Issues
When it went to Outlook from hotmail/live. I gave up then and went to Gmail.
Unfortunately Gmail are "improving their system" at the moment so goodness knows what scatterbrained idea they will come up with.
What is it with these companies? They have good systems and then they make "progress" by implementing a system, I presume designed by a 2 year old, that takes longer, and longer, and longer, and longer, to use.
Ebay's "Quick" listing system is the same. They done away with Turbolister, never replaced it, result it takes a lot lot lot lot longer to list items.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Outlook Email Issues
"...What is it with these companies? They have good systems and then they make "progress" ..."
It may be hard to believe but developers do not lie awake at night trying to make a user’s life miserable. They are just like everyone else in a workplace; they would rather have everything stay the same. No one wants their job constantly changing. No one wants all the work they have previously completed to be tossed out and started over. No one wants to relearn new skills and tools just so they can get their job done. No one wants to go out and buy all new development tools.
I like to turn wrenches and I know more than anyone should know about fixing Studebakers. But I pop the hood on a new car and just shake my head. Is it the car companies or the engineers fault for moving ahead? They are simply keeping up with the passing of time and advances in technology.
The issue is that time and technology moves ahead and those who do not keep up get left behind.
Don
Login to Like
this post
Auctions - Approvals
re: Outlook Email Issues
I don't blame the developers.
It is the senior manager(s) who actually decide to implement these "improvements".
How can a system "improvement" be implemented if it takes your "customer" 65% to 85% longer to use your system?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Outlook Email Issues
Thanks to Benque for the tip, it seems to have worked. I am also noting what looks like a reduction in the awful stuff I was getting in my Junk box.
Some sites just cannot leave a good thing alone. They hire outside developers who, in turn, feel expected to come up with 'improvements' and 'new' concepts. I saw this during my employment in the public sector. It is wasteful and in the end, adds unneeded expense to both the owner and user.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Outlook Email Issues
This thread is very timely for me, I appreciate the honest feedback.
I have been involved in many, many upgrades and changes with systems over the last two decades. The overwhelming majority was due to the world changing around a company, not because some manager simply decided to pull the trigger and change something.
The key to this kind of change is to ‘sell’ it before the changeover; having users buy into the change is key for it to be successful. I have been trying to get folks here to understand that this website needs to make substantial changes. This is not based upon my opinion. Nor is it because David, Tim, or any of the other managers of this site simply would like to change things for the sake of change or ‘improvements’.
This site has to change to stay current with user habits, search engines, and device/browser evolutions. It will require a total rewrite and redesign to correctly position it now and for the future. Having been asked to assist, I would be donating several hundred man-hours in helping make the necessary changes. If we cannot get folks to understand that change is required, and buy into the justification(s), then the odds of a successful update are greatly diminished. Obviously my efforts to ‘sell’ the need to change has so far failed.
Given the feedback it is pretty clear that change is not desired.
Don
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Outlook Email Issues
Don,
It is human nature to resist change, because change is "unknown". Few people have John Lennon's attitude regarding the unknown - “It's fear of the unknown. ... And to be frightened of it is what sends everybody scurrying around chasing dreams, illusions, wars, peace, love, hate, all that--it's all illusion. ... Accept that it's unknown and it's plain sailing."
That said, many people like to try something out and give their opinions on it (not myself - spent way too much time playing in the sandbox for the Feds).
What very few people like is to open a familiar website and find major changes and be FORCED to try to figure them out. It is particularly egregious when you opened the website to do a business task and now find yourself struggling to try to figure out what happened and how you can get the information necessary to complete the task. That 5 minute project turns into a half day disaster.
I'm sure that most of us would try out a beta if one was available. That way everyone can go in at their own pace. It also aids in finding those "unintended consequences" that occur with every change. The beta MUST run concurrently with the present system.
Just my two cents - I played devils advocate for three years of system development AFTER a program was released - it was a nightmare. Cost over-runs considerably north of $10,000,000 (multiples of, actually).
Login to Like
this post
re: Outlook Email Issues
Webpaper,
I agree with much of what you wrote. We are indeed creatures of habit, we strongly prefer doing things the same way today as we did them yesterday. As you say, it is just human nature that change is hard.
I have been responsible for implementation of massive business systems such as SAP and other ERP type business systems across large companies where thousands of users replied upon them to get their jobs done every day. In two specific situations I was project manager and was directed to put into place dual systems to allow users to ‘get their feet wet’ and as part of the ‘buy in’ process. In both cases it was an abysmal failure.
This will not be a trivial or simple upgrade. If SOR were to try to upgrade the site using paid contractors the costs would easily be north of $25k and probably more like $50k. But whether a paid project or a volunteer effort, a project this large demands there be a full commitment to the switch.
And note that running duel sites would also require users to participate in both sites. In other words, folks would have to be willing to spend large amounts of time entering auctions, approvals, and forum posts in both sites. Many users are likely to give the new site about 10 minute test drive and not bother beyond that. Heck, just finding a solid number of testers, folks who would be willing to test a new site for 10-15 hours, would probably be a challenge.
With overlapping sites also comes confusion. Buyers and sellers will forget which site has which listing. But I concur that it is indeed critical that users have opportunity to offer input and feedback. It would be nuts to go off into a corner, develop a new site the size of this one without giving everyone in the community input and review authorities.
But before we even get there we should have a firm understanding of the reasons that the site needs to change. Without this, the resentment and push back will constantly undermine the project.
Don
Login to Like
this post
02:51:49pm
re: Outlook Email Issues
Boy has this topic ever CHANGED from how it started....LOL
I feel strongly about the comments presented by Brechinite, Don, Snick1946, Webpaper.
Throughout my career, I witnessed and participated in many changes to my company's procedures and processes. Like Don, I also participated in the implementation of SAP......a manufacturing process ERP splotched onto a repair/overhaul facility. Was that ever fun...OK, it was in retrospect, and did I ever learn alot. That change took years longer than expected.
Anyhow, it was truly necessary to put that in place, to continue seamlessly working with head office (the manufacturer) and most customers.
However, too many times I have seen CEOs, Directors, and Managers try to kickstart their lackluster careers by announcing "wonderful" changes. Occasionally they worked, despite the reluctance of most of those impacted (ref Don's observation); but most times, they were ill conceived and abject failures. Much time and money flushed down the drain.
Then there are the "innovators", hired into management positions because they proclaim that "change is good, and I'm all about change...just watch me go!" I remember the grocery store manager hired to manage a jet-engine component repair division. It was awful. This guy didn't have the wisdom to know that he was comparing turnips to turbines. He left, sporting cherry-picked production data in his CV, just as the crap started hitting the fan. Who picked up the pieces? Those left behind, of course. The cost of those changes, and the repair of the damage increased our overall costs, and affected our competitiveness.
If someone tells me I have to work harder at what I do, because it's progress, they'll get a jaundiced look from me. I want changes that make my life easier, and I care nothing for complying with the wishes of "everyone", in the name of progress.
This topic reminds me of my Mom, and I paraphrase what she used to say to me as a youngster: "Just because all the other kids are playing in the dog poop, doesn't mean you have to as well". That still works for me, but I think the majority of people these days are only to happy to play in the dog poop, so to speak, if they perceive "everyone else" to be doing so.
So, if I am happily married, should I dump my wife for a younger one, because that is the change that "everyone else" seems to be making? Hey, hey, hey...viagra and hair-dye here I come...look out ladies a changed man is on the scene!
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Auctions - Approvals
re: Outlook Email Issues
I am NOT against change.
I am against, ILLOGICAL change.
For example:-
Mobile phones may account for 55% of your business, so you change your system to serve this section of the market in such a way that your 45% find it more difficult to use your system.
Result:- You may drive away about 20 - 25% of your business. Plus it has cost you time and money to make the changes.
Like Benque:-
"However, too many times I have seen CEOs, Directors, and Managers try to kickstart their lackluster careers by announcing "wonderful" changes. Occasionally they worked, despite the reluctance of most of those impacted (ref Don's observation); but most times, they were ill conceived and abject failures. Much time and money flushed down the drain"
As far as Stamporama is concerned, YES the system MAY need to be "improved" but please, please, please "Do NOT throw the baby out with the bath water".
To all those that have criticisms please REMEMBER this site is run by UNPAID VOLUNTEERS, with NO cost to the average Member
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Outlook Email Issues
My thoughts are that before we make any changes lets know what our members are actually viewing the site on, laptop/phone/Desktop etc.
Do they encounter any problems, what or how?
What web changes are coming that will need the alterations, specifics?
Will conversion programs enable us to adapt the site without major rewrites?
I'm sure that there are many more questions that we as members and our webmaster will be able to pose and answer.
Maybe we start with an online survey for anyone logging on to Stamporama before going to the home page.
I'm not against change where it is necessary but the old adage "if it ain't broke don't fix it" sometimes is very true.
It has become apparent from recent net problems that despite all the alterations that have gone through since W95 there are still holes being found in the base code which does not fill me with trust of any new systems.
Viewing on my laptop at present but also using my desktop on occasion both on W10.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Outlook Email Issues
Well, I must have missed part of this discussion. Is there a secret location that hides part of it? I was trying to find out what specifically needs to be changed. I am viewing on a laptop and running W10. This discussion, so far, is like a political debate, no specifics and a lot of generalities. Some input would help this reader.
Tad
Login to Like
this post
re: Outlook Email Issues
Tad,
Sorry, I have been bringing up this topic across a number of threads to raise awareness. I jumped in the end of this thread once I saw that the OP question had been answered.
To summarize the issue; online traffic passed a tipping point in 2015 when more users are accessed websites on mobile devices than on desktop computers. Around 2008 many website owners realized that websites designed for desktop monitors did not display correctly on smart phones and other mobile devices.
During that time many web site owners ran two separate websites, one for desktops and one for mobile devices. Obviously this cost more and introduced new problems as the two sites always had to be kept in sync. So a new approach was introduced called ‘responsive web design’. Without getting too technical it introduced a way to have a single website that dynamically resized itself by recognizing the browser and display resolution. This allowed website owners to have a single website that reached any user on any device. It should also be noted that this was not just a new technology, it also brought a new set of design requirements to the table. IT professionals have known for long time that computing was leaving the desktop, it used to be called ‘ubiquitous computing’. People want to be able to reach their information when and where they want it, not just at home on their desk. Additionally, computing power was being mated and embedded in all kinds of devices; appliances, watches, cars, etc.
Philatelic websites got a bit of a reprieve because our users tend to be folks who have not quickly adopted these new technologies and devices. Well, that grace period ended 2-3 years ago when philatelic website owner began to see more and more user accessing the site on smaller displays. This has caught some site, like SOR and the APS site, with poor support for users with device other than a desktop computer. Other sites addressed the issue earlier and now have responsive designs and code in place. After a lot input, APS has finally decided to upgrade their site (see Scott’s column in this month’s AP) to a responsive design.
I would estimate that about 45% of the philatelic websites have been updated to responsive designs. To view a good example of responsive design look at the US Classics Society site (http://www.uspcs.org/). After viewing the site on your desktop you can easily test the responsive design but resizing your browser window to a size of a tablet of smart phone. Note how all the screen elements dynamically resize, shrink, and reposition themselves as you drag the window smaller and smaller.
All major website, like eBay, Google, Amazon, etc have long ago updated to responsive designs. Some users are still fussing about the changes. They do not understand that these site were dropping things like ‘active content’ and Flash because responsive design does not support them.
There are even online tools from Google and other that help website owners test their sites and display what mobile users are facing trying to go to their site.
Note that some of the problems are design issues to support people navigating with their fat fingers instead of a mouse. But typically every single page of a website has to be recoded. Responsive design also drives the purchasing of new development tools for those who have to code the site. It is neither cheap or easy and many of us dragged out feet in making the switch.
There are also other implications that are forcing website owners to make this change. A huge issue is that Google and other search engines are now penalizing non-responsive websites by putting them last in the search results. This started about 1-2 years ago and will become a bigger and bigger issue over the next few years.
So SOR and other non-responsive sites have to make a choice. Either they can stay desktop only and become less visited, less relevant and eventual just fade away or they can upgrade to a responsive design and continue to thrive and grow.
So this has absolutely nothing to do with changing SOR because someone thinks they have a better idea. This has nothing to do with making a change just for the sake of making a change. There is no need for a survey since this change is being driven by the world around us, not by SOR members. The decision here is really with the owners/admins of SOR. It is my understanding that they desire to make the change but I am uncertain if this decision is final.
My personal perspective is that I have a very limited amount of time to contribute. My cancer and renal failure has progressed to the point where doctors say I have a 15% chance of living more than a year. There are other philatelic sites which I donate time to and I also am sole administrator and developer for Stamp Smarter (huge site with over 45,000 files).
Sorry for the long post, I hope this provide the context you were seeking.
Don
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Outlook Email Issues
Don,
Thanks for the summary and excellent explanation. I mostly use an iPad for SOR but occasionally will use a desktop when I want to post photos.
I am with those who aren't fans of change just for the sake of change. I suspect, however, that most of us just don't know why the changes have to be made. Your summary helps me understand just how much I don't know and actually take for granted when I use a computer daily.
If SOR needs to change to stay relevant, I hope it can. I know very little about the computer world but would be willing to help if possible.
I am sorry to hear of your health concerns and thank you for your contributions to SOR and Stamp Smarter. Hope you will be with us for a long time yet.
Sally
5 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.