I have been using Threads for quite some time (not even sure...been a few years). Since Infopop has taken over, I have been really REALLY debating the $125 yearly license. It just seems a bit steep.
I can go to vbulletin for $160 - with a yearly $30 license.
I can go to phpbb for free.
Can someone compare contrast UBBThreads / VBulletin / PHPBB for me? I have only used UBBThreads...but am getting to know the other two, and want to make sure I DO want to stick with UBBThreads.
While I personally cannot make a comparison because I do not know anything about the other 2, one thing to keep in mind is former WWWThreads users do not pay the full price for yearly upgrades. I believe it's a 75% discount on the yearly upgrades which makes it somewhere around $31 for the yearly upgrades.
Ooooh Scream, I should have known to ask you first. Now THAT makes all the difference in the world...
I just want to clarify why I asked. I run a small community group, and each of us pitches in and pays for the website hosting and forum. While I run the site, I do take all member requests into account. I personally did not want to switch, heck, I just got my calendar working with UBBThreads!
Hi Medar I saw your site back in 1999 I believe and liked the boards (been here ever since hehe) I am Pappy Farland from the UO community section. Thanks for the insight back then on these fantastic forums []/forum/images/icons/smile.gif[/]
Aye, I am in contrast-compare mode right now...letting everyone check out different setups. Have 3 boards setup right now (UBBThreads of course, and two test boards - vbulletin, and phpBB).
So far I see no reason to switch...especially with v6.0 coming out some day soon.
But, will version 6.0 be up to par with vbulletin? What I mean is vbulletin already has had for some time the new features that 6.0 is just now coming out with and will most likly have some bugs. What I would like to know is what does 6.0 have that vbulletin does not? I think that vb has a supported calander not a hack just want to have a forum that has the best features.
Really depends on what your users are used to, I guess []/forum/images/icons/smile.gif[/] I know some long-time threads users would kill if their owners switched to non-threaded forums []/forum/images/icons/smile.gif[/] I prefer flat, mainly because it is what I am used to, but with threads, I don't have to make that choice []/forum/images/icons/smile.gif[/]
Coding in threads is cleaner with less queries for most any page you could care to compare. If you are already working overtime on your server, moving to vB definitely isn't going to help (phpbb is in the same boat as vB when it comes to server load). Their site runs fast because it runs on 2+ servers. :rolleyes: I don't think you'll find very many threads sites with the same number of concurrent users needing more than one decent server - especially on a v6 site.
Ultimately, it comes down to a matter of personal taste - unless you are in some sort of hurry, you won't be sorry to stay with threads []/forum/images/icons/smile.gif[/]
Thank's Allen, I am kind of in a hurry (long story) just wanted to know the diffs between the two because they are about the same cost and feature wise.
I believe that vBulletin is going to be very tough to beat. It certainly is a matter of preferences but with vBulletin 3.0 now offering threaded format it attracts the users here all-the-more. I selected WWWThreads because our visitors had to have threaded and now other packages are offering this option.
I'm not sure what Rick's situation is now with Infopop but if he is doing this alone and competing with teams at vBulletin and phpBB then it is an uphill battle:) I believe this is a hobby for Rick, not his full time job correct?
Either way this is a solid product that will be a good choice. Unfortunately Infopop's pricing may drive a lot of people away that can get these other products at a better price.
I don't normally post here being a vbulletin fan but it only seems fair you get your facts right before criticising another board.
vBulletin runs on two servers because it also runs other sites, not least a large content site (and popular vbulletin forums) www.vbworld.com as well as www.vbulletin.org It also needs the extra capacity whenever a new release is made avaliable as a few thousand people downloading the software adds a bit of tole. Arguing that it is resource inefficient because the maker of the software uese two servers is laughable. Instead post some sites that have 500+ concurrent users.
vB is innefficient when compared to threads, a quick glance at their own support forums and their hardware recommendations can tell you that - even a moderately busy forum will require one dedicated server. For a site that has 500+ concurrent users, I have seen them recommend 3 servers - one for the database, one for the forum files, and one for the rest of the site's html. I know of one such site personally. This is not criticism, it's facts.
If you wanna see something funny, ask one of those sites to run vB and php 4.2 with register_globals turned "off" - heheh.... vB is decent software, but they've got some serious issues
as a user of both, I can say vb is a little more inefficient on resources and bandwidth. Although I do like some vb features straight out of the box and the users like it.. I will continue to do so as I can't afford another upgrade.
BUT, I will be changing the site to threads as soon as the budget allows.
However I would hope you would agree that the shere number of queries is not the most important thing when designing a forum system. 30 optomised queries can take less time than 1 badly written query. I think you will find that a lot of time has been spent on ensuring that the queries in vbulletin are optimal. An increase in the number of queries goes hand in hand with adding more features.
I believe a fix has just been released to let vbulletin run with register globals off. This will of course be something built into the next version of vbulletin.
Lastly, I don't actually know of any vbulletin board running on 3 servers, as it requires load balancing of apache it is not the easiest setup. Perhaps you can let me know who is running a 3 server config? And agreed that as you hit 500 concurrent users are you going to be getting to the point of needed a second server. I have never seen a ubbthreads forum with more than 100ish people online so couldn't comment on what happens when you get to this level of activity, perhaps you could let me know.
Lastly I think there is plenty of room for both forum products to exist and the typical ours is better than yours rubbish is rather tedious as we clearly all have our own opinions and that is great but please be careful what you say about other products and insure it is accurate.
You are welcome to search the vb support forums for your answers. No one has said vb is rubbish here, I said it is decent software, but most everyone would agree that it needs some work on its efficiency - most pages in vB run many more queries than threads, and 8 times more queries is a huge difference no matter how efficient you may think the queries are.
A "fix" for register globals hasn't been released, as it requires them re-doing most all the subs to work correctly - php.net has recommended that register_globals be off since 4.1, something Rick and the gang prepped threads 5.5 for way back when - vB isn't there and I am pretty sure it won't be until v3 is released at some point in the distant future
We do not bad-mouth other software here (although seeing 2.2.1/2.2.2/2.2.3/2.2.4/2.2.5/ and now 2.2.6 released in rapid succession would make me wonder as a paying customer if anyone is steering the ship up there - seems like they should be able to get it right at some point) - we have no problem comparing this software to any php/mysql product out there...
I don't think everyone at all agrees it needs work on efficiency. As mentioned the raw number of queries is hardly important, it is how optomised they are. Are you saying there are not optomised or bad? give proof of this please. I am not sure which page uses 8 times more queries. Perhaps you can let me know as I am sure there is a valid reason.
If you want to talk about efficiency etc, then back it up. Show me some huge threads forums with say a million + posts on them or show me some forums with 400+ on line. I recon for everyone you find I can find 5 vbulletins with similair stats. So there is a challenge I guess.
Well the fix for register_globals is really not that hard, you just type
inside global.php if you don't want register_globals on, hardly rocket science.
The rapid successions is generally active response to security concerns. vBulletin has the software regularly externally audited to check things are ok. If there is a problem, however minor then these are fixed as that is better than hiding stuff under the carpet.
For example one of the responses was dealing with a new javascript security that affects basically all web based applications, and was dulely reported on bugtraq. vBulletin has a fix, that day i remember. Not so far all of infopops properites:
In reply to:
Information on this morning's compromise
Someone used a Javascript that we thought to be filtered to steal the cookies of a handful of admins, after which he logged into the control panel and shut the board down with the redirect to vB.
Signature images are now disabled and will remain so. The UBBCode IMG tag is now disabled and will remain so until further notice.
You should change your profile password. Now.
This is the reason for some of the releases and I don't think any of the developers make any apologies for keeping up to date on any and all security issues should they occur.
The last release has been a direct response to php 4.2. Unfortunatly we can't tell how PHP changes are going to affect the code until we have the software so it is naturally going to be a response after the fact.
Compare the queries for profiles, 4 here, 30 there.
Compare the queries for threads: 14 here, 27 there
Compare the queries for forums (postlist): 9 here, 24 there
Compare the queries for who's online: 5 here, 16 there
Compare the queries for memberlist: 4 here, 10 there
Compare the queries for the search page: 3 here, 12 there
Compare the queries for the search results page: 4 here, 15 there
There is no comparison
Register_globals - heheh... that isn't a fix, it is a work-around Register_globals has to do with the basic coding practices of the underlying code. vB can't be run with register_globals on because the coding needs a lot more work for it to stand up to the increased scrutiny globals being on brings for error-checking. Defaulting to globals being off doesn't fix the underlying code errors
The rapid succession is because they can't get their underlying code base right in the first place - they keep applying patches to patches instead of fixing it.
The last "update for php 4.2" is because they have still failed to get the base code right to run like it should. It is a patch that will hopefully hold on long enough for them to get a beta out for v3. Then, when another bug is found in v2.2.9, they will insist that everyone upgrade to v3 beta since "it is pretty stable anyways".
Like I said, it is decent software, but isn't as good as threads
You have a point about register globals and yes this is how vb3 is going to be encoded. It is really a matter of timing. I believe the first version of wwwthreads need register globals on and as has vbulletin. The next version won't. In the end register globals being off does not make something more secure if it coded properly, it is just an added precaution. I can assue you vb3 has been written from the ground up with register globals off however.
Your query stats are distored by using vbulletin.org really. It has completly and utterly hacked to bits. This does not aid in keeping query numbers down. I don't know how hacked this site is, I am not sure where the demo is or if this is what it looks like out of the box or not. But even so, on my site the profile query is half that. And sure there are more queries in a number of places but this generally corresponds to more features. Some of these extra queries (about 3 i believe) are used every page for features such as cobranding, phpinclude templates, sessions and the like.
But even so, you are again just harking on about query numbers which in the grand scheme of things are irrelevant. You argued that vbulletin is server intensive but have yet again not shown me an example of this being a particular problem. If you post some very large wwwhtreads forums i make take your comments more seriously.
is dieing with a dual PIII 800mhz server with 1GB ram and only 90 users online.
Again you make completly unsubstantiated claims about "getting the code base fixed". The javascript fix for example that i mentioned is one that every product needed a fix for. UBB was late in applying it by the sounds of it and www.ubbdev.com was hacked bceause of it. Suggesting that something is insecure because they have releases is rediculous.
Either way from what I can gather you have slightly changed track. instead of suggesting that vbulletin as bad for the server:
" I don't think you'll find very many threads sites with the same number of concurrent users needing more than one decent server - especially on a v6 site. "
and not providing proof of this you now are just arguing on the basis of raw number of queries - this might be an indicating factor but hardly gives that much evidence. Provide some evidence like I asked for in my previous post to gain some credibility.
Oh and on bugs, in posting here 4 times I have found 2 so far. The first is the email replies thing popped out html in my email I had <BR /> stuff and image links to smilies. And secondly the nav bits on this reply page is broken. The thread is linked to: https://ubbdev.com/threads/php/...age=&view=&sb=&o=&fpart=
Definitely. I don't know of any forum software that can handle 500+ users with one server. Unless maybe they are doing some major caching stratics.com runs a two server config because they routinely have 500-600 users online. It's just the nature of the beast. In order to keep up with everything, queries, page rendering, etc. it takes alot of overhead.
And you're right again that more features adds more queries. That's one of the hard things is to balance features that really improve the software against the extra overhead needed for them.
Anywho, everyone's got their favorites which is why I never comment on other forum software becuase honestly I don't know anything about them. Not like I'd have the time to even if I wanted
You're getting the bugs because we're currently in the middle of a beta release and fixing them out as they are spotted. Thanks for pointing out the ones you encountered.
Register-globals has been fixed since 5.5 in threads, still has not been fixed in vb, and there's nothing to say it will ever be fixed. vb3 is vaporware and will be for months to come. Sooooo... we are discussing vb2.x.x.x.x.x
I have never owned a vb, so I can't tell you if it is hard on the server from personal experience, I can only go by the posts at vb and their recommendations for hardware based on number of concurrent users. If you wanna be picky, their hardware recommendations are more than for plain ubb boards. Granted, most ubb's do not run as many concurrent users as some vb's do, but some do and the hardware requirements aren't any greater. Post a link to your forums with a test acct if you think vb.org's site is not indicative of the queries on most vb sites
Queries against a database are what determines most server load when it comes php/mysql forum scripts. vB's developer recognizes this himself: "One thing that we've learnt in developing vBulletin for its varied environments is to have as few queries on the page as possible." Why would he make that statement if the number of queries "is irrelevant", according to you? Read your own support forums to see the server requirements for this "optimized code" - everyone of them says you need 2+ servers for 500+ concurrent users online running vb2.
Register-globals has been fixed since 5.5 in threads, still has not been fixed in vb, and there's nothing to say it will ever be fixed. vb3 is vaporware and will be for months to come. Sooooo... we are discussing vb2.x.x.x.x.x
<hr></blockquote>
Vaporware? wow, that's a wild assumption. riiiighhhtt... please, tell me what solid indicator you possess that vb3 is not real.
And please remind the public of the releases of UBB 6.0- you remember, right? the betas? the ones going to e!!!
I have never owned a vb, so I can't tell you if it is hard on the server from personal experience, I can only go by the posts at vb and their recommendations for hardware based on number of concurrent users. If you wanna be picky, their hardware recommendations are more than for plain ubb boards. Granted, most ubb's do not run as many concurrent users as some vb's do, but some do and the hardware requirements aren't any greater. Post a link to your forums with a test acct if you think vb.org's site is not indicative of the queries on most vb sites
<hr></blockquote>
it's been proven by forum admins that UBB cannot handle the traffic and requests on the same kind of servers that vB can. I'm not going to post any file crap, but I will tell you- my site switched to vB and ran at least 5 times as fast. portent.net did the SAME THING, and never looked back.
please, show me a UBB with 500 members, and then show me a vB with the same, and compare the two, then talk to me about concurrent servers.
I've read this thread, and the crap you spew allen, but I guess you have to pine for whatever you can when faced with a superior product.
I aoplogize for my spelling, the 5 line text area is kind of a pain to use.
EDIT #2: wow, just 2 edits and the post is broken, Threads can't even parse it's own posts :rolleyes:
I personally find it funny that you only compare mention vbulletin.org's quries, and not any other vBulletin....
vB.org, has many hacks installed which add quries, the standard, main forum page has 19 quries... If you add explain=1, to the end of a url, you will see the page's stats...
Next time, if you are going to spout off about something, atleast know what you are talking about.... I was actually proud of UBB at one time... But now, I have to say I'm disgusted with it....
I didn't think it would take this long for vB's people to show up - good to see you over here
I explained a few times that vb.org is the only site I know of that shows queries, and so I used them as an example. Thank you for the &explain=1 , it helps
Compare the queries for profiles, 4 here, 19 there.
Compare the queries for threads: 14 here, 21 there
Compare the queries for forums (postlist): 9 here, 21 there
Compare the queries for who's online: 5 here, 12 there
Compare the queries for memberlist: 4 here, 9 there
Compare the queries for the search page: 3 here, 9 there
Compare the queries for the search results page: 4 here, 13 there
OK, yes.. there is an improvement, but not quite valid since the site is almost empty. A full page of threads and posts would be a little more accurate in results (generally higher ). Still, threads is still much more efficient in design to a stock vb.
To my other new friend, vb3 is vaporware until at least one copy of it is seen - otherwise it is still in the planning stages and hardly worth mentioning in a comparison
Ok that's enough BS. Why don't Infopop get together with vB and submit to a 3-rd party independent test comparison? Using the default installs of the latest builds running on identical hardware. That way we will see who is right and who is wrong.
If possible, I'd love to get a copy of whatever script they use for load-testing, mainly for personal testing, etc... but I am game for a test, I believe the results would be interesting
With all the conversation of ubb verses vb, why did infopop - being 'leaders' in the forum software business - have to go out and purchase wwwthreads to get their own php/mysql forum software ? Could not they have written their own forum software, since they did 'invent' forums?
And as for speed, would you like me to benchmark ubb.threads and compare it to vb - knowing that the last time i did it, vb beat the pants off of wwwthreads?
Ahh, yes... I remember the good old days... Let me paint this picture of UBB:
Version 5.45c - April 16, 2000 Version 5.44b - March 12, 2000 Version 5.44a - February 23, 2000 Version 5.44 - February 19, 2000 Version 5.43d - February 04, 2000 Version 5.43c - January 31, 2000 Version 5.43a - January 21, 2000 Version 5.43 - January 18, 2000 Version 5.42a - January 05, 2000 Version 5.42 - January 01, 2000 Version 5.40 - November 16, 1999 Version 5.39d - November 12, 1999 Version 5.39c - October 07, 1999 Version 5.39b - September 23, 1999 Version 5.39 - September 16, 1999 Version 5.38 - June 21, 1999 Version 5.37 - June 08, 1999 Version 5.36a - June 07, 1999 Version 5.36 - June 07, 1999 Version 5.34a - April 17, 1999 Version 5.34 - April 12, 1999 Version 5.31 - March 29, 1999
Boy, that brings back good memories..... 22 releases in just over 1 year.
I'd be happy to rerun the extensive tests that I did about two years ago (May-Jul 2000) . Seeing as how Scream (Rick) was so kind to give me a copy of wwwthreads the last time i tested wwwthreads, I would be very grateful if he wanted to give me a copy of the newest version (ubb.threads) so that I could do the testing again. If so, please contact me at [][email protected][/]. Attached you should find a pic of ubb vs vbulletin. The rest of the info you should be able to find using archive.org
Allen, a couple of things. I will order them by number is perhaps if you choose to respond you can refer to my actual points.
1) The raw number of queries is not important. It is how optomised they are. Number of queries rises as the number of features rises. That is clearly something that can not be avoided (minimised by not avoided). Do you agree? or is the be all and end all of programming databases effectivly the number of queries? If you think find a forum and just remove the index on the threadid or whatever you use and see what happens.
2) If you accept that the number of queries is not really that important and is nothing more than a signal (for example when threads had to do 1 query for every single post in the threaded version then there is clearly a problem there, and i believe vbulletin 1.1 had this problem but it was fixed by 1.3 i think). if you accept that is is only a signal then to say that vbulletin will do worse via performance requires some evidence. Do you have any? What are you basing it on? Recommendations on server specs? When people post at vbulletin with high numbers online giving higher server specs allowing for growth is expected. If you buy a server the difference between 1GB ram and 2GB ram is really not that much in terms of price. The other thing worth noting is that getting to 400 users online on a server is not a huge problem but from going from 400 to 600 is. You get diminishing marginal returns chucking hardware at things. As I don't think there exists a threads forum with 400 people online at once (and you have not provided any high activity sites with evidence that there are) then any comparisons at the very high end of activity are irrelevant because you don't have anything to compare it with.
3) So we are looking at the low end for comparisons, with say 30 or 40 users online. Well vbulletin appears to be recommended by most hosts, many of whom have banned UBB for example but I have certainly never heard of a host advising someone to move from vbulletin to ubbthreads. Have you?
4) The reason the vbulletin lot are coming over here is not so much this thread but actually one caused by the CEO at infopop and especially his claim that vbulletin is rubbish because it was coded by a teenager (ignoring of course that there are now another 4 developers). Generally when someone can't compare something in objective terms they sling mud. I wonder if John race, religion, birth place, nationality etc would have been relevant. i doubt it.
5. A missed Screams' message. Thank you for that reply. I understand the bugs completly, was just pointing a couple out. (and p.s. being able to read the whole thread when replying is quite nice if that can be added, partly why i missed your post). That forum you posted, thank you for that and I take back my bit above about no huge forums. But as you say, two servers which is what a vbulletin with 600+ people online would probably need.
Yes, granted that more features would cause more queries to a database, I don't see what "features" vb is supposed to have over threads that would cause the doubling of queries.
Name the "features" that would cause queries to be more than double in profile checks, who's online, forumdisplay, the search page, showthread, memberlist etc etc etc... some of those pages are 3-4 times as heavy on the queries - hardly what I would call "optimal".
Something like: The queries are higher for threads on the forum index page because threads reads every forum and prints the number of new threads and the number of new posts since you last signed on - I would call that a feature, tho I think for new users, they should all be marked as read the first time they sign on so they don't trigger 40-60 queries for the index page everytime they sign on until they've visited all forums.
Do us both a favor and answer to all of them before coming back to post, your material is starting to get old. You were wrong regarding all of the points brought up in the thread already, I'd like to see some pretty specific evidence to the contrary.
What really frustrates me over this log term debate, that will still be rumbling on in a years time, (maybe a different thread, but it will still be there,) is the fact that all too often VB is compared to to UBB and not UBBT. Even in this thread we have had several references to ubb. Also looking at the thread on VB that discusses this thread, references are still made to compare VB with UBB, whislt talking about this site.
On the site that I am setting up with UUBT, I could never do it with vb, as the features just do not exist in the program.
I also ran a search on the forums at vb, I can find very few comparisons between the two packages - even when people do ask on the pre-sales forum, a VB person replies that UBBT has far fewer options & features, but when asked to expand on this comment, does not.
Make your minds up as to whether you want to compare VB to UBB or UBBT
Allen, i gave you a list of points to give some evidence for. All you have said so far is that vbulletin has more queries but have yet to show me why this matters. You have not given any evidence that vbulletin is more resource intensive than threads is, so what does it matter that it uses more queries?
Why does it use more queries? Well there is a base need for more queries on all of the pages, for example the template system is stored in mysql. I believe that you now have a template system but it does not use mySQL so less queries. (I am sure you will say that this makes it better but can counter that if you so wish). Other things such as multiple template sets, cobranding, replacement variables being independant from templates etc all add to the raw number of queries that must be done one every single page. Sure it adds extra queries, but then it adds very useful features and we don't get many reports of people having performance problems.
Without doing an investigative search of the differences between every single page it is hard to know where all the other query differences are. vBulletin has I believe a more robust permissions system. You can see a discussion about this at vbulletin.com that references a discussion about the permissions you can't set for moderators. Permissions, require extra queries.
So yes you have less queries because you have less features. Bar the number of new threads/posts on the index page, something that I have always wanted in vbulletin as it is very useful, I can't see many other features you guys might have that are missing in vb and a few the other way round. So that is why we have more queries.
So there, more queries. I accept that. But I think you really need to somehow show that the performance of a forum is based solely on how many queries it has as this is the only evidence you are giving to back up why vbulletin is more resource hungry than anything else. You have not.
Out of interest what features are missing from vb?
You are right, comparing vb with UBB is pointless. Trying to do a search on UBB shows the difference between any database backed software, from the numerous free forums out there to programs such as threads and vbulletin.
Because, all other things being equal (server hardware/software and setup, number of users, number of posts and threads, browser version, etc etc etc), database queries are what determines server load - that's a pretty basic concept in database/software design. Just because you can query for the most minute details doesn't mean you should.
The average user doesn't care where the templates are stored, that multiple templates are available, etc. - all they know is the site is slow. All non-forum-software things being equal, threads is faster and less server-intensive due to the design/implementation. I don't have to prove less-queries-means-better-performance, that's common sense - a vb developer needs to prove their design hasn't compromised performance for what could be seen as unnecessary fluff.
1) vBulletin is slower than wwwthreads. No proof needed 2) You are questioned on evidence for this 3) Oh.. vbulletin has more queries. 4) You are questioned on why this matters 5) Your answer, because if there is nothing else to test it on (ie actual server load) then that is all we have to go by 6) Therefore, for allan queries = performance. I am afraid that shows complete ignorance as has already been shown. Performance is not based simply around the number of queries. As any db person can tell you 2 queries can sometimes be faster than 1.
Your specific points:
1) Show me that templates being stored in a database is less efficient than a file system please if you want to claim this 2) By storing templates in the database we have accesss to greater level of features inclduing cobranding, multiple styles etc as well as some nice new features that you won't see until vb3 (sure it is vaporware for you but not for me).
The problem here is you made unsubstantiated claims about performance of another product. You have failed to provide any evidence what so ever for your claims apart from suggesting that there are more queries. That is like saying, well vbulletin has more PHP code (i don't know if it does) and because there is more PHP code to parse then it is going to be slower. Utter rubbish. To proove performance is slow you need to compare two forums. As you have not done this your claim is unsubstantiated.
And lastly you suggest that a) site is slow (which one?) and you talk about other things being equal. Well they are clearly not, vbulletin has more features than wwwthreads as has already been shown so has more queries. Even if it was slower and more resource intensive it would not particularly worry me because the extra features are worth it, but given that I have found no evidence that suggests that it is any way slower. In fact most of the large forus out there with 1 million + posts and lots of online users are generally using either something built in house or vbulletin.
>>> To proove performance is slow you need to compare two forums. As you have not done this your claim is unsubstantiated. <<<
Last time I did my tests, vb beat out W3T by 40%. Now, granted, that information is over 2 years old and it compaired the perl version of W3T w/mySQL (which was gratiously donated by Scream, and i believe there was no PHP version at the time) to 1.x version of vBulletin.
Like I said in a previous post, I'd be happy to spend the time redoing the tests, if all the companies (IP including) would donate a copy of their software for these tests.
As for myself, I still have various copies of UBB 5.x, phpbb 2, vbulletin 2.x, and microsoft discussion webbot all in use on different sites. Different options for different needs. If one program suits your need, go with it... If another does something better, than go with that program... Each time I need to evaluate any program, I base it on the needs of *that* site, not anyone elses.
In reply to: Each time I need to evaluate any program, I base it on the needs of *that* site, not anyone elses.
I like this. Naturally my wish would be that everyone uses UBB.threads , but to face reality nothing is suitable for everybody. Everyone has different needs and tastes so they should use what works best for them. It's not like Vbulletin and UBB.threads are the only forum packages out there. Just a quick glance at hotscripts.com shows 110 discussion forum packages and surely there are more.
The big thing is everybody likes to fight for something. Microsoft vs. Linux, Netscape vs. IE. In the end it just boils down to what you are comfortable with. You tell the potential customer about your stuff and then let them go look for themselves at the others. I get asked all the time about VBulletin and others. The only thing I know is second hand stuff and I have no idea if it's true or not so I just tell them that I don't know.
I don't need to prove anything - you need to prove vb is not slower because of the > twice as many times it has to fetch information from the database per each page. I didn't go to vb posting on their site that vb is junk coding wrapped in duct tape - it's decent software that's not as efficient as threads, pure and simple. Common sense dictates this, as well as John Percival saying so himself - less queries == better. It's acknowledged on vb's forums that the higher the number the queries a file uses to generate a page, the worse the performance, otherwise, why is there so much work in the past, present and future versions of vb to reduce the number of queries? Keep working hard and maybe you'll get to where .threads is
I have said several times now I welcome an independent third party to server load test them and prove me wrong - I think quite a few people will be surprised at the results
Scream, thank you for your post. Again you are a breath of fresh air to the unsubstantiated claims from others.
Allen you actually amaze me. I find it hard to believe that you actually read any of my posts because you clearly don't understand them. This is what you said:
>> I don't need to prove anything
Ok, so you think it is fair to make claims about software (does it matter where you make the claim?) which you can't back up?
>> decent software that's not as efficient as threads,
Under what criteria of efficiency? If it is just the raw number of queries then I am afraid this shows your ignorance and perhaps you should read up a bit on databases. Sure reducting the number of queries, other things being equal is a good plan but this does not mean a script with 10 queries will necessarily run faster than one with 20 queries. That is just an absurb statement to make. Efficiency of programs is based on a lot more than that. Or are you going to claim that the quality of the PHP coding is irrelevant as well?
And of course vbulletin is trying to cut down the number of queries, although I doubt it will be much less and more likely more in vb3 with new features but that is not yet known. But just because it has more queries (which has been accepted) does NOT mean it is less efficient. I am not sure how many other ways of putting what is really a very simple concept so that you can understand it.
>> have said several times now I welcome an independent third party to server load test them and prove me wrong - I think quite a few people will be surprised at the results
Yes, I would agree that this is what is needed and perhaps you should keep your subjective evaluations to yourself until you can proov them with an independant valuation. That is my only beef with you, that you make statements you can not backup.
Find an example that can compete with www.disboards.com for example which only recently went to two servers. 1285 online max users, I don't often see it below 700 active and 1.7 million forum posts all on two servers. If you have something of equal size one one server then I might believe wwwthreads is more efficient then.
Donate to UBBDev today to help aid in Operational, Server and Script Maintenance, and Development costs.
Please also see our parent organization VNC Web Services if you're in the need of a new UBB.threads Install or Upgrade, Site/Server Migrations, or Security and Coding Services.
vB is decent software, but they've got some serious issues 
Register_globals has to do with the basic coding practices of the underlying code. vB can't be run with register_globals on because the coding needs a 
at the moment - but expanding all the time....) 
