What do you think about Vbulletin vs Xenforo?

[Gemma]

@nhawk

You currently release modifications on both platforms, is there much difference between the two in terms of coding?

[JacquiiDesigns]

Originally Posted by katie hunter

Adore XF vs bringing negativity ? Do you even see how contradicting you are (: like seriously. Sorry i am not a hypocrite.

And I am not talking to you now, I was talking to Gemma, better work on your logo design instead of putting fake words https://vborg.vbsupport.ru/showpost....1&postcount=63 it is offensive to web design when you use complex words that aren't even justifiable. This actually tells me few things about your character.

There you go again Katie: Nothing of substance to add so you throw in a totally irrelevant insult.
Here's a suggestion for you ==> Go back to school. I said ABHOR Xenforo, which you obviously do. Whether you know the definition of abhor is obviously at issue.

For your educational purposes - enlighten yourself at http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abhor - where you will clearly see the meaning:

Abhor:
to regard with extreme repugnance | to loathe

Furthermore - Please *try* to refrain from slinging insidiously horrid insults my way.
It makes you look like a buffoon. It truly does Katie.

Next...

J.

[nhawk]

Originally Posted by Gemma

@nhawk

You currently release modifications on both platforms, is there much difference between the two in terms of coding?

Between vB3/4 and XF, there is a fair learning curve but nothing too wild. I'll be the first to admit that I am still learning the XF way of doing things and I discover things with each new add-on I do.

At this point I am comfortable programming for either platform. But I have to say I prefer coding for XF. I've been swamped with people moving to XF and wanting my custom mods converted so I'm getting a lot of practice.

[JacquiiDesigns]

Originally Posted by nhawk

But I have to say I prefer coding for XF. I've been swamped with people moving to XF and wanting my custom mods converted so I'm getting a lot of practice.

Congrats on the success!
Might I ask why you prefer coding for XF?

J.

[nhawk]

Originally Posted by JacquiiDesigns

Congrats on the success!
Might I ask why you prefer coding for XF?

J.

There are quite a few reasons. But one of the biggest ones is the TMS (template modification system). I can manipulate templates without ever actually touching the templates. So an upgrade to XF has no effect on my add-ons.

Another is the direct access to literally every function in XF. It cuts coding time considerably once you get the idea of how XF works.

And finally, if done correctly one add-on can't interfere with another. So I have very little worry about a mod conflicting with another one. But I still slip up once in a while and have to correct a couple of things here and there with this one.

The entire process is almost like opening a kitchen cabinet and picking what you need to put together a good meal.

[BirdOPrey5]

Originally Posted by Barcham

If the founders of XF were former employees at VB, why were they not bound by a non-disclosure/non-competition clause in their contracts? I've been working in the computer business as a hardware specialist for 35 years and such contracts are a standard thing, especially in the software end of the business. If they were bound by such a contract, VB needs better lawyers who would make certain they were enforced. IF they were not bound by such a contract, VB/IB made a serious error and tough luck - deal with it.

As we saw from the documents released during the lawsuit they were bound by a 1 year non-compete clause.

XenForo didn't become a thing until the day the non-compete expired.

Part of the lawsuit was the fact VB felt this meant they were competing / breaking the agreement by working on XenForo (before it had a public name.)

The reality is however that the precedent set in both the State of California (where Internet Brands is based) and the UK make non-compete clauses unenforceable as a practical matter. Had those been the only charges in the lawsuit IB may have had the moral highground they would have easily lost the case.

[katie hunter]

Originally Posted by nhawk

There are quite a few reasons. But one of the biggest ones is the TMS (template modification system). I can manipulate templates without ever actually touching the templates. So an upgrade to XF has no effect on my add-ons.

Another is the direct access to literally every function in XF. It cuts coding time considerably once you get the idea of how XF works.

And finally, if done correctly one add-on can't interfere with another. So I have very little worry about a mod conflicting with another one. But I still slip up once in a while and have to correct a couple of things here and there with this one.

The entire process is almost like opening a kitchen cabinet and picking what you need to put together a good meal.

But to make it clear, it is not XF, it is the Zend framework http://www.zend.com/en/ and since XF back-end is built using zend, imagine i have a product back-end built using Zend, Cakephp, Yii or any of these wonderful framework, any web developer familiar with the framework and learn it, can create great addons without affecting the main template or hassle.

So credit is to be given back to Zend framework not XF whereas VB uses its own built framework that is built from ground up.

Originally Posted by BirdOPrey5

As we saw from the documents released during the lawsuit they were bound by a 1 year non-compete clause.

XenForo didn't become a thing until the day the non-compete expired.

Part of the lawsuit was the fact VB felt this meant they were competing / breaking the agreement by working on XenForo (before it had a public name.)

The reality is however that the precedent set in both the State of California (where Internet Brands is based) and the UK make non-compete clauses unenforceable as a practical matter. Had those been the only charges in the lawsuit IB may have had the moral highground they would have easily lost the case.

Just as i describe it, opportunists.

[nhawk]

Originally Posted by katie hunter

But to make it clear, it is not XF, it is the Zend framework http://www.zend.com/en/ and since XF back-end is built using zend, imagine i have a product back-end built using Zend, Cakephp, Yii or any of these wonderful framework, any developer familiar with the framework and learn it, can create great addons without affecting the main template.

So credit is to be given back to Zend framework not XF whereas VB uses its own built framework that is built from ground up.

The Zend framework has nothing to do with what I said and the features I spoke of. I suggest you understand the code before commenting about it.

[katie hunter]

Originally Posted by nhawk

The Zend framework has nothing to do with what I said and the features I spoke of. I suggest you understand the code before commenting about it.

You're building addons/features for XF and they are using a Zend Framework for their back-end. If i hired a web developer expert in using the Zend Framework, it will be very easy for him or her to code any addon or feature for XF b/c it is using Zend framework for its back-end.

[Adrian Schneider]

XF doesn't use that much of Zend Framework...the knowledge isn't as transferable as you'd expect. When people refer to "using" ZF, they mean the full stack framework, particularly the MVC stuff. That is all custom in XF.

Now, if a programmer is competent with Zend Framework, programming is programming, and add-on development for XF is more like regular programming. It's not as random as it is with vBulletin.