# Organize! my osx brothers, don't let the osx man keep us down!



## habilis (May 31, 2003)

It is high freekin time that you enable image tags in the signatures. How do you expect us to have any kind of flippin personality on this website. jesus.
All the cool, high-end forums allow this. Don't let them fool you my brother, don't let them lie, down with the osx-industrial complex!!!!


----------



## ScottW (May 31, 2003)

Uhm, yea.


----------



## RacerX (May 31, 2003)

Seems like a waste of band width. But it makes no difference to me, I have the signatures turned off (they get in the way of content).


----------



## mr. k (May 31, 2003)

peoples signatures are kinda in the way already, but it's nice to have smaller text ones.  boards that ive been too with images enabled in the signatures just have really big pictures under every post, and that is ten times worse then ad's interspersed between pages...  it gets in your way and makes it hard to read things.


----------



## Darkshadow (May 31, 2003)

Yeah, those images make loadin the page a pain in the butt.  I like it just as it is now.


----------



## Giaguara (Jun 1, 2003)

Use your avatar. scrolling that huge images in signatures cause, are a pain in the apple.


----------



## toast (Jun 1, 2003)

I voted yes... with an image limitation in terms of size and dimensions.


----------



## symphonix (Jun 1, 2003)

I voted no. Signature images are like advertisements ... sometimes they are useful or informative, but 99% of the time they just get in the way of content.


----------



## bobw (Jun 1, 2003)

Image Tags in Sig's, not unless you have a setting in User CP to turn them off.


----------



## Arden (Jun 1, 2003)

Just use your GD avatar.


----------



## Shifting (Jun 1, 2003)

> _Originally posted by RacerX _
> *Seems like a waste of band width.*



that's EXACTLY what it is.


----------



## dlloyd (Jun 1, 2003)

I like them without


----------



## Jason (Jun 1, 2003)

waste o space....


----------



## habilis (Jun 2, 2003)

This is how you do it so it doesn't offend anyones taste in bandwidth or organization, and only benefits those who wish to see them;

1. Set up the Control Panel with IMG tags off as the *default* in signatures only, not in actual posts. 
2. Specify remote linked images only, that way macosx.com incurs no bandwidth expediture
3. If you want, specify dimensions of the image (around 432px X 54px or 6" X 3/4")
Beyond that, all the same rules that apply to avatars would apply to the signature image.

Ok, I was drunk when I created this thread so sorry about my militant attitude in the first post. I had no idea I was such an anti-establishment geek.

Also, while were on it, why no rank images either? I put these on my board and the users LOVE them.

Jason, I'm suprised at you, a fellow graphic designer.


----------



## toast (Jun 2, 2003)

habilis was drunk but I wasn't when I voted yes...   

I like the members of this board and I especially enjoy the works of a few designers that linger 'round here. Some signatures can be nice.

Obviously I'd like them as much as I'd like to deactivate them if I was surfing on narrowband.

May I simply point at those HUGE text signatures which don't eat up much bandwidth but which eat up reading space already. No offense taken, guys 

Cheers habilis !


----------



## ksv (Jun 2, 2003)

Why have IMG tags in signatures when 9 out of 13 are going to turn them off anyway? 



> _Originally posted by habilis _
> *Also, while were on it, why no rank images either? I put these on my board and the users LOVE them.
> *



Are you serious? And you tell _others_  to grow up?


----------



## toast (Jun 2, 2003)

You know, we phpBB guys we LOVE signatures.


----------



## habilis (Jun 2, 2003)

ksv: I'm going to put a texture map of your face on the German soldiers in MoH:AA to make being a sniper so much more worth while.

The cool graphic signatures would only be for the cool, graphically oriented people, which, incidentally, is about 20%. Thats why the graphic signatures would be off by default and almost a hidden function that only the really cool, forum saavy cats would turn on.

This site can only function with capital power. So, the point is to get as many people addicted to this site as possible so you can get more donations. It doesn't matter how you do it, give em stuff to discover and play with, different styles, rankings, whatever, keep em commin back for more. The addicted consumer is happy cuz he's got cool stuff to play with and people to talk to, macosx.com is happy cuz it gets more capital to continue functioning, exapnding, addicting more users. It's a happy circle of happy people. What do you have against fun>>>


----------



## ksv (Jun 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by habilis _
> *ksv: I'm going to put a texture map of your face on the German soldiers in MoH:AA to make being a sniper so much more worth while.*



Hey, mail me a picture of your face, and I'll do something you'll like


----------



## bootedbear (Jun 2, 2003)

> The cool graphic signatures would only be for the cool, graphically oriented people



While all those completely uncool non-designer  types should just curl up and go away, I presume?

bear


----------



## toast (Jun 2, 2003)

> _Originally posted by ksv _
> *Hey, mail me a picture of your face, and I'll do something you'll like  *



Some strong friendship is growing here !
*LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL !*


----------



## Arden (Jun 2, 2003)

Most (not all) of the users of this board could care less about the site's bandwidth usage; all they care about is their own bandwidth.  If you put images into signatures, then it takes them that much longer to download no matter where it comes from (longer, perhaps, because you don't know where it's coming from or how good the connection there is).

And Toast:  Those signatures with big text (thankfully few and far between) take up enough space already, why add an ad banner to the bottom of everyone's post as well?


----------



## habilis (Jun 2, 2003)

ksv, you know the thing about the sniper, that was pure sarcasm, just a joke. In real life I think you're OK cuz you like video games.


----------



## mr. k (Jun 2, 2003)

i really think that having img tags in the signatures is too much.  images bloat pages, they make pages ugly, and in general they hurt the overall design of the site. why not make whatever image you want into an avatar, the avatar serves the same purpose with a size limitation (is it 128 by 128?) so the board doesn't begin to look bloated and out of proportion.
now im not one to complain about bandwidth, but some people are still on 56k and do not have thirty seconds to wait for each page to load, and when space is wasted like that and images are downloaded, it makes browsing the fourms much harder.
and has anyone ever been to spymac.com/forums? look at how big the smallest post from anyone with or without an avatar is.  all they did that is different the here is they let the avatars get bigger and have some buttons under the avatar.  just posting one line of text takes up five inches of vertical board space!
one of the nicest things about macosx.com, and the main thing that kept me coming back to this form instead of another form is its enviroment.  it is consistent, simple, and it doesnt hurt my eyes to look at.  i am not saying that adding image tags would ruin the atmosphere, but it sure would bring down the design element of this site.


----------



## habilis (Jun 3, 2003)

I know it's a dead horse now, but for example, this is the signature image I use on other forums. It changes regularly.


----------



## mr. k (Jun 3, 2003)

and i agree that that looks nice, but if everyone had one like that not everyones would look nice, as looking nice is a matter of preference, and the board would lose quite a bit of its good old simplicity.
on other boards, some people just put big solid background gifs that say something stupid!


----------



## Cat (Jun 3, 2003)

> it sure would bring down the design element of this site



Indeed.


----------



## dlloyd (Jun 3, 2003)

Well, I guess as long as it was 'turn-offable' then it would be okay...


----------



## mr. k (Jun 3, 2003)

whatever keeps the boardies happy ;^) but if it does get implemented i agree that you should be able to disable the img tags in the signature, without turning off signatures.


----------



## toast (Jun 3, 2003)

Your site won't boot, Mister Kay.


----------



## ksv (Jun 3, 2003)

~kjell? Norwegian ancestors, or just a coincidence? That name is only two letters, minus one,  from my own


----------



## Giaguara (Jun 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by habilis _
> *3. If you want, specify dimensions of the image (around 432px X 54px or 6" X 3/4")
> Beyond that, all the same rules that apply to avatars would apply to the signature image. *



Use the avatar. learn to express yourself in 80x80 pix, or forget it. i hate even the sites that have huge avatars, such as 150x. *if* there was an img allowed in signature, it would *not* be 432 pix x 54, but rather 120 x 20, or less than that. you have the unlimited text in your possession as sign. (unlimited = as long as no one complains about yours), AND the avatar. period.


----------



## Giaguara (Jun 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by toast _
> *You know, we phpBB guys we LOVE signatures.  *



uh.   

i hate phpBB. it's even admin board suxx.


----------



## Giaguara (Jun 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by habilis _
> *The cool graphic signatures would only be for the cool, graphically oriented people, which, incidentally, is about 20%. Thats why the graphic signatures would be off by default and almost a hidden function that only the really cool, forum saavy cats would turn on.*



99 % of the users would use it. look at macnn lounge images and re-state your argument. use the avatar if you want a picture.


----------



## toast (Jun 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Giaguara _
> *uh.
> 
> i hate phpBB. it's even admin board suxx.  *



j/k, Gia


----------



## Arden (Jun 3, 2003)

Geez:  The avatars on this site are a MAXIMUM of 50x50 pixels.  That should be plenty to express whatever you need to say.


----------



## mr. k (Jun 3, 2003)

hmmm... it might have been that my computer was restarting of shut down... i can get at it from both the pc across the room and the mac here.  if it still doesn't work tell me - it might be a network issue.  oh and if you don't have safari or mozilla don't even bother going there - it renders horribly because i haven't worked on it for other browsers.
i just figured out that ie doesn't support <div class=" "> properly, so almost none of my site works in it : >

edit: yeah fryke my router keeps changing my ip address although i don't think that it should...  i can't tell either because unless i get outside the lan something makes it so i get to the server no matter what the router is set as.


----------



## mr. k (Jun 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by ksv _
> *~kjell? Norwegian ancestors, or just a coincidence? That name is only two letters, minus one,  from my own  *



oh yes, its half norwegian and half danish, as my mom is norwegian and my father danish.  quite the scandanavian name, huh?


----------



## edX (Jun 3, 2003)

i have been to several sites that allow sig pics. i've never revisited any of them. i find them terribly annoying and extremely self-serving. 

however habilis, if you would like to entertain us with yours from time to time, feel free to add into the bottom of your post above your actual signiture every now and then. frankly i wish there was a way that all kinds of signitures only showed up on a person's first post in any thread. then i could tolerate pics in them. i also think this quick reply should be defaulted to not show the sig and you should have to do a regular reply to include it.


----------



## Giaguara (Jun 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by mr. K _
> *oh yes, its half norwegian and half danish, as my mom is norwegian and my father danish.  quite the scandanavian name, huh? *



and you are american? amazing you ever met your parents, eh?


----------



## mr. k (Jun 4, 2003)

well yes im american, and no, my parents are american too : but can't they still be norweigan or danish?
if you really want it both my parents are third generation immigrants.


----------



## habilis (Jun 4, 2003)

> _Originally posted by edX _
> ...feel free to add into the bottom of your post above your actual signiture every now and then.


Good call, Ed 

Why are you guys hating on phpBB? what's the big big difference between vbulletin and phpBB?

This anti-signature sentiment reminds of how HTML purists hated on Flash when it first came out.


----------

