I have seen these kind of compliments one time to many, will it ever stop?

Well, I guess if you put everything in private forums, thats one excuse for why VB5 is tanking in google rankings and pages indexed.

 

If you move from VB3-4 to XF your pages indexed would reduce and it's not bad sign.

 

I absolutely agree it's not. However, should you not have at least one page indexed for every thread? Plus any additional pages such as page 2, page 3, and page 4.

I understand it got rid of a lot of junk content by removing the showpost type pages, but to go from having millions of pages, to having 423,000 threads and dropping, clearly something is wrong. And if they make their proposed change of having member profiles deindexed, you'll see the threads deindexed as well.

 

The difference is... one's a software migration and one's an 'upgrade'. For the former people expect everything to change, for the latter... not so much.

 

vB5 can also be considered a migration since the DB data structure has changed from the prior versions and is one of the reasons why people are running into bigger than usual issues when trying to roll back to prior versions.

It really should have been called "vBulletin Connect", without the "5" version number it, and treated as a new product instead of positioning it as an upgrade from prior versions; that would've saved a ton of headaches for both customers and the vB crew.

 

http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/foru...k/3999983-my-vb5-feedback-as-a-recent-upgrade

Kinda think about it, has anyone done any compilation of similar compliments about vB5?

 

Sorry, I still disagree.

Yes, a customer should test an upgrade to a major point release, but not to test the functionality of the upgrade procedure itself. That should simply work....period.

I just don't think IB should be taken off the hook that easily and obviously the customer sees it the same way. The fact the upgrade process seems to be broken must stay in the focal point and the issues must be corrected. The additional situation of the customer upgrading a live system without testing is absolutely secondary from a product quality standpoint.

There is also, as far as I know, no warnings or messages in any documentation telling a customer to test any upgrade to a final version first, before upgrading their live site. Or is there?

I know, if you are an experienced admin, you'd know better and this customer knows better now too. However, the seriousness of the issue is the fact the damn thing just doesn't work and she or he isn't warned that it might not work either (like the normal warning of a beta software).

The seriousness of the issue shouldn't be blown off in the name of "the customer is too inexperienced" or "stupid customer" or "user error".

How many more inexperienced customers are about to have vB5 blow up in their face?

Scott

 

I agree with you for all the ideas however IB also ran vb5 in their official forum and there were many complaints about this. Why are there so many customers that choose to buy? Even though IB has their tricks.

Once you let your money go for the software you'd better define changes that the software would bring. This is minium requirement I think, not only for the software but anything you would ever buy. Still there are many customers considered vb5 worth buying. IB fault no doubt but customers are responsible either.

 

The only thing a customer is responsible for is their decision to purchase a product or service. Everything else that happens after the purchase is a direct result of the alignment between the quality delivered and the expectations the customer has for that product or service. This is where IB has totally screwed vB5. They are still trying to sell it for something it is not. There is no alignment between the quality level and the expectations customers have. As long as this alignment is missing, customers will continue to get upset. So, all fault is on IB for the situation and none of it is the customer's.

Scott

 

Personally I don't agree with that. If the customer was using an earlier version of VB and believes that VB / IB is a reputable software business, it is not unreasonable for them to expect the newer version of the software to be of good quality.

I feel that it is unfair to blame the "user" when they are sold a poor quality product. If a company misrepresents their product and the product does not do what a reasonable customer would expect it to do, then the company is at fault, not the "user". It is my opinion, that VB misrepresent VB5 when they describe it as "the world's leading community software" on their homepage.

 

I've read this entire thread, and I have no idea what it's about. Could someone explain?