HOME > Chowhound > Site Talk >
What's your latest food quest? Tell us about it
TELL US

This is new site is not working well for me

Karl S Jul 1, 2006 05:07 PM

I've been a regular contributor for years, but this shift may lose me. For some reason, this site (*alone* of the sites I have been trying to access these past few days) is just glacial, even on DSL broadband. The graphical features seem to be the hangup.

Because each screen takes so long to load, I've given up trying to find out if there are answers to some of my questions in previous threads.

Some commonsense questions:

1. It there a way to keep the splash of recent posts to boards I select?

2. Is there a way to expand the viewable posts from 20 to something more useable, like, say, 100?

I would like to try to like this new site, but it's so slow that I may cease to be a regular contributor.

  1. s
    Schveinhund Jul 21, 2006 04:12 PM

    I love the new site!!! I've been reading Chowhound for years and I finally joined because it's so user-friendly now. Thank you, thank you!!

    1. galleygirl Jul 21, 2006 02:04 PM

      I have to say, this is the first time I tried to view the site on a dial-up modem, and it's really frustraing. Luckily, i also have access to a wireless high-speed connection, because it's really impossible to wait for each board to load...I'd probably give up if I only had access to dial-up.

      1 Reply
      1. re: galleygirl
        LindaWhit Jul 21, 2006 07:55 PM

        I still have dial-up at home (although I'm moving over to DSL with a new PC just purchased) and I've found the new version of the site a damn sight faster than the old format. I've learned to wait for the entire thread to load via the progress bar on the bottom of the screen, but it's a lot faster than the old view.

      2. d
        devil Jul 9, 2006 02:24 AM

        I am on cable, and the new site is sooooo much faster than the old one.

        1. hatless Jul 9, 2006 12:59 AM

          add_column :users, :topics_per_page, :integer, :default => 20
          # Set default for existing users
          User.reset_column_information
          User.find(:all).each do |p|
          p.topics_per_page = 20
          end

          ...

          @topic_pages, @topics = paginate(:topics, :per_page => current_user.topics_per_page,
          :order => "updated_at DESC")

          ...

          <label for "user_topics_per_page">Threads Per Page:</label>
          <%= select "user", "topics_per_page", [20,40,50,100] %>

          ...would pretty much do it, I think, give or take a line of validation to make sure nobody opts for 1500 threads per page. ;)

          2 Replies
          1. re: hatless
            PJ Hyett Jul 9, 2006 01:27 AM

            This makes me smile, good to see Rails developers posting on the site. We're aware of how easy it would be to make the topics per page a user-selected option, but there are implications with the amount of extra caching that needs to be done to handle it. Head over to my site if you wanna talk more Rails: http://www.pjhyett.com

            -Chowhound Engineering

            1. re: hatless
              d
              David Ford Jul 9, 2006 02:10 AM

              hatless, you are *such* a showoff.

              Now, BACK TO THE CHOW!

              Er, I mean site talk. :-)

            2. Chris VR Jul 9, 2006 12:33 AM

              Karl, let me echo other sentiments- please stick with the site because I'd hate to lose you as a poster!

              You asked "2. Is there a way to expand the viewable posts from 20 to something more useable, like, say, 100? "

              The software doesn't really offer anything right now to allow users to customize their own experience, but I've seen this raised pretty often and joing you in fervently hoping it gets addressed soon.

              1. Karl S Jul 3, 2006 03:53 PM

                Things did improve this weekend. The images before that were clogging up the loading, but not on other websites. It was very strange.

                2 Replies
                1. re: Karl S
                  Snackish Jul 5, 2006 03:16 PM

                  Maybe the tubes that the internet is made up of (as Sen Ted Stephens of Alaska claimed) were all stuffed full.

                  1. re: Snackish
                    f
                    Feed Me Jul 21, 2006 10:47 PM

                    Very cool reply - maybe the science works

                2. MMRuth Jul 3, 2006 03:45 PM

                  Karl S - please don't leave us! I have a high speed cable connection and the site is very fast for me. Don't have any suggestions on why you are experiencing slowness though.

                  1. d
                    Dave Feldman Jul 2, 2006 01:22 AM

                    I'm on a cable connection and the boards fly for me, as fast as any forum software I've experienced. My only complaints have been how long it takes to find new replies on long threads.

                    Using myChow and Hot Posts makes a big difference. I have to agree that you might have a settings issue.

                    I haven't frozen once. Maybe just luck.

                    1. Bob Brooks Jul 1, 2006 11:46 PM

                      I have DSL but have absolutely not noticed the pages loading any slower than before. In fact, the site actually seems faster. I wonder if there might be some issue with your browser...

                      1. Greg B Jul 1, 2006 10:06 PM

                        I suspect that the site employs Flash for just about everything -- I note that when you get into a long thread (say, the 50+ posts in the current one about the interface) that it takes several seconds for the computer to "unfreeze" which, coincidentally, is when the graphics kick in. I also note that there are occasional pieces of text in posts that simply are not rendered at all on my screen, which may be an issue between Flash and my video settings. I suspect another Flash issue is causing the links in the Big Red Box at the bottom of the screen to freeze my entire computer at times.

                        I have never had problems with Flash before but OTOH it is not something I particularly cared about since it was mostly used for ads and other annoyances, so why would I care? Now I do though. It would be nice to have something posted about version #s required, minimum computer configurations, etc., if gee-whiz software is what's needed.

                        1 Reply
                        1. re: Greg B
                          hatless Jul 5, 2006 03:26 PM

                          The map on the "boards" page is the only Flash I'v seen on the site proper. The rest of the effects -- the fades, the way the posts slide down to reveal the board list, etc. -- are all plain 'ol HTML and Javascript, albeit of the snazzy variety you usually only saw on the likes of Google Maps, GMail and parts of Yahoo. It's not gonna be snappy on a 256MB, 5-plus-year-old computer but loading the Outer Boroughs or Bay Area thread lists on the old site wasn't either.

                        2. Bob Martinez Jul 1, 2006 06:08 PM

                          I use the site on dial up at home. It's slightly slower than the old software but more than fast enough. At work with broadband it flies. I suspect there's a setting issue for you. You'll not that slowness is not on the list of complaints so the issue can't be a common one.

                          The number of topics per page was recently expanded from 20 to 40.

                          Hot Posts is back.

                          I'm sure your problems can be resolved. Please stick with it.

                          1. coll Jul 1, 2006 05:57 PM

                            Hi Karl, have you tried "My Chow" on the header at the top of the page. It's only posts that you have started or contributed to yourself. I love it. We'd hate to lose such an erudite poster as yourself for no good reason!

                            Show Hidden Posts