incal wrote:Changes always surprise us, it's quite normal, let it give a couple of week of usage and after we can say if we dislike or not.
Don't interpret this as dumping on PBase, for I don't mean it that way but rather as JMHO about what a problem is:
(a) It would be less of a surprise if some degree of consultation with the members was done
before changes were made; and
(b) That includes beta testing, for which I'm sure that there would be no shortage of volunteers. But point (b) doesn't seem to be done to any extent at all; look at each of the changes that's been made recently and you'll notice a common thread.
Member 1: "Hey, x doesn't work."
PBase: "OK we've fixed that."
Member 2: "Hey, Y doesn't work."
PBase: "OK we've fixed that."
Etc.
It's great that they're being responsive at the moment... less great that they need to be, especially when they have a willing and enthusiastic base of testers (who would be using it on a wider range of platforms than PBase staff alone could emulate) to iron out the bugs (and give feedback on what's good and bad) before go live, if only they'd choose to call upon it.
And on point (a) there's already a source of consultation... it's the Features Request forum. The problem is that I'm not seeing a lot of similarity between the biggest things that are requested there, and what's actually being done. Again, merely IMHO... the key thing that needs to be worked on is a fully featured API. Do that and there probably wouldn't be any need for developing iPad apps, Lightroom plugins, etc... because enthusiasts in the community would be out there knocking them up like nobody's business. It would give much more bang per buck than a dashboard would, and effectively kill about a dozen feature requests with one stone.
But as I said... that's JMHO.