|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » I think I have a new website pet peeve... |
| 1-12 of 12 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 12-23-09 03:12pm - 5261 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
rearadmiral (0)
Active User Posts: 1,453 Registered: Jul 16, '07 Location: NB/Canada |
I think I have a new website pet peeve... And I'm looking at you, FTV Girls and Hustler... The rest of you know who you are too. I have this fantasy that maybe someday there will be the perfect website. Everything will be done right: content, ease of use, download speeds. But the little things matter too. I just ended a membership with Hustler and found this trait annoying, and I'm into my first-ever membership with FTV Girls. That trait? Naming every goddamn file on your site the same name. Do you know how many video files on FTV are named "o1w"? I don't know, but I'm guessing that it is in the thousands. Downloading from the site is so much harder since I have to create folders and sub-folders as I go along. Sub-folders are necessary since a model with 6 shoots will have 6 files named o1w, o2w, o3w, etc. Does it detract from the quality? No. Does it impact download speeds? No. Does it show a bit of laziness? Yes. Other websites can manage, like Videobox and American Vice. Think of it as a little way to mprove your relationship with customers. | |
|
||
| 12-23-09 03:42pm - 5261 days | #2 | |
|
Jeffrey99 (0)
Active User  Posts: 106 Registered: Nov 04, '08 Location: Good Ole Midwest USA |
Honestly that doesn't bother me. I use DownThemAll in Firefox. So I just name the first file the name of the shoot and save all the rest as the same thing. DTA will automatically change the second file to end with a _001, followed by _002, _003, etc. I've found that even when sites do actually name the files, it's normally something stupid anyway. So to me, it's not really a big deal. Honestly, I'd rather see FTV make full size videos available for download first, rather then splitting each shoot up into 4+ videos. | |
|
||
| 12-23-09 04:16pm - 5261 days | #3 | |
|
rearadmiral (0)
Active User Posts: 1,453 Registered: Jul 16, '07 Location: NB/Canada |
Not to head off in a different direction, but FTV is one of the few places where I don't mind split files. I took my mmembership based on the reviews that noted a lot of public nudity, and having split files makes it easier for me to get just that. In most cases, split files are another pet peeve though. | |
|
||
| 12-23-09 06:11pm - 5261 days | #4 | |
|
Reg Berkeley (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 22 Registered: Apr 01, '07 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
Thanks for the compliment. The issue comes down to how the site's content management system is designed. For established sites like you've referenced, they are probably past the point of no return. We've always just named our files in this fashion since day one. But you're not the first person to mention this pet peeve. | |
|
||
| 12-24-09 03:45am - 5261 days | #5 | |
|
atrapat (0)
Active User  Posts: 182 Registered: Apr 19, '08 Location: Non-USA |
If you are planning to switch to DownThemAll!, it's worth noting that you can apply a renaming mask that includes the subdirectories. So, if you've got these two files with the same name: http:// site.com/modelA/set1/file.zip http:// site.com/modelB/set1/file.zip You could enter a renaming mask like this "*subdirs*\*name*.*ext*" and save them to "c:\Pictures\site.com"; they would then end up in: c:\Pictures\site.com\modelA\set1\file.zip c:\Pictures\site.com\modelB\set1\file.zip You'd only have to create the site.com folder and forget the hassle of creating new folders for each download. You also retain some additional info on what you've already downloaded to avoid re-downloads. If they aren't saving static files like the ones above and use URLs with parameters like this: http:// site.com/download.htm?model=modelA&set=1 you may consider using *qstring* instead of *subdirs* and get something like this: c:\Pictures\site.com\model=modelA&set=1\file.zip Edited on Dec 24, 2009, 03:52am | |
|
||
| 12-24-09 09:27am - 5261 days | #6 | |
|
RagingBuddhist (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 893 Registered: Jan 23, '07 |
To me, that reads like "We've been told more than a few times how much of a pain in the ass it is to have the files named like this, but it's not changing because we've always done it this way." I know one monkey don't stop no show, but it's the split files and the file names that have put me off from joining your site. Sarcasm is a body's natural defense against stupidity. | |
|
||
| 12-24-09 09:40am - 5261 days | #7 | |
|
Cpmx54 (0)
Active User Posts: 42 Registered: Oct 09, '09 Location: USA |
I'm an active web application developer and web designer, and I find it hard to believe that any site would be "past the point of no return". If it is.. then it just means the backend of that site was poorly designed, and not written with scalability in mind. Writing code to rename the images, as well as update the references in the database, might be a pain in the ass, but a good developer could likely do it in one day. A better option would be to offer zip sets. GodsGirls.com does this, available in Small, Medium and Large. No file renaming, no creating your own folders and all that mess. Just click, and you're done. | |
|
||
| 12-24-09 01:17pm - 5261 days | #8 | |
|
Reg Berkeley (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 22 Registered: Apr 01, '07 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
Cool, then you'll appreciate that the issue probably has nothing to do with the file naming. There's no way that these sites store all that native content with the same name. The issue is how their CMS is designed (perhaps poorly, as you suggest), and more specifically, their authentication/security scheme. When files are all named the same, they are using an obfuscation technique vs. a modern day token auth. The homogeneous name is created in the SAVE AS to keep you from seeing the real file name and surmising where/how it's stored (to prevent theft). These are all serious issues that the really relate to content storage and delivery. Obviously, nothing is past the point of no return. But practically speaking, there may not be enough incentive to address the issue. | |
|
||
| 12-24-09 02:08pm - 5260 days | #9 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
It's kind of sad when a Content Management System can't manage to produce file names that are unique to each file and user-friendly in their naming patterns. It may not seem like a big deal, but when the user wants to store files in the same directory and has to rename them, even via automation such as with DownloadThemAll, it's an added chore for every photoset or video segment set. The user winds up managing the content! It's a turn-off that makes this user think twice about coming back for more fiddling around with little stuff like that. One site that is annoying with photo file names is Photodromm. Photoshoots come split up piecemeal in 2-3 zips over several days or weeks. Then you can't put it all in one folder because every file of every segment begins with 01l.jpg and so on! Doesn't have to be that way! Digital Desire, TorridArt, and BeautifulNude all do split-up zips, but the file names are made in some way continuous from one segment to the next. Of course, split-up zips are a pain, anyway. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. | |
|
||
| 12-24-09 02:34pm - 5260 days | #10 | |
|
figurebaby (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 14 Registered: Aug 15, '09 Location: Portland, OR |
It's still possible to create unique filenames without compromising server security, but you are more exposed to theft. We create our ZIP filenames dynamically with unique, descriptive, human readable filenames. I realize we make it very easy to pirate our content since it is already prepackaged and labeled, but my concern is for the people who pay me to provide a fabulous, convenient website. We'll find other ways to deal with security and theft. Please don't misunderstand though. Reg makes excellent and correct points about why some would choose to use unfriendly naming. We just take a different approach. | |
|
||
| 12-26-09 05:55am - 5259 days | #11 | |
|
rearadmiral (0)
Active User Posts: 1,453 Registered: Jul 16, '07 Location: NB/Canada |
RagingBuddhist: Maybe I'm just mis-reading your post, but I'm confused. It seems like you're saying that you don't join American Vice because of the split files and file names used. But American Vice uses scene-specific file names and no split files. When the American Vice webmaster made his comments about them having "always done it this way" he was referring to having done it the right way - used a naming system that uses scene-unique names. Maybe I'm wrong, but I interpreted the wemmaster's comments as simply pointing out that sites like FTV Girls and Hustler got into using generic names for all files early and now it's too late to go back and change them, so they just stick with a bad choice and live with it. I think what the American Vice webmaster was saying was "We've always just named our files in [a scene specific, unique] fashion since day one. But you're not the first person to mention this pet peeve [that other sites don't use this method]." I may be accused of putting words in the American Vice webmaster's mouth, but I don't think so. My apologies for anyone whom I've mis-interpreted or mis-represented... M | |
|
||
| 12-27-09 10:56am - 5258 days | #12 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
Nope, you didn't misinterpret anything. I think Raging Buddhist thought that Reg was the webmaster of FTV and was defending their way of doing things. RB, Reg is the webmaster of "American Vice." | |
|
||
| 1-12 of 12 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
