Just do it. Implement Tabs and quit the excuses

[Truespeed]

Hi,

I'm a registered FlashFXP user and I did a search for why there is still no tab feature in FlashFXP and all I find is:

"We would need to re-write the entire program to support tabs."

"We may come out with tabbing in FlashFXP Pro"

And all I can think about is that maybe I should have purchased UltraFXP instead. Seriously, I don't care what it takes and I'm tired of the excuses on why it "can't" be done. Just do it. I don't care what it takes, but it's 2004 and the lack of tabs and the excuses is just getting tired.

I PAID for the best FTP client in the world. Now it's time to make it better by implementing tabs.

[MxxCon]

bigstar will not change his release schudule or developmans plans just becuase of your rude post.
you don't know what's going on behind the scenes!
you don't know what source code looks like!
you don't know what it takes to rewrite flashfxp!
you don't know how long it's going to take to rewrite flashfxp!
bigstar isn't sitting on the couch twiddling thumbs and drinking beer!
saying "just do it" is extremely ignorant and ungreatful!

[Hetfield]

I couldn't agree more on that MxxCon.

[Truespeed]

If I came across as being mean then I apologize. But I just don't care for the excuses I've heard. This is reminiscent of why Internet Explorer doesn't have tabbed browsing to this day - because Microsoft doesn't think the public wants it or needs it. I sort of get the same feeling here. We don't need it and therefore we won't get it.

Usually when software reaches a major release milestone (IE 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0) there are drastic changes between these versions and the code in the 3.0 codebase doesn't even resemble the 1.0 codebase. This is why I don't really buy the excuse that "we'll have to rewrite the entire application". The codebase has already been drastically changed and the inclusion of tabs is just another evolution in the codebase that will differentiate it from the 3.x codebase.

[Ascii]

I do not like tabed browsing.

[neoxed]

Truespeed,

A milestone in development terms is 'usually' the current state of progress or the completion of certain feature before final (alpha, beta, release candidate and so on).

Secondly, how can you be so sure a re-write is not required? Do you have physical access to the source where you can make an educated judgment or are you ball parking your judgment based on no facts, just for the sake of criticism?

I'm sure they [FlashFXP’s developer(s)] could quickly code a tabbed feature if they wanted to. However, I doubt the result would as satisfactory if they took the time to properly plan, test, and implement it. After all, good things are worth waiting for. Maybe they have to redesign the threading model to improve the responsiveness of the application to compensate for the added ‘burden’ of tabs. Maybe they need to minimize the increased memory usage introduced by tabbing. Maybe the widgets/controls they were planning on using or writing drastically increase load times.

Personally, I find your attack on FlashFXP, particularly the developer(s), quite childish and naive. I’m not sure if you frequent these forums, if you do, you would have noticed the numerous requests for ‘tabs’. If you thought your post was different then the previous ones, or you had an idea no one else had touched on…you didn’t – it was the exact same, for the most part, as the past requests.

Courtesy and respect is looked upon greater then impatience and negative criticism, so why not show some?

[MidKnight]

i dont like tab browsing either. although a multi-thread system would be nice

[MxxCon]

Truespeed, reading IE and tabs, actually you are incorrect.
at the time when IE6 was released depand for tabbed browsing was indeed very small. now it's a different story. check out http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_Windows_Exec_Talks_IE_Firefox/1100534022

neoxed is partially right. for ffxp to support tabs, it needs to be truely multi-threaded, which ffxp currently isn't.
something like this needs to be properly planned out, not bolted-on to the current code base.

[DayCuts]

In order to make any program multi-threaded from a previous release that so obviously is not (ie the queue is paused while downloading a live update) it DOES require proper planning, time and quite possibly large amounts of changes in the code. I can't speak for flashfxp specifically, but i am also a programmer and scripter in about 12 different languages, so i know just how much work a 'simple feature' (as it may been seen) can actually take to properly implement.

Also, there are no laws for programmers, a 'major release milestone' does not have to mean a thing. It is entirely at the developers descretion. I believe the many changes implemented and the association/partnership with IniCom Networks qas quite sufficient for the 3.0 release branch.

Not that a version number makes a blind bit of difference to the users. The developers could jump to 6.0 with the next bug fix, what difference would it really make to the end user...

ps. if you payed for this software, why dont you update your profile to reflect that.

... Oh yeah, and i personally also very much dislike tabbed browsing. However i do believe the future implementation of tabbed (optional if possible, but doesn't really matter in the end) sessions would be great. Even though i would mostly not use the feature (if it were optional not to use it) very often.