Haha, that's my site. The difference is that SmugMug provides the support for Fastline to do it, and it only works on my site due to a dodgy hack.
I did a side-by-side comparison, and my layout actually ends up being almost identical to the SmugMug one, except I always finish the gallery with a nicely filled row instead of SmugMug nearly always ending on 1 or 2 photos left over. A lot of the difference is due to the fact that I'm willing to crop photos to make them fit better, which allows for more evenly-sized rows (though if you add borders to your own photos, that will make them look terrible).
Hah!, I actually knew that too, just wasn't paying attention to who I was talking to. Their layout selection is terrible, and the fact that gallery layout is not customizable at all is really weak sauce.
I think we want adsense support
I think if you would deploy adsense support most of us would be off your back. This is huge for a large chunk of people and why we love smugmug.
I haven't delved into this thread, but Andy referred me to this post and it's the most informed thing I've heard so far on this forum.
We chose Fastline because they understand JavaScript security and they would let us review their code.
I can tell you very honestly what the situation is:
- Of course we'd love to deploy JavaScript.
- Several people are threatening to sue me for not including it.
- But more people would threaten to sue me if we included it and there was a security breach.
- No one that we've met has yet been able to come up with a solution to deploy it responsibly, except for PBolchover, which is to employ the method used by WordPress successfully: institute an approval process and include some JavaScript snippets that pass the approval process.
- I've talked to several of you and the interest level in that is low except among the customizers.
I think if you would deploy adsense support most of us would be off your back. This is huge for a large chunk of people and why we love smugmug.
Chris
"Some" people want adsense. It's stretching things to say that "most" people who want JS support would stop wanting it if SM supported adsense as I rather doubt this is true.
I'm not arguing against SM supporting adsense, but I am disagreeing that adsense would cover the needs of "most" people who want JS support.
I think if you would deploy adsense support most of us would be off your back. This is huge for a large chunk of people and why we love smugmug.
Chris
I don't want adsense on my photography site.
Actually, as a photographer I want people to look at my photos and keep them browsing my site/photos. Imho, that's the purpose and ultimate goal of a photo site. I don't want to distract them by ads and I don't want them to click on something that sends them away, completely off my site.
Also, if photography is a passion then I want to share that passion and not send a subconscious signal to the visitors that I "need" money, money and more money and that they are browsing another commercial website that 'uses' photos as an excuse. It's the passion that must prevail not the money! People will come to you for your expertise, knowledge, 'good eye' etc. that you share; they will leave if you collect money.
I think you got that wrong. Some people would like to have the ability to use adsense, either by let SM allow users to make use of the required JS in a custom JS content block or by a special adsense content block. Those user who want to add adsense to their pages could then simply use the customizer to do so. It is not a generic "must have" for all SM users.
Even if SM adds the use of adsense i would not use it. Just like you said, visitors should have a look to my photos, not to adds. And i pay for my site to not have adds on it.
I think you got that wrong. Some people would like to have the ability to use adsense, either by let SM allow users to make use of the required JS in a custom JS content block or by a special adsense content block. Those user who want to add adsense to their pages could then simply use the customizer to do so. It is not a generic "must have" for all SM users.
Even if SM adds the use of adsense i would not use it. Just like you said, visitors should have a look to my photos, not to adds. And i pay for my site to not have adds on it.
No, I did not . I know that it's not a must have for SM users and SM will not force us to use adsense either but might provide it as an additional tool for some who may like it.
I just responded to the assumption that "most of us (i.e. photographers) would support adding adsense." I don't and I don't think that adding adsense is or should be part of the demands for more customization. I don't think adsense should be part of the essence of the JS discussion. I agree with Jfriend here.
I don't think adsense should be part of the essence of the JS discussion. I agree with Jfriend here.
I don't want (need) adsense either, but I do think it belongs here because it is one of the multitude of examples of things SM users could do before the "new" SmugMug was released.
Every feature that anyone was using via the previously supported JS framework should be included in this thread as documentation of features that SmugMug removed when they "upgraded".
SM has already proven that they can't (or won't) implement these features in a timely fashion, or even give a timeline for when they might be implemented. Making JS available to all users once again is the only thing they can do to repair the damage done by removing it from the new release.
Comments
Hah!, I actually knew that too, just wasn't paying attention to who I was talking to. Their layout selection is terrible, and the fact that gallery layout is not customizable at all is really weak sauce.
leftquark said they couldn't, as I quoted
I think if you would deploy adsense support most of us would be off your back. This is huge for a large chunk of people and why we love smugmug.
Chris
Nope, not me... I think many people want Paypal or self fulfilment :-)
Cheers - N
http://www.nzsnaps.com (talkiet.smugmug.com)
I'm not arguing against SM supporting adsense, but I am disagreeing that adsense would cover the needs of "most" people who want JS support.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
I don't want adsense on my photography site.
Actually, as a photographer I want people to look at my photos and keep them browsing my site/photos. Imho, that's the purpose and ultimate goal of a photo site. I don't want to distract them by ads and I don't want them to click on something that sends them away, completely off my site.
Also, if photography is a passion then I want to share that passion and not send a subconscious signal to the visitors that I "need" money, money and more money and that they are browsing another commercial website that 'uses' photos as an excuse. It's the passion that must prevail not the money! People will come to you for your expertise, knowledge, 'good eye' etc. that you share; they will leave if you collect money.
Luc
I think you got that wrong. Some people would like to have the ability to use adsense, either by let SM allow users to make use of the required JS in a custom JS content block or by a special adsense content block. Those user who want to add adsense to their pages could then simply use the customizer to do so. It is not a generic "must have" for all SM users.
Even if SM adds the use of adsense i would not use it. Just like you said, visitors should have a look to my photos, not to adds. And i pay for my site to not have adds on it.
No, I did not
I just responded to the assumption that "most of us (i.e. photographers) would support adding adsense." I don't and I don't think that adding adsense is or should be part of the demands for more customization. I don't think adsense should be part of the essence of the JS discussion. I agree with Jfriend here.
Luc
I don't want (need) adsense either, but I do think it belongs here because it is one of the multitude of examples of things SM users could do before the "new" SmugMug was released.
Every feature that anyone was using via the previously supported JS framework should be included in this thread as documentation of features that SmugMug removed when they "upgraded".
SM has already proven that they can't (or won't) implement these features in a timely fashion, or even give a timeline for when they might be implemented. Making JS available to all users once again is the only thing they can do to repair the damage done by removing it from the new release.