FORUM: New Brand specific categories

[Freddie Chopin]

How about I revert back to just separate Microcontrollers and FPGA/PLD categories for now?
Perhaps with a sticky thread telling people how to use the section. i.e."Use "tages" like (PIC) in the title, like people do for the Buy/Sell/Auction section?
Also, I think I'll eliminate "child" boards entirely, and move CAD to it's own main section with just the brand sub boards.

This would be great!

[ebastler]

Also, I think I'll eliminate "child" boards entirely, and move CAD to it's own main section with just the brand sub boards.

I've made that change, let me know what you think. I never liked the look of those Child boards with no description.

Hmm, not sure... The top-level list of boards is becoming awkwardly long for my taste. Adding the "Computing" section has already added a handful of entries, and now the "EDA" section adds another big handful.

I don't think "EDA" is big/active enough to warrant that level of visibilty. And I am happy enough with the way the forum software displays sub-boards, both in the "full" view and the mobile view.

[EEVblog]

Hmm, not sure... The top-level list of boards is becoming awkwardly long for my taste. Adding the "Computing" section has already added a handful of entries, and now the "EDA" section adds another big handful.
I don't think "EDA" is big/active enough to warrant that level of visibilty. And I am happy enough with the way the forum software displays sub-boards, both in the "full" view and the mobile view.

You can "collapse" the boards to take up less space, button on the right side.
Perhaps a couple of those can go? Who uses gEDA, Proteus, and DesignSpark? I only see a handful of threads this year in those.

[EEVblog]

Ok, FPGA's have been split from microcontrollers, I think this is a sensible and obvious choice.

[Freddie Chopin]

Ok, FPGA's have been split from microcontrollers, I think this is a sensible and obvious choice.

I assumed that "reverting" would mean that also the subcategories would be gone, but they are still here.

[StillTrying]

You can "collapse" the boards to take up less space, button on the right side.

For 90%+ of my quick visits, or even longer reads, or from different devices. I'm not logged in, so the "collapse" doesn't work.

I think MCU's and FPGA could be separated, but that's about it.

I agree with nearly all of the content of the ~15 previous posts, you're making it unusable, and it's not just because we 'don't like change'!

Edit: I don't mind the smaller fonts everywhere, I've got quite good eyesight at this distance.

[EEVblog]

Ok, it seems that nobody liked the new categories, it was universally hated.
Revert has been done, with the exception of splitting out the FPGA board from Microcontrollers.

[Freddie Chopin]

Great, thanks (;

[Sal Ammoniac]

Thanks for reverting it. Otherwise I think it would have resulted in the Balkanization of the groups, and based on experience with other forums, that's never good.

[KC0PPH]

I was really enjoying that.... Too bad it did not last 

[tggzzz]

I note that from the sub forums and descriptions, EDA==schematic+layout. In general that's a mistake, since there are many other forms of EDA, e.g. Spice being the most used analogue tool.

In theory I'd like to see a specific place for non schematic/layout EDA:

• a natural and significant distinction
• will actively encourage people to think about and use such tools, rather than stuffing components on a breadboard and hoping

but I have no idea whether there would be sufficient posts to justify it.

Revert has been done, with the exception of splitting out the FPGA board from Microcontrollers.

I think that's a good decision, not just because I suggested a few years ago I know it doesn't fit with my "ARM inside Zynq FPGA" question, but I really don't care

Thanks for reverting it. Otherwise I think it would have resulted in the Balkanization of the groups, and based on experience with other forums, that's never good.

Agreed.

[wilfred]

I'm now waiting for the split of "Dodgy Technology" in

It actually does serve a useful purpose as Dave has been saying. You can just ignore the entire board.

It was fun for a while but really, who cares anymore?

Separating that from General Chat really did make the forum a better place. But separating the people working with one microcontroller platform from those on another one doesn't help make the forum better. People who are not fanboys want to be exposed to other things and more importantly the people involved.  People come here to learn from others and to pass on whatever help they can offer. Or they just want to gather where others with similar interests (not devices) gather.

[wilfred]

Yes, it's Dave's place, but it's the community that makes it an interesting place to visit, and disrupting the community because of "reasons" isn't helpful.

I guess it'll keep the mods happy, busy moving posts to the relevant sections.  Personally I hope folks keep just posting in the main section.

+1

There's a cow path metaphor in there somewhere.

[newbrain]

Separating that from General Chat really did make the forum a better place. But separating the people working with one microcontroller platform from those on another one doesn't help make the forum better. People who are not fanboys want to be exposed to other things and more importantly the people involved.  People come here to learn from others and to pass on whatever help they can offer. Or they just want to gather where others with similar interests (not devices) gather.

I cannot but agree 100% - mine was a hyperbolic simile.
I'm glad that Dave reverted the change, opting for a much more reasonable solution and showing he listens to his public.

[EEVblog]

I note that from the sub forums and descriptions, EDA==schematic+layout. In general that's a mistake, since there are many other forms of EDA, e.g. Spice being the most used analogue tool.
In theory I'd like to see a specific place for non schematic/layout EDA:

• a natural and significant distinction
• will actively encourage people to think about and use such tools, rather than stuffing components on a breadboard and hoping

but I have no idea whether there would be sufficient posts to justify it.

I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be, but it would probably be more than gEDA. I'm thinking about ditching gEDA, DesignSpark, and Proteous. In that case a Simulation section could be added?

[EEVblog]

Given the zero outcry over splitting FPGA from micros, I take it that wasn't a problem...
BTW, I shuffled a few other categories around but I suspect no one really noticed.

[EEVblog]

I added a sticky post on how to add tags to posts.
Anything else to add?

[ebastler]

Given the zero outcry over splitting FPGA from micros, I take it that wasn't a problem...
BTW, I shuffled a few other categories around but I suspect no one really noticed.

The new sequence of main categories (Electronics, Products, General, Computing, EDA) and their sub-categories work fine for me. Completely removing all child boards has made the navigation nicely consistent. As mentioned earlier, the category listing on the home page is becoming a bit long for my taste, but I will get used to that.   

[tggzzz]

I note that from the sub forums and descriptions, EDA==schematic+layout. In general that's a mistake, since there are many other forms of EDA, e.g. Spice being the most used analogue tool.
In theory I'd like to see a specific place for non schematic/layout EDA:

• a natural and significant distinction
• will actively encourage people to think about and use such tools, rather than stuffing components on a breadboard and hoping

but I have no idea whether there would be sufficient posts to justify it.

I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be, but it would probably be more than gEDA. I'm thinking about ditching gEDA, DesignSpark, and Proteous. In that case a Simulation section could be added?

I think I'd prefer it to be "Simulation and Modelling", again to subtly emphasise the breath of the subject and to note the distinction between the two. Perhaps if you "build this better mousetrap", posts will automagically appear.

I have no strong opinion about those specific packages. My preference is usually to have the generic (as distinct from general) topics at the top of a list and the specific topics below. That's because I like generic topics rather than boring stackexchange-like "which button do I press to frobnitz the squirdle" questions.

Having said that, I'm not too worried about where pixels appear, and my normal trajectory on the site is the "new replies" followed by "unread posts", with searches where necessary. My main use for the front page is when I need to decide where to start a new topic.

[asmi]

Given the zero outcry over splitting FPGA from micros, I take it that wasn't a problem...
BTW, I shuffled a few other categories around but I suspect no one really noticed.

I'm interested in both micros and FPGAs so now I have to watch two subforums instead of one, but since I seem to be in the minority, I can live with that.

[EEVblog]

My main use for the front page is when I need to decide where to start a new topic.

I suspect that's common for most users?

[tggzzz]

My main use for the front page is when I need to decide where to start a new topic.

I suspect that's common for most users?

In my experience that is 100% the case, but anecdotes are not data. You might have data available

[EEVblog]

My main use for the front page is when I need to decide where to start a new topic.

I suspect that's common for most users?

In my experience that is 100% the case, but anecdotes are not data. You might have data available

I can see where people are on the forum at any given time, but AFAIK that data is not logged.

[richardman]

Thanks for reverting it. I have seen this sort of split before, mainly in photography forums, as a way to "draw more participation, but usually ends in disaster.

[tautech]

In that case a Simulation section could be added?

Fine idea. 

I tried to get something along those lines going a few years back as guidance for those venturing into simulation:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/circuit-simulation-(sticky)/


The rest of your forum tweaks are coming along nice and they should accommodate forum growth well. 

Do you want us to report threads that we see that would best be in one of the new categories, or have you mods got enough to do ?