Some notes
It's obvious that PTC is making a very hard effort to implement a new collaboratory, I just must to congratulate the guys involved in this project, because is easy to see that they are paying much attention in the develop of this project.
Also is obvious that they are following the new tendencies in the process, making not a collaboratory but a community, a social one, using the news available technologies to make it. But this have nothing new, from the times before of the cavern mans this happen. And the process of changes are usually some traumatic.
The new options available sure have a lot of advantages, make the concept of the new PTC collaboratory superior than the old from the point of view of the possibilities of growth and are write having windowed standards to make this kind of discussion forums. So, I agree with almost all of the new toys. Even that, have some points to remark.
I don't see people who claim to recover the old functions available in the collaboratory as dinosaurs after a meteorite impact -at least, if that, I'm a diplodocus-. The old technology provides just the enough to have a high discussion level with the minimal effort from the side of those who want to answer questions or having interesting points of views take the time and with the best of the intentions empty out it to the others.
I think that a point here is if system engineers dedicated to the design of this community want to preserve it or not. I'm sure that in the staff who are working here are persons that want it, but, and probably without proposed it, this design is not on purpose to have the kind of discussion that the other technology propitiates. For example, here there are the possibility to mark answers as the correct one. This make a lot of assumptions, for starting, the principle that there are sure only one correct answer -this the big, but there a lot of other assumptions. I leave in a word where the circuits have a Thevenin or Norton equivalents, both corrects, just if they are assuming as linear, planes, components at very long distance one between others but joined with no resistive wires, etc, etc. So, the true is more a functional abstraction than a catching thing. If Discussions are thinking just to make a social tissue I think that this conception make to degrade the technical concepts that people can to knock over here.
In the above point I don't see the ex-profeso intention to do it, but a systems engineers translating here technologies which are not specific for technical communities -or technological - linking communities.
Another thing that I see typical from engineers dedicated to develop software is the size of the pages: there are a lot of pages with more than 2.000.000 bits -this without counting images. Usually those guys have the last innovative hardware, optimized operating systems -usually more than one- and cleaning machines -this is, without other software. I believe that I'm not alone in the form that I read the forums: with four or five hungry of resources other openend programs -like mathcad-, by intervals -like when drinking coffee or smoking- and interchanging this reading with others -like one or two pdf or the soccer results. I usually use Opera to navigate, and must to confess that even work fine for the most pages, which surprise to me, there are others that make the reading bother.
So, having above things in mind and another, I guess that making the access in some "old view" engine, without the sophistications of the "normal" view, but with the speed of the simple things. Gmail have it, BBC internet site have it, so probably it is some useful thing. Also remember that the standard for well designed pages still in 800x600. For the low-resources reading, can't go beyond this resolution.
Another point of view could be not think in improve the community with the ability for reading posts on-line populating the options in this design, but providing software to do it off-line. There are a lot of free software to read PHP forums, I don't use it and know very little about this, but I'm sure that there are over there implementations with enough options to make a lot of people happy, or at least, with a easy life. If designers of this know some one, probably is time to point us to it.
Another point -to me- is the lemma: "A community for PTC customers and everyone dedicated to product development excellence" I'm not sure which kind of statics have PTC about they own software, but the word that I don't understand very well is customers. I know some quantity of users of PTC software, but actually very little amount of PTC's software owners. I see engineers working in enterprises with this software, which a lot of times are corporations, and the owners are shareholders. I believe that they have the admission by the side of the excellence of the product development, but I miss the old salutation "Welcome to the Mathcad User Forums". At least, I'm a teacher too, and one that still thinking that the education isn't a factory process where the product development usually occurs. I believe that this more modest wellcome have a best impression than a sphisticated lemma (slogan) as advertiser.
I'm sure that the staff dedicated to implement this community have more than enough technical background, willingly and enthusiasm in the good sucess of the implementation of it, so have certitude of it sucess, and in this post are just some personal notes and appretiations -and in my limited technical english.
Kind regards and congratulations.
Alvaro.