Radio Button selection

User 491904 Photo


Registered User
51 posts


Critique of the new CoffeeCup WebForm Full

Priority to S-Drive has complicated the learning curve of parking forms on own servers.

Radio buttons lack individuality preventing easy manipulations.
Radio putton having 1 choice picked as default is problematic.

Inabilty to place components where designer chooses as opposed to just drop it and that is where it stays within a space chosen by the program.

Not designed with the general form designer in mind. Rather it is designed for those who have the abilty to write HTML. (Programmers)

Trying to set up confirmation emails very confusing despite hints. To have to write within the HTML programming is not working due to inability to write HTML and lack of individuality of radio buttons.

Setting up reporting being attempted with no success for lack of undestanding the process. (See above)

I am of course comparing the classic webform builder and a program called Simfatic which I was compelled to buy due to the inabilty of the classic to be seen in Apple and some Andoid systems.

Here then is the beginning of the form design which should contain all NFL teams. This has to be manipulated bases on a 17 week schedule.

http://gregimbal.coffeecup.com/forms/NFL%20Games/

PS: Having the list of NFL teams in the list component of radio buttons appears useless since the listing does not seem to lend itself to individual manipulation of each team.

Sending form(s) to own server is unduly complicated also simple in FTP terms. Why can it not be like all other programs which allow transfer from within themselves.

Here is what I hope to achieve:

http://www.perfectonlynflpool.com/all_picks.htm

The creation of confirmation e-mail is easy, with results sent to me and confirmation with each choice sent to participant.

Sorry coffecup, I have to give this one a thumbs down at this time, until I learn how to use it. The learning curve is much longer than the original due to my lack of acceptable knowledge of HTML.

I am now going to attempt reading the instructions and proceed from there.

More to come.

Guy
User 491904 Photo


Registered User
51 posts

Hi,

Follow up on critique. I have read the instruction. I learned nothing new. I am no further in designing the form. I have polished it up, but it looks like a major retyping for each week. No manipulating of individual teams

I hope there is more to come in the development stage. It looks at this like an incomplete project. (I mean the program, not my form.

Guy
User 38401 Photo


Senior Advisor
10,951 posts

Guy Regimbal wrote:
Hi,

Follow up on critique. I have read the instruction. I learned nothing new. I am no further in designing the form. I have polished it up, but it looks like a major retyping for each week. No manipulating of individual teams

I hope there is more to come in the development stage. It looks at this like an incomplete project. (I mean the program, not my form.

Guy


Hiya Guy,

Are you sure you're talking about the Web Form Builder? Not sure if what you said makes sense for the form builder, but if there's issues you might want to be more specific about what you're having problems with. This is also a suggestion thread so I don't know what your suggestion is here :)
User 491904 Photo


Registered User
51 posts

Jo Ann wrote:
Guy Regimbal wrote:
Hi,

Follow up on critique. I have read the instruction. I learned nothing new. I am no further in designing the form. I have polished it up, but it looks like a major retyping for each week. No manipulating of individual teams

I hope there is more to come in the development stage. It looks at this like an incomplete project. (I mean the program, not my form.

Guy


Hiya Guy,

Are you sure you're talking about the Web Form Builder? Not sure if what you said makes sense for the form builder, but if there's issues you might want to be more specific about what you're having problems with. This is also a suggestion thread so I don't know what your suggestion is here :)


No doubt I'm talking about the webform builder. I am suggesting that the elements known as radio buttons be individualized.
Look at my webforms mentioned above and you might perceive the problem when dealing with multiple radio buttons. Sure, I can have a pick your choice type form that will work, but each week the games change and it would mean retyping most names over each time.
The form confirmation dialogues need to be developed in HTML to produce the required format. A typical prep time to create a new form each week is about one hour. I have devoted more than 5 hours producing the one that is on the sdrive, and I have not got the email format done yet.
I have looked at the confirmation email part and am almost scared off by the HTML tags and all.

I am also suggesting that the program is incomplete and will need a lot of revising to allow the flexibilty that could be achieved with the classic webform builder and with the webform program I am presently using (not coffeecup).

The problems may not be CoffeeCup's, but my lack of knowledge in programming. I look for user friendly programs. This one, to date, is not. The classic was user friendly.
It may be that once I learn all the tricks, the new webform will seem as easy. But I thought I would phrase the critique in the form of problems a perceived in the eyes of one who has used webform programs and is comparing one with the other. Excuse the expression, but I am mixing Apple for oranges.
User 38401 Photo


Senior Advisor
10,951 posts

Hiya Guy,

I can understand how it can be daunting at first when you're not a coder to start with it sounds like. I will admit the ease of use for the novice coder was a whole lot better for the Classic version, but in defense of the new program, I have to say it's a whole lot more feature packed.

I am looking at your 2 sites with the 2 different forms (the one you're building vs. the one you want it to be like) and I am not see what is wrong there I guess. Since I don't use your current program it's hard to compare them for us here, but the forms look identical for the most part in functionality. Getting sizing may be a little more difficult but should be fairly close to doable.

What is it that is actually causing you issues here? I see 2 choices per line which is what is on the target form. I see names of Teams which you will have to type in regardless of which type of program you use. I guess I'm missing the point you're trying to make and I apologize if it's staring me in the face and I'm just not seeing it :)

Feature wise though, this new one offers a whole lot more, and will be getting added to as time goes also which means we have a lot more features coming that won't ever be in the Classic version. You do have to keep in mind it was just released, has just finished testing for the most part (basically that's what the Lite version was until the Full version was released) so give them some time to get more features in it, more functionality as it goes. It is already a very good program, and will be a great one in a short time I'm sure.
User 491904 Photo


Registered User
51 posts

Jo Ann wrote:
Hiya Guy,

I can understand how it can be daunting at first when you're not a coder to start with it sounds like. I will admit the ease of use for the novice coder was a whole lot better for the Classic version, but in defense of the new program, I have to say it's a whole lot more feature packed.

I am looking at your 2 sites with the 2 different forms (the one you're building vs. the one you want it to be like) and I am not see what is wrong there I guess. Since I don't use your current program it's hard to compare them for us here, but the forms look identical for the most part in functionality. Getting sizing may be a little more difficult but should be fairly close to doable.

What is it that is actually causing you issues here? I see 2 choices per line which is what is on the target form. I see names of Teams which you will have to type in regardless of which type of program you use. I guess I'm missing the point you're trying to make and I apologize if it's staring me in the face and I'm just not seeing it :)

Feature wise though, this new one offers a whole lot more, and will be getting added to as time goes also which means we have a lot more features coming that won't ever be in the Classic version. You do have to keep in mind it was just released, has just finished testing for the most part (basically that's what the Lite version was until the Full version was released) so give them some time to get more features in it, more functionality as it goes. It is already a very good program, and will be a great one in a short time I'm sure.


Hi Jo Ann,

In the form that is already set up, each of the 32 teams is a separate entity that I move around on the form. I do not need to retype the names of each team each week. I just move them around.
In the form on the sdrive, units are in 2s and cannot be separated. So when each team plays a different oponent at least half the radio buttons need to be renamed.
It is important to start out with no choice showing when the form is first filled out. In the form on the sdrive, one of the 2 choices is already chosen. It becomes confusing trying to remember which teams have been picked.
The program I am using does not have the clutter of html when designing the email confirmation and sending me a participants picks. With the number of participants in the pool, I receive on average 350 to 400 emails a week for the 17 week schedule. Each pick is entered manually on a spread sheet (SQL is still a mystery to me). I am not saying that the program I am using is better at this time, just that is is more user friendly.

With the coffecup webform builder, I can design the form to look good, but it is not functional if I can't get it to report to me the way I want it. I'll keep working at it.
User 38401 Photo


Senior Advisor
10,951 posts

Ahhhh ok now the lights went on lol, thanks for helping me understand the difference between the 2 forms. I guess that's definitely something that would be extremely helpful for many people.

As for the user friendly part, the Flash version wasn't much more user friendly than this one really. You still had to paste code in the right places, and the results reply email was setup in HTML, but the results email was mostly setup in just fields so that was easier.

If you need help on that results HTML though, just holler and we'll see what we can do on it for you.

I have to agree on 2 major points here though. First, yes the radios would be nice if singly manipulable (is that a word? lol) and....

SCOTT!!!!!
Hear him talking about radio buttons needing not to be preseleted? hint hint lol.

Here is another prime super example of bad radio button setups. This was all preselected and you didn't have a choice of not selecting it if you didn't have more family members. I was filling this out for a family member that only had 1 person in her household lol. We couldn't go further in the form because it wanted ages for all the rest that were preselected by default:

http://coffeecuphelp.com/jo/screenshots/bad_radios.jpg
User 491904 Photo


Registered User
51 posts

Thanks Jo Ann,

This old Guy refuses to just lie down and not learn. In my younger days (though still old) I tried to learn assembly language. Might as well have given me the task of designing a rocket ship to Mars. It went way over my head. I did learn fortran programming, darn those missed semi colens,(remember that?) using a PDP 11 computer and marksense cards. Unfortunately, I feel the same way about SQL. SQL for dummies did not work for me. But I'll keep plugging at it.

That was just to make a point about user friendly. Things have changed over the years and user friendly is a relative term. AsI get older, the eyesight detoriates and I find that the size of the email configuartion box so small. It does not seem to want to let itself get large to get a better view of the dialogue. The task of setting up the confirmation emails and reporting email would not seem as daunting if the box was a larger size allowing a better view of the whole html form.

Thank you for your concern and your ability to see that a critique is not a criticism

Guy
User 170830 Photo


Registered User
41 posts



You know what Guy one ol geezer to another I know exactly how you feel I would like to see that email configuration box bigger so I could see it better to, and what SQL and data bases that’s gone over my head so bugger that for a game solders just use S-drive and let the devil worry about databases and SQL ya do the SQL for dummies if you want to became a hermit :lol:
Peter
Peter aki badger I only see what I want to
User 491904 Photo


Registered User
51 posts

Hi,
I make limited use of forms, but for 17 weeks (See NFL Schedule), they are essential. This Webform maker could not be used for my purpose because of the pre selected radio button.

An example of where this is important can be seen here: http://www.perfectonlynflpool.com/all_picks.htm

The first 2 games (Thursday and Saturday) are non required fields with all other games being required. If someone already has used the Thursday or Saturday forms they will not choose the first 2 games. If these are pre selected, it throws everything off. The form program which I used to do the above form gives me the option of pre selecting if I wanted to, but leaves it unselected as did the classic CC form builder.

Also, because of the different schedule each week, I need to have the form showing the different games. This CC form requires me to retype each game each week rather than just moving an element in it proper place and then matching the games using the group name function in the properties.

The third difficulty is that of the email confirmation dialogue box is too small without the ability to increase its size.

Take the above critique as a wish to have CC WebForm builder work. The WebForm builder I am using now has all the functions mentioned above, and allows for direct uploading to one's own servers.

By the way, my form can be seen and filled out on IPhones, IPads and also Android OS.

Good luck in the New Year. There is much work for your coders to do.

Guy

Have something to add? We’d love to hear it!
You must have an account to participate. Please Sign In Here, then join the conversation.