This question is not answered. Helpful answers available: 2. Correct answers available: 1.


Permlink Replies: 1 - Pages: 1 - Last Post: 13-Jul-2016 06:54 Last Post By: jGromit
utternonsensr

Posts: 1
Registered: 12-Jul-2016
How dead is Chameleon?
Posted: 12-Jul-2016 22:04
 
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
For years I kept an XP machine around for a few legacy programs. Among those was a copy of jAlbum originally supported with a donation.

It would be nice to dump that XP machine before it dies.

The problem is Chameleon. I can work around the glaring problems such as obstacles to editing, difficulty compartmentalizing projects, and odd insistence on storing on the "C" drive instead of the designates installation directory.

But if Chameleon isn't stable and there is no practical alternative that is equally straightforward (only images, title, and home, back, and next buttons) and intuitive (unviewed icons vertically arrayed on the left of the current large image and viewed icons vertically to the right) it might be more prudent to say good by to this old friend.

So what's your experience with Chameleon. Is it compatible with jAlbum 13.3? Is there an alternative skin that offers the same simplicity to the visitor viewing images on a web site?

Can the resulting album be uploaded ("res", "slides" and "thumbs" directories, index*.html and perhaps the "album.rss" file) to your own server and linked to a HTML page so visitors can thumb through the images?

Perhaps I have this wrong, but it seems like jAlbum is shunning basic utility in favor of "Gee Wiz" features. Alas, my application is anything but flashy and the target audience is just a tad technophobic..

Aza D. Oberman.

Edited by: Aza D. Oberman on 12-Jul-2016 22:05 to correct a mispelling
jGromit

Posts: 33,186
Registered: 31-Jan-2006
Re: How dead is Chameleon?
Posted: 13-Jul-2016 06:54   in response to: utternonsensr in response to: utternonsensr
 
  Click to reply to this thread Reply
utternonsensr wrote:
The problem is Chameleon. I can work around the glaring problems such as obstacles to editing, difficulty compartmentalizing projects, and odd insistence on storing on the "C" drive instead of the designates installation directory.

None of those "problems" has anything to do with Chameleon. Those are the functions performed by the jAlbum core program, no matter what skin you're using. If you could be more clear about what difficulties you're having, perhaps someone could suggest ways to avoid them.

But if Chameleon isn't stable....

Chameleon is completely stable. It will never be changed from the way it is right now - no further development.

...and there is no practical alternative that is equally straightforward (only images, title, and home, back, and next buttons)....

There are a number of skins that can provide exactly that.

...and unviewed icons vertically arrayed on the left of the current large image and viewed icons vertically to the right....

Now that, on the other hand, may be unique to Chameleon. Most similar skins offer a thumbstrip at top or bottom with a marker arrow to show where you are now, and at least one skin that can place a thumbstrip at either side (that's tricky because HTML layout tends to a "top to bottom" creature). When you're familiar with something, it naturally seems intuitive to you, but to a new visitor, I always thought that split thumbnail arrangement was a bit odd. It's rather an uncommon way to present a thumbstrip.

So what's your experience with Chameleon. Is it compatible with jAlbum 13.3?

Yes, it's completely compatible with jAlbum 13.

Can the resulting album be uploaded ("res", "slides" and "thumbs" directories, index*.html and perhaps the "album.rss" file) to your own server and linked to a HTML page so visitors can thumb through the images?

Again, that has nothing to do with Chameleon - it doesn't handle the uploading, or the way in which you link to the album from other pages. Those are basic jAlbum or web functions, common to all skins. Most skins use the same directory structure that you've described. The exceptions are the old Flash skins (obsolete, to be avoided) and a few of the newest "all singing, all dancing, all Javascript" skins. Those use a different output file structure.

Is there an alternative skin that offers the same simplicity to the visitor viewing images on a web site?

This is the classic question: "Which skin should I use?" It falls into the same general category as, "How long is a string?" ;)

It depends on what you like. If you want the skin to be exactly like Chameleon, then use Chameleon. If you want something that's actively supported and has some newer features (responsive layout to handle mobile devices, modern video support, etc.), then start looking at the sample albums for some of the more current, popular skins.

The list of "updated" skins would be a good place to start. The "popular" list is also handy, though it's not "time weighted," so it includes skins that were wildly successful eight years ago, but have fallen into disuse. The "downloaded" list is fairly unreliable, since it, too, is skewed toward skins that have been around forever, or toward skins that have only 20 users, but have seen 250 updates, leading to a lot of downloading.
Legend
Forum admins
Helpful Answer
Correct Answer

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in all forums