NATS 4 vs NATS 3, who's downgraded? - GoFuckYourself.com

jact · 08-20-2009, 02:03 PM

If you've gone to NATS4 and regretted it, or you've already gone back to 3 please let me know. We're just about to make the jump to NATS and I'm requesting to start in 3 but they don't seem to want me to? I don't want to have to downgrade and change links... again...

MaDalton · 08-20-2009, 02:25 PM

well, there is a very big program who just did that after 3 or 4 days. back to V3 that is

LotzaDollars · 08-20-2009, 03:38 PM

What are your reasons for wanting to go back down to V3?

webgurl · 08-20-2009, 03:38 PM

twistyscash.com downgraded last week i got an email from V4 to V3
I think Dukedollars did as well ....

wargames · 08-20-2009, 03:43 PM

I like 3 way better 4 stats are wack

Easton · 08-20-2009, 04:12 PM

we're on v3 and i refuse to upgrade to v4

TheSenator · 08-20-2009, 04:18 PM

As an affiliate v4 has more tools that are useful to me.

wargames · 08-20-2009, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wargames

I like 3 way better 4 stats are wack

Gotta love Nats and John 1 of the issues was fixed (sponsor related) before my post and the other will be on the next nats patch. Nats is the best

kaori · 08-20-2009, 04:41 PM

as an affiliate, I tend to have problems with NAT v4 on Firefox and Opera..
IE is great though...

bdld · 08-20-2009, 04:42 PM

v4 is more time consuming for an affiliate to use. the only thing i like is the stats info.

Major (Tom) · 08-20-2009, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by webgurl

twistyscash.com downgraded last week i got an email from V4 to V3
I think Dukedollars did as well ....

We had nats v4 installed. We never flipped the switch because we needed Doc to get more familiar with it. That's the only reason. I would love to be on v4.

Duke

jact · 08-20-2009, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DukeSkywalker

We had nats v4 installed. We never flipped the switch because we needed Doc to get more familiar with it. That's the only reason. I would love to be on v4.

Duke

Good feedback.

jact · 08-20-2009, 04:49 PM

BTW this thread absolutely is not bashing TMM in any way. I'm just looking for people with experience with 4 to sound off so I know what I'm talking about tomorrow in my meeting with John.

robwod · 08-20-2009, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdld

v4 is more time consuming for an affiliate to use. the only thing i like is the stats info.

+1

The default FHG system is just disgraceful in how many clicks it takes just to get a set of links, as compared to v3.

When it comes down to it as an affiliate, I only use v4 sponsors as an absolute last resort when I can't find a sponsor who offers more easily accessible FHG's with comparable content.

The exception to this (in my experience) is Medium Pimpin, who have a superior custom FHG system to circumvent the inferior default FHG system inherent in v4.

Incidentally, while the stats are a nice touch, most all nats4 sponsors I have tried are dreadfully slow compared to their v3 counterparts.

TMM_John · 08-20-2009, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robwod

+1

The default FHG system is just disgraceful in how many clicks it takes just to get a set of links, as compared to v3.

When it comes down to it as an affiliate, I only use v4 sponsors as an absolute last resort when I can't find a sponsor who offers more easily accessible FHG's with comparable content.

The exception to this (in my experience) is Medium Pimpin, who have a superior custom FHG system to circumvent the inferior default FHG system inherent in v4.

Incidentally, while the stats are a nice touch, most all nats4 sponsors I have tried are dreadfully slow compared to their v3 counterparts.

How would you design the FHG listing if you could design it any way you wished?

(also, you shouldn't see any performance issues on v4, if you are, please let me know where you are seeing them)

mpahlca · 08-20-2009, 05:23 PM

I still think Nats really hasnt done enough its better than all the alternatives but just lacks a lot of things that would really make it killer. Just my :2cents

Sausage · 08-20-2009, 05:36 PM

Yeah definitely sticking to 3 ... don't wan't 4 yet especially with all the terrible feedback we have had about it. Using 3 on 2 programs.

robwod · 08-20-2009, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TMM_John

How would you design the FHG listing if you could design it any way you wished?

John, v3 was superior in speed alone compared to 4. But for a quick dump capability, I defy anyone to come up with a better solution than the one Medium Pimpin implemented on v4 for FHG's. Fast, efficient, and vastly superior. It is certainly the exception on v4 rather than the rule.

NScash's own FHG system, while not on NATS4, is comparable if you're looking for examples of an efficient FHG system.

Quote:

(also, you shouldn't see any performance issues on v4, if you are, please let me know where you are seeing them)

I'd rather not throw any one company under the bus in public... but suffice it to say that I have yet to see a single v4 FHG system not make me sit and wait with each "display" versus how fast the results are returned on v3 versions -- regardless of the hardware it is installed on. One large company who recently reverted back to 3 has incredibly powerful servers and v4 still performed slower than any v3 install I have used. I was both relieved, and happy, they went back to 3.

cLin · 08-20-2009, 05:49 PM

for those on v3, is there anyway to get the pricing options to be buttons instead of a dropdown like it currently is? That's probably my only gripe. =\

TMM_John · 08-20-2009, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robwod

John, v3 was superior in speed alone compared to 4. But for a quick dump capability, I defy anyone to come up with a better solution than the one Medium Pimpin implemented on v4 for FHG's. Fast, efficient, and vastly superior. It is certainly the exception on v4 rather than the rule.

NScash's own FHG system, while not on NATS4, is comparable if you're looking for examples of an efficient FHG system.

I'd rather not throw any one company under the bus in public... but suffice it to say that I have yet to see a single v4 FHG system not make me sit and wait with each "display" versus how fast the results are returned on v3 versions.

So you'd like a dump by default, a textarea?

Regarding the speed issues, you're certainly not throwing anyone under the bus, if they have an issue we'd like to address it. You're helping them. If you'd like you can contact me privately of course also.

BestXXXPorn · 08-20-2009, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robwod

+1

The default FHG system is just disgraceful in how many clicks it takes just to get a set of links, as compared to v3.

When it comes down to it as an affiliate, I only use v4 sponsors as an absolute last resort when I can't find a sponsor who offers more easily accessible FHG's with comparable content.

The exception to this (in my experience) is Medium Pimpin, who have a superior custom FHG system to circumvent the inferior default FHG system inherent in v4.

Incidentally, while the stats are a nice touch, most all nats4 sponsors I have tried are dreadfully slow compared to their v3 counterparts.

I'm not understanding where all these clicks come in... If you're at tools, you click the Hosted Tab and then select what type of galleries you would like (Pic, Vid, Mix, etc...). Maybe the v4 implementations you've seen are just poorly done? Checkout TeenModelCash, I love their setup. That's only two clicks to get where you're going (not including arriving at the section). So I'm not quite sure what you're referring to...

IMO v4 is vastly superior to v3 in terms of functionality, reporting, and ease of use. I have noticed a few minor bugs relating to selecting large time frames and displaying the charts but that's nothing too major...

Brad Mitchell · 08-20-2009, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mpahlca

I still think Nats really hasnt done enough its better than all the alternatives but just lacks a lot of things that would really make it killer. Just my :2cents

Tough crowd! It's the best but needs more stuff... send John a list! I'm sure he'd love the feedback

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdld

v4 is more time consuming for an affiliate to use. the only thing i like is the stats info.

The best affiliates spend the most time sending hits not checking stats

lol j/k

Quote:

Originally Posted by jact

If you've gone to NATS4 and regretted it, or you've already gone back to 3 please let me know. We're just about to make the jump to NATS and I'm requesting to start in 3 but they don't seem to want me to? I don't want to have to downgrade and change links... again...

I'm offended you haven't called me yet to discuss this!

Brad

jact · 08-20-2009, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad Mitchell

I'm offended you haven't called me yet to discuss this!

Brad

You're my host, what do you know about anything?! LOL, joking. I was actually going to call you first thing tomorrow to discuss this and another matter.

BestXXXPorn · 08-20-2009, 06:05 PM

Yeah I'm not seeing a major speed decrease on any sites which implement v4... more than likely there could be more complex calculations and queries in the new system as compared to v3, but that's a necessity when offering more functionality. If a site is running slow, it's not the software, it's the hardware. Most likely (since there isn't too much to change in PHP unless they need to add more webheads) it lies within the DB. I would recommend people get some beefier boxes for their DBs and certainly be running a Master / Slave / Slave if they're a large sponsor. There are so many settings in let's say MySQL that you should have a real DBA take a look at your system if it's running slow...

Are people that are experiencing this checking for slow queries and running explain to see where the bottleneck is? What does your HD I/O peak at on your DB boxes and how often? How much memory are you allocating to MySQL? Have you taken a look at the amount allotted to your thread cache, bdb cache, table cache? What about your key and join buffer sizes? Many people don't even know these exist. Additionally, what engine are you running on what tables? There's so much performance you can squeeze out of MySQL if you really know what you're doing...

jact · 08-20-2009, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BestXXXPorn

Yeah I'm not seeing a major speed decrease on any sites which implement v4... more than likely there could be more complex calculations and queries in the new system as compared to v3, but that's a necessity when offering more functionality. If a site is running slow, it's not the software, it's the hardware. Most likely (since there isn't too much to change in PHP unless they need to add more webheads) it lies within the DB. I would recommend people get some beefier boxes for their DBs and certainly be running a Master / Slave / Slave if they're a large sponsor. There are so many settings in let's say MySQL that you should have a real DBA take a look at your system if it's running slow...

Are people that are experiencing this checking for slow queries and running explain to see where the bottleneck is? What does your HD I/O peak at on your DB boxes and how often? How much memory are you allocating to MySQL? Have you taken a look at the amount allotted to your thread cache, bdb cache, table cache? What about your key and join buffer sizes? Many people don't even know these exist. Additionally, what engine are you running on what tables? There's so much performance you can squeeze out of MySQL if you really know what you're doing...

I don't know how NATS is written, but if it's anything like Carma, there are some extremely bloated and poorly (read: NOT AT ALL) optimized queries contained in TMM code. We have extremely well optimized servers thanks to Mojohost and Carma runs like a dog even on that. Hundreds of hours of investigation later, it's the queries compiled into the code....

Soooooo I dunno about that one. I'm hoping NATS doesn't suffer the same inefficiencies.

robwod · 08-20-2009, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BestXXXPorn

I'm not understanding where all these clicks come in... If you're at tools, you click the Hosted Tab and then select what type of galleries you would like (Pic, Vid, Mix, etc...)

OK, let me explain the v4 process I find *I* have to use with most v4 sponsors:

Click Hosted Tab
Select Gallery Type
On the right column, under limitations, select Dump, and then any other parameters (a default sort of most recent to oldest would be nice).
Click Submit to again show the gallery list but with the newly selected parameters to dump
When the dump form finally appears, you can choose your dump fields and records type
Click Create Dump to finally get the dump you want.

And each and every time you select a new limitation to display, you have to sit and wait for the galleries to show, which on some implementations, is just ridiculously slow compared to any v3 I have used.

Alternatively, a dump on v3 is no less than half those steps for v4, and without the slow responding gallery display queries:

Select Program to use
Select Ad type to use (pics, videos, banners, etc. easily accessible all on one form)
Choose your desired Dump Fields and Click Show. You are finished

Nurgle · 08-20-2009, 06:44 PM

NATS4 is just a pain in the ass for doing the most simple tasks, as Rob has put it. I seriously suggest you guys hire a human interface expert first before doing anything with it. The number of clicks etc needed to get links, hosted gals etc is just a major pain in the ass.

Even something as simple as getting the refer stats of my sales on a single page appears impossible and i need to check each individual sale (unless im mistaken)

n

BestXXXPorn · 08-20-2009, 06:45 PM

Ah then judging from everyone's replies it does seem to be a matter of speed.

@jact Sounds like it is on the DB side then. I would love for someone that's having speed issues to contact me and let me take a look. I would, of course, sign an NDA and I can supply a whole list of references if you'd like as I know the data is sensitive.

I also invite TMM to contact me if they have a system already setup with a large amount of data and can simulate high usage. I'd love to help out. Are you guys looking to hire a CTO or Senior PHP developer?

@robwod It sounds like v4 could use a bit of display:none/block action to hide/unhide content areas rather than refreshing the entire page. Perhaps some repopulating of select boxes and things based on other selections to avoid page refreshes as well. I'm sure some AJAX would also go a long way to minimizing requests rather than running a whole page worth of queries over again... and like you said. Remembering previous preferences would also be nice for that area.

RyuLion · 08-20-2009, 06:52 PM

I'm sure the guys at TMM are waiting for affiliate feedback to improve their script. Its always a good habit to have a good friendly communication system with the software that's displaying how many $/RIO you could be making.

Not only you will be more happy but your wallet will be too..

SomeCreep · 08-20-2009, 06:54 PM

As an affiliate, I like NATS version 3 way more than version 4.

The interface with NATS version 3 is simple to use and straight to the point.

The interface with NATS version 4 is cluttered and non-intuitive.

Major (Tom) · 08-20-2009, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jact

BTW this thread absolutely is not bashing TMM in any way. I'm just looking for people with experience with 4 to sound off so I know what I'm talking about tomorrow in my meeting with John.

V4 is so much more web 2.0 i guess you could say.
Duke

GrouchyAdmin · 08-20-2009, 08:05 PM

Whenever possible, I choose V3 over V4. Not only due to the fact that I have several things tied to V3 that just work, I don't need to move to incompatible backwards link codes - and I absolutely detest the goddamn skins.

I haven't seen forech pairs nested 50 deep before.

Major (Tom) · 08-20-2009, 08:10 PM

Another thing to point out.
TMM has always listened to affiliates and adapted, changed, improved every time they were ever faced with an obstacle. Trust me, the first version of nats wasnt easy either and they fixed that. The same will happen with v4.
If there was a way to import all your v3 settings into v4, kinda like disk imaging on a mac, we all would be on v4. I wish it were that simple

Duke

xxxjay · 08-20-2009, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DukeSkywalker

We had nats v4 installed. We never flipped the switch because we needed Doc to get more familiar with it. That's the only reason. I would love to be on v4.

Duke

Nats 4 is horrible. We asked to be switched back to 3 and they told us it couldn't be done.

xxxjay · 08-20-2009, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jact

I don't want to have to downgrade and change links... again...

I would think there would be serious compatibility isssues for anyone who put links up using the NATS 4 codes. They would be forward compatible but not backwards.

georgeyw · 08-20-2009, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robwod

+1

The default FHG system is just disgraceful in how many clicks it takes just to get a set of links, as compared to v3.

I was attempting to get gallerys from a sponsor yesterday and I couldn't for the life of me get a single friggin link. Ended up closing the window and not using that sponsor.

greater than less than - for fucks sake the affiliate area is written in mumbo jumbo 'limitations' etc... Why everything was screwed up like that I have no idea, stats look great but I defy anyone to get a gallery dump.

Why break what wasn't broken?

Also what is the point of completely changing they way an affiliate interacts with the interface? I don't want to have to relearn how to use an admin panel every time it (up)grades

xxxjay · 08-20-2009, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgeyw

I was attempting to get gallerys from a sponsor yesterday and I couldn't for the life of me get a single friggin link. Ended up closing the window and not using that sponsor.

greater than less than - for fucks sake the affiliate area is written in mumbo jumbo 'limitations' etc... Why everything was screwed up like that I have no idea, stats look great but I defy anyone to get a gallery dump.

Why break what wasn't broken?

Also what is the point of completely changing they way an affiliate interacts with the interface? I don't want to have to relearn how to use an admin panel every time it (up)grades

Yes, the limitations are a limitation. On the bright side, the TMM guys are reading this thread and actually do care what everyone thinks and are working to resolve it, so I won't turn this thread into a TMM hate thread.

jact · 08-21-2009, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Yes, the limitations are a limitation. On the bright side, the TMM guys are reading this thread and actually do care what everyone thinks and are working to resolve it, so I won't turn this thread into a TMM hate thread.

Exactly. Tmm have made countless changes to carma for us over the years.

boneless · 08-21-2009, 01:26 AM

for me runnnig a big mgp network, nats4 is a pain in the ass.

Its allready been pointed out but in v3 i can make gallery dumps at the speed of light whilst in v4 it takes just so much effort to output listings for the sites i want to have, in v3 it was easy working.

i really loved the stats v3 was putting out. easy to read.

v4 to me seems to be a bit too much loaded with stuff the average affiliate really doesnt wanna see. The design is slick, but i guess we got all got used to v3 and loved it the way it was.

georgeyw · 08-21-2009, 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Yes, the limitations are a limitation. On the bright side, the TMM guys are reading this thread and actually do care what everyone thinks and are working to resolve it, so I won't turn this thread into a TMM hate thread.

I'm not trying to hate on TMM, just venting my frustrations. I really don't understand the thought process behind the changes to be perfectly honest.

Any webmaster that was used as a beta tester and thought that was great needs their balls removed with a spoon

Hopefully they get it sorted out ASAP.

Qbert · 08-21-2009, 03:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgeyw

Any webmaster that was used as a beta tester and thought that was great needs their balls removed with a spoon

Make sure it's a rusty one.

Randy Franklin · 08-21-2009, 05:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nurgle

NATS4 is just a pain in the ass for doing the most simple tasks, as Rob has put it. I seriously suggest you guys hire a human interface expert first before doing anything with it. The number of clicks etc needed to get links, hosted gals etc is just a major pain in the ass.

Even something as simple as getting the refer stats of my sales on a single page appears impossible and i need to check each individual sale (unless im mistaken)

n

(From an affiliate point of view)
I agree with Nurgle. The referal stats are a major weakness in nats4.
Also: nats4 seems to be much slower than nats3. I noticed this with several sponsors and last week again with Twistyscash.

Machete_ · 08-21-2009, 05:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgeyw

I'm not trying to hate on TMM, just venting my frustrations. I really don't understand the thought process behind the changes to be perfectly honest.

Any webmaster that was used as a beta tester and thought that was great needs their balls removed with a spoon

Hopefully they get it sorted out ASAP.

+1

However - I dont know if its a bad script or a bad implmentation of a good script.

But I dont care really, because the bottomline is its pain to use

Vjo · 08-21-2009, 05:18 AM

The referral url is truncated in v4 too. It's there but like half as long. Maybe that is individual program related but seems I've seen that in a couple of v4 progs. Other than that v4 is ok. But yeah kind of bloaty and confusing. (Does anyone ever really use graphs that much for example)

Vjo · 08-21-2009, 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randy Franklin

(From an affiliate point of view)
I agree with Nurgle. The referal stats are a major weakness in nats4.
Also: nats4 seems to be much slower than nats3. I noticed this with several sponsors and last week again with Twistyscash.

Yep and referral stats (not only on signups but on all hits) is prob the most important thing nats had over other stats. They're still there but truncated which can be a problem.

selena · 08-21-2009, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgeyw

I was attempting to get gallerys from a sponsor yesterday and I couldn't for the life of me get a single friggin link. Ended up closing the window and not using that sponsor.

greater than less than - for fucks sake the affiliate area is written in mumbo jumbo 'limitations' etc... Why everything was screwed up like that I have no idea, stats look great but I defy anyone to get a gallery dump.

Why break what wasn't broken?

Also what is the point of completely changing they way an affiliate interacts with the interface? I don't want to have to relearn how to use an admin panel every time it (up)grades

I'm also not hating on NATS, because generally speaking, it is great.

However...

We run 3 on JaYMan Cash, and 4 on That One Program. I'm embarrassed to say this, but I had to ask how to create a dump in 4, and I've been an affiliate manager for nearly 4 years and an affiliate for over 5, so it's not like I'm a stranger to the process.

That aspect of it *really* needs some fine-tuning, imho.

shunga · 08-21-2009, 05:53 AM

I've always been curious about the process people go through when coding this stuff, in particular with regard to the CCBill affiliate admin; how many actual affiliates are consulted? Not part timers, but full time affiliates.

~Ray · 08-21-2009, 05:58 AM

sounds like you need the fhg format of V3 put into V4 and punt the current fhg format currently used in V4

Christophe · 08-21-2009, 06:32 AM

also like better better v3 to v4. for the reasons stated before: speed and usability

robwod · 08-21-2009, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by selena

We run 3 on JaYMan Cash, and 4 on That One Program.

I was actually pretty close to signing up for That One Program, until I saw it was on 4. Nothing personal, but so far my experience with v4 is one of frustration, which makes the programs running on it less attractive to me. It's unfortunate that an affiliate backend could influence decision making, but it does -- at least for me.

NATS4 seems to have focused a lot on presentation, as if they were creating a powerpoint presentation, while focusing, I believe, far less on what a lot of affiliates want: quick access to simplified stats (sales, cb, rebills, referring urls), fhg's/tools, and payment info,. All the rest of it is simply clutter to me, including all the charts everywhere. An option to turn all that stuff off would be welcome. But it's the default FHG system that ultimately makes me look at other programs instead.

08-20-2009, 02:03 PM	#1
jact Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Oakville, Canada Posts: 9,134	NATS 4 vs NATS 3, who's downgraded? If you've gone to NATS4 and regretted it, or you've already gone back to 3 please let me know. We're just about to make the jump to NATS and I'm requesting to start in 3 but they don't seem to want me to? I don't want to have to downgrade and change links... again... __________________ Free agent

08-20-2009, 02:25 PM	#2
MaDalton I am Amazing Content! Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 39,828	well, there is a very big program who just did that after 3 or 4 days. back to V3 that is __________________ AmazingContent.com - providing only the best content and service since 2003 Monetize your content on Veegaz.com - one of Germanies largest VOD sites Got German traffic? We convert it into money for you! Skype: madalton02826 - Email: oltecconsult [at] gmail [dot] com

08-20-2009, 03:38 PM	#3
LotzaDollars Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Michigan Posts: 162	What are your reasons for wanting to go back down to V3? __________________ ICQ: 114784140 Skype ID: eds_adult_network The Original Program! www.LotzaDollars.com My Newest Program! www.GuyDollars.com Another Great Program! www.Dream-Cash.com

08-20-2009, 03:43 PM	#5
wargames Kliris Join Date: May 2003 Location: ca Posts: 10,423	I like 3 way better 4 stats are wack __________________ ICQ 212-115-582 Email Steve at Vas Media Group .com

08-20-2009, 04:12 PM	#6
Easton Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 9,825	we're on v3 and i refuse to upgrade to v4 __________________ New models booked and shot every week... MILFs, pornstars and teens. Girls for every niche and project. Looking for high-quality affordable exclusive content? Check me out at Easton Content for all the details.

08-20-2009, 03:38 PM	#4
webgurl Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Clouds with Carebears Posts: 7,954	twistyscash.com downgraded last week i got an email from V4 to V3 I think Dukedollars did as well ....

08-20-2009, 04:18 PM	#7
TheSenator Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: NJ Posts: 13,335	As an affiliate v4 has more tools that are useful to me. __________________ ISeekGirls.com since 2005

08-20-2009, 04:41 PM	#9
kaori Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Montreal Posts: 1,569	as an affiliate, I tend to have problems with NAT v4 on Firefox and Opera.. IE is great though...

08-20-2009, 04:42 PM	#10
bdld $100,000 Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 11,452	v4 is more time consuming for an affiliate to use. the only thing i like is the stats info.

08-20-2009, 04:49 PM	#13
jact Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Oakville, Canada Posts: 9,134	BTW this thread absolutely is not bashing TMM in any way. I'm just looking for people with experience with 4 to sound off so I know what I'm talking about tomorrow in my meeting with John. __________________ Free agent

08-20-2009, 05:23 PM	#16
mpahlca Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Vancouver Posts: 1,821	I still think Nats really hasnt done enough its better than all the alternatives but just lacks a lot of things that would really make it killer. Just my :2cents __________________ I could give two shits wether you read this sig or not.

08-20-2009, 05:36 PM	#17
Sausage Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 3,012	Yeah definitely sticking to 3 ... don't wan't 4 yet especially with all the terrible feedback we have had about it. Using 3 on 2 programs.

08-20-2009, 05:49 PM	#19
cLin Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2009 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 94	for those on v3, is there anyway to get the pricing options to be buttons instead of a dropdown like it currently is? That's probably my only gripe. =\ __________________ Chris The Ex Girlfriend Pics

08-20-2009, 06:05 PM	#24
BestXXXPorn Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Asheville, NC Posts: 2,277	Yeah I'm not seeing a major speed decrease on any sites which implement v4... more than likely there could be more complex calculations and queries in the new system as compared to v3, but that's a necessity when offering more functionality. If a site is running slow, it's not the software, it's the hardware. Most likely (since there isn't too much to change in PHP unless they need to add more webheads) it lies within the DB. I would recommend people get some beefier boxes for their DBs and certainly be running a Master / Slave / Slave if they're a large sponsor. There are so many settings in let's say MySQL that you should have a real DBA take a look at your system if it's running slow... Are people that are experiencing this checking for slow queries and running explain to see where the bottleneck is? What does your HD I/O peak at on your DB boxes and how often? How much memory are you allocating to MySQL? Have you taken a look at the amount allotted to your thread cache, bdb cache, table cache? What about your key and join buffer sizes? Many people don't even know these exist. Additionally, what engine are you running on what tables? There's so much performance you can squeeze out of MySQL if you really know what you're doing... __________________ ICQ: 258-202-811 \| Email: eric{at}bestxxxporn.com

08-20-2009, 06:44 PM	#27
Nurgle Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Land of OZ Posts: 2,337	NATS4 is just a pain in the ass for doing the most simple tasks, as Rob has put it. I seriously suggest you guys hire a human interface expert first before doing anything with it. The number of clicks etc needed to get links, hosted gals etc is just a major pain in the ass. Even something as simple as getting the refer stats of my sales on a single page appears impossible and i need to check each individual sale (unless im mistaken) n __________________ I am not a megalomaniac.. I just rule the world Need Quality Hardlinks? We have several packages and custom deals available. High Quality Hard Links For Sale ICQ: 394016570

08-20-2009, 06:45 PM	#28
BestXXXPorn Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Asheville, NC Posts: 2,277	Ah then judging from everyone's replies it does seem to be a matter of speed. @jact Sounds like it is on the DB side then. I would love for someone that's having speed issues to contact me and let me take a look. I would, of course, sign an NDA and I can supply a whole list of references if you'd like as I know the data is sensitive. I also invite TMM to contact me if they have a system already setup with a large amount of data and can simulate high usage. I'd love to help out. Are you guys looking to hire a CTO or Senior PHP developer? @robwod It sounds like v4 could use a bit of display:none/block action to hide/unhide content areas rather than refreshing the entire page. Perhaps some repopulating of select boxes and things based on other selections to avoid page refreshes as well. I'm sure some AJAX would also go a long way to minimizing requests rather than running a whole page worth of queries over again... and like you said. Remembering previous preferences would also be nice for that area. __________________ ICQ: 258-202-811 \| Email: eric{at}bestxxxporn.com

08-20-2009, 06:52 PM	#29
RyuLion ClubDomCash.com Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: San Diego Posts: 32,242	I'm sure the guys at TMM are waiting for affiliate feedback to improve their script. Its always a good habit to have a good friendly communication system with the software that's displaying how many $/RIO you could be making. Not only you will be more happy but your wallet will be too.. __________________ Adult Biz Consultant A tech head since 1995

08-20-2009, 06:54 PM	#30
SomeCreep :glugglug Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Where the Wild Things Are Posts: 26,118	As an affiliate, I like NATS version 3 way more than version 4. The interface with NATS version 3 is simple to use and straight to the point. The interface with NATS version 4 is cluttered and non-intuitive. __________________ Webair Hosting I use and recommend Webair for hosting.

08-20-2009, 08:05 PM	#32
GrouchyAdmin Now choke yourself! Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 12,085	Whenever possible, I choose V3 over V4. Not only due to the fact that I have several things tied to V3 that just work, I don't need to move to incompatible backwards link codes - and I absolutely detest the goddamn skins. I haven't seen forech pairs nested 50 deep before. __________________ AIM: GrouchyGfy

08-20-2009, 08:10 PM	#33
Major (Tom) Noticing Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Null Posts: 30,212	Another thing to point out. TMM has always listened to affiliates and adapted, changed, improved every time they were ever faced with an obstacle. Trust me, the first version of nats wasnt easy either and they fixed that. The same will happen with v4. If there was a way to import all your v3 settings into v4, kinda like disk imaging on a mac, we all would be on v4. I wish it were that simple Duke __________________ My mother said, to get things done You'd better not mess with Major Tom

08-21-2009, 01:26 AM	#39
boneless Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: in your head Posts: 3,625	for me runnnig a big mgp network, nats4 is a pain in the ass. Its allready been pointed out but in v3 i can make gallery dumps at the speed of light whilst in v4 it takes just so much effort to output listings for the sites i want to have, in v3 it was easy working. i really loved the stats v3 was putting out. easy to read. v4 to me seems to be a bit too much loaded with stuff the average affiliate really doesnt wanna see. The design is slick, but i guess we got all got used to v3 and loved it the way it was. __________________ icq:148573096 skype:dabone2 email:boneless(a)mgpteam(.)com

08-21-2009, 05:18 AM	#44
Vjo So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Happy 4th of July :) Posts: 6,082	The referral url is truncated in v4 too. It's there but like half as long. Maybe that is individual program related but seems I've seen that in a couple of v4 progs. Other than that v4 is ok. But yeah kind of bloaty and confusing. (Does anyone ever really use graphs that much for example)

08-21-2009, 05:53 AM	#47
shunga Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Loveland Posts: 994	I've always been curious about the process people go through when coding this stuff, in particular with regard to the CCBill affiliate admin; how many actual affiliates are consulted? Not part timers, but full time affiliates. __________________ Clockwork Cash - ICQ: 355-26-288 / Email: admin AT clockworkcash DOT com Asian Paysites : Exclusive Content : NATS or CCBill Thai Cuties : Shave Asians : JAVondemand

08-21-2009, 05:58 AM	#48
~Ray visit hardlinks.org Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Las Vegas , Nv >>> [email protected] or icq 94994627 anytime Posts: 18,362	sounds like you need the fhg format of V3 put into V4 and punt the current fhg format currently used in V4 __________________ Adult Backlinks for Adult Websites - Testimonials Available

08-21-2009, 06:32 AM	#49
Christophe Confirmed User Join Date: May 2005 Location: London Posts: 335	also like better better v3 to v4. for the reasons stated before: speed and usability __________________ CHRIS ICQ 27865660 SKYPE jwchris69 EMAIL [email protected]