General Community > Off-Topic

How many people are still using WebsiteBaker?

<< < (6/8) > >>

jacobi22:

--- Quote from: jacobi22 ---actualy we have only a handfull of addons with this safe select's
--- End quote ---

it means: that the addons working together with new and next PHP-versions and also in mysql-strict-mode

safe-to-work in WB, not unsafe in the sense of a Security Announcement

N1kko:
I moved to Wordpress around 1 year ago. What's the point using something that is so outdated? WB has been dead a long time, also modules are no longer updated or supported.

With Wordpress the possibilities are endless  :-D

jacobi22:

--- Quote from: N1kko on November 02, 2015, 03:52:25 PM ---What's the point using something that is so outdated?

--- End quote ---

i think, the handling in the backend for beginners.
i work also with wp and i make it possible for my customers, to try both systems. the most of them are realy beginners or started with 1-click-construction-kits like jimbo, some mouse-clicks and a editor, finish is the page. their using only small projects with 10-20 pages, some pictures, a contact-form, maybe a guestbook, dont need dynamic content like the last twitter- or facebook-post etc. my customers are private persons or little company's and change the content max 2-4 times in a year.
the work in the backend of wb or his forks is very easy to learn and you remember, what you have to do, when you coming back one year later. for my customers wp looks too complexe, too much to learn, too much to forget, wb (or other small systems) are enough for this job


--- Quote ---With Wordpress the possibilities are endless
--- End quote ---
yes, if you need this possibilitys  :wink:

Argos:
And that is exactly what is wrong with WB. It has not been kept up to date with website progress. In the old days WB was sufficient for most websites, because most websites were relatively simple. But professional websites have become more and more complex. WB doesn't have the tools to create the kind of sites the average business owner wants.

Sure, you can buy a cool HTML/CSS template at Themeforest or Templatemonster, and make it into a WB site. But that's it. There are no out of the box usable news, blog, gallery, and contact modules, let alone built-in page builders and modules for all kins of advanced website functionalities.

So WB has become a tool for only the most simple, semi-static sites.

I agree the WB admin is way more easy to understand for clients than WP and other CMS'es. But in the end it's primarily the frontend functions that matters, not the backend. While WP is not as user friendly as WB in many respects, it is way more advanced, the community and available addons are enormous, and it offers all the tools and options to create both simple and advanced professional websites.

It is unrealistic to think WB will catch up with WP, but if WB (either original or a fork) can catch up to at least some higher level that offers all functions required for creating a general professional website, it still has a chance of survival and use other than for the most simple low budget semi-static sites.

By the way, even WB has proven to be too complicated for most of my customers, and most of them let me do their content work every now and then. I have used WB on many dozens of client sites in the past, and only one of them did and still does his own content. All the others outsourced it to me. Go figure. So actually I wonder if a simple backend is that important for customers anyway. The most important aspect of a CMS is not an easy backend for end users, but (potential) power and flexiblilty in design, administration and functionality for website builders. Joomla's backend is a disaster, and that is one of its pitfalls. WP's backend (as well as WB's backend) is partly user friendly, and partly not so. But it's enough to survice and grow. But it's the potential, the power, and the possibilities (by using themes and addons) that count. That is why WP has become leader of the pack, and WB is stumbling along. WB's so called ease of use and simplicity has actually become just a lack of features and possibilities.

I hope this post won't be deleted, because criticism and open discussions about shortcomings will only be beneficial for WB as a community driven system. Removing posts like this will hinder progress and community support. We'll see what happens...

N1kko:
I understand people find WP complicated but add in Visual Composer and you get a real easy to edit site, and once you show a client how to use it everything falls into place. I have been using CMS Pro before WP which is very user-friendly but unfortunately costs $40 on codecanyon but well worth a look as support is great and it also has some great modules.

If WB was updated and more modules I would have stuck with it as I used it for every clients site.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page