szabesz

Some of us (including me) are lucky enough to have clients who do not care about the look of processwire.com and trust us that ProcessWire is the best. Not all of us are that lucky. So for those who are not so lucky, it matters a lot what a potential future client perceives when visiting processwire.com.

I built "my" first website in `96 with Adobe PageMill, fighting with tables to craft the basic layout it had. It was for a bank, a handful of static pages. I had no prior experience with HTML... :P

No to mention other issues like the following. On my 2560x1440 monitor, while scrolling, I get views like: I guess I do not have to explain why this is far from ideal. Just a big bulge blob with a subscription form in it and that’s it? To whom does it look professional?

But there is one thing we can all agree on, and that is the new design is quite controversial. And as far as I can tell, one either likes it a lot or does not like it a lot. And I don't think that such a controversial look is good in general. As for being "contemporary"? I started my designer career in 1997 and back then everyone used QuarkXpress, Aldus Freehand, and Color Studio (later Photoshop 2.5+). Because Macs were not too powerful, most designs were put together in QuarkXpress only. Why am I bringing this up? Because the current processwire.com design does look like "QuarkXpress only designs" from about 1995-2002. For this reason, to me, this is vintage.

I burnt some credits on Seedream v4. (BTW, Our grandchildren will surely ask us: Grandma, Grandpa, is it true that your image generators were so stupid back in your day?)

Recommended read: https://www.smashingmagazine.com/2025/10/the-grayscale-problem/ Quote: "Colour seems an appropriate place to start. When given the choice, try something audacious rather than safe. The worst that can happen is that it doesn’t work. It’s not like the sunk cost of painting a room; if you don’t like the palette, you simply change the hex codes. The same is true of fonts, icons, and other building blocks of the web."

I quite agree with your two points above. "Section for practical code examples." They could be added to the method descriptions, and not just sample code strictly related to a given method, but code showcasing typical scenarios with related methods and often used techniques, "coding patterns". "Currently a lot of core features are very fragmented and hard to find if you don't know they exist in the first place." So true! I have some notes of some important settings, which I often set up differently from the defaults, but having to look through them just to find something is time consuming. Some sort of clever way of gathering information and providing it in a categorized and digested way would help, I think.

That will definitely be welcome, for sure! Thanks in advance.

You guys rock!

Good luck to the Craft team, but to me it looks like they need to reinvent the wheel every now and then. Luckily, we have our own genius, Ryan, who figured that reinventing the wheel is not for everyone. At least not for us ;)

I would not say a "rollback" is desirable, it is just that the new theme needs some more work because it is rough around the edges. Eg. when selecting pages in a Lister, the "label" showing the number of selections makes the list jump, which is bad UX but can be fixed with a display:"inline-block". Also, used to be shaded inputfield groups can have their background color back, etc... So while I agree that it is sort of half-baked, it can surely be made better.

Awesome! Just what I will need in the near future. Thanks @Mikel for sharing!

News: "...npm got rocked by a record-breaking exploit..." https://youtu.be/QVqIx-Y8s-s And self-driving cars, AI agents, refrigerators, cat feeders, and who knows what else are and will be based on code written by who knows who...

Great new features, thanks a lot!

+1 Is it possible to bring it back?