Jump to content
NorbertH

Making PW more userfriendly

Recommended Posts

I feel we're running in circles...

I would give you 50 likes for that sentence if it wasn't for some passive-aggressive details in the rest of the post. I thought of just letting go, since your post seems to put a healthy stop on the discussion, but then, I don't feel like swallowing some things that I do consider unfair. I'm referring to these:

(although a lot of experienced PW users seem to disagree with this, but that is in hindsight, and many times people tend to forget or justify past struggles and efforts).

...(pseudo) coders

I felt that everyone was very honest in their comments in the thread, and most of them (me included) said that they were not coders and had to learn a lot in the way. We also welcomed you and tried to give a friendly push to become better in what you do for living, since you said you're not happy with your knowledge. In general we don't know each other personally in the forum, but we still expect that people are honest, cordial, truthful in their opinions, and I think this forum in extraordinary in that aspect. You didn't do anything wrong in giving your opinions, but in my opinion, you are wrong when being deliberately unfair.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel we're running in circles... For the last time I will try to sum up my point of view. Not to keep "complaining", but to make myself clear, as I feel I get reponses that don't match what I said.

............

Should it be a CMS that even non-dev website builders coming from other CMS's can use for creating run of the mill sites without coding? Then it should have more or less ready to use regular content type thingies.

...........

Now it's a developer platform that suggest it's also a ready to use CMS, besides a platform. It's not. And that may lead to disappointment for some beginners, and also to annoyment for experienced users that see non-coding newbies enter the forums with questions and support requests that could have been prevented.

I do feel that most have a pretty good sense of where you are coming from. A lot of them just don't agree with you. Don't confuse this with misunderstanding.

"Now it's a developer platform that suggest it's also a ready to use CMS, besides a platform. It's not"

If maybe you would stop stating your opinion as a fact people would stop responding the way they do. I've seen many happy end-users without any technical knowledge use the default PW admin on a daily basis to manage content.

In the development stage of a site PW does assume some basic skills to get the most out of it, but i think this is pretty clear already, and in fact the same goes for any CMS.

The fact that you apparently are able to build sites without touching a line of code using WordPress, good for you, but this doesn't make PW a 'platform' only.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, other systems I worked with the last 12 years orso never forced me to code to use available content types. Only deviating from the default content types required coding sometimes. but most of the times plugins/modules/addons/snippets perfectly did what I wanted. The majority of my website work is frontend work, not database related coding stuff. That's why I use a CMS after all, to not be bothered with that:-)

As it turned out to be, PW is not the ready to use CMS with tons of extras for developers that I thought it was. It's a developers framework that may be used to some extent by some non-coders as well if they are willing to (learn to) use code.

That's not the same, and my only suggestion is make this difference more clear on the site. Or to do something to make it more usable for non-coders as well (without affecting the possibilities for coders). Nothing more, nothing less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn. does anyone else has problems with this forum software? I have lost a reply I was working on 4 times already today. Suddenly the screen only shows page not found type of error, and everything's gone. Going back with the browser button or reload doesn't help. Really annoying.

And also: how do you guys use quotes? When clicking the quote button nothing happens with me. No quotes are visible, just an empty field. I can enter manual quote thingies, but that doesn't have the users ID and time line, and the content of the quote itself.

OK, let's post this before it's lost too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are sabotaging your posts :P
 
Everyone has problems with the forum editor, I keep saying to myself that next time I will write my posts somewhere else and than paste here, but I never do it... But the quotes should work, I never had trouble with them, at least.
 
I'm even afraid to say this, but if you want you can click on the switcher on the top-left corner and write them in bbcode :P
The format of the quotes is:

[quote name="argos" post="73697" timestamp="1410883849"]
paste quote here
[/quote]
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And also: how do you guys use quotes?

We all have some premade templates for this. But don't tell.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to interrupt but I finished another version of "GetStarted". I like it a lot more then he version before and got rid of the tooltips. Texts are copied from wikipedia and not final. What do you think?

GetStarted2.zip

Edit: fixed a minor install error.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now a real reply.

 

I seem to have stepped on some toes here and there. Sorry about that. I certainly don't mean to be "deliberately unfair" as Diogo says. I have the utmost respect for you non-coding guys to learn how to use PW and PHP along the way. However, it's a well known psychological phenomenon for people to justify past efforts as being neccessary. But having to learn a fair bit of coding along the way should not be a justification for possible unneeded difficulties in PW. That's what I meant. I certainly don't criticise anyone here. But I do feel PW could be more usable for non-devs, so that initial and basic stuff is indeed more low level. Leaving the coding for complex, higher level stuff. And yes, I know it's fair to say that learing low level stuff is needed before higher level stuff. So, every point of view has its merits.

 

I also appreciate all support that is given to me and other newcomers in this forum. But maybe I am unlike other newcomers who either become PW fans themselves, or are leaving without bothering any further. I try to tell my point of view in the hope that it will be of some use and PW will become more what I had expected, instead of just leaving. Maybe that's annoying to PW lovers, coming across like someone who is criitsizing PW without putting effort in it and expecting PW doing it the Argos way, instead of myself doing it the PW way :-) I do understand that. So again: sorry for any "unfairness" you might feel from what I say or how I see it. Be assured it's not meant that way.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But maybe I am unlike other newcomers who either become PW fans themselves, or are leaving without bothering any further.

I suspect you are already a PW fan but would like to take the short route. That's not allowed, no. Sorry.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Point taken and accepted. Don't think you didn't contribute, because you did. I still don't agree with 99.9% of what you said but it did push some buttons of awareness in the PW team that will surely not be ignored. this doesn't mean things will change, but your concerns will be taken in consideration.

Now, lets get back to work!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Point taken and accepted. Don't think you didn't contribute, because you did. I still don't agree with 99.9% of what you said but it did push some buttons of awareness in the PW team that will surely not be ignored. this doesn't mean things will change, but your concerns will be taken in consideration.

Now, lets get back to work!

+ a lot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It strikes me that a more accurate topic of this thread could be "how to make PW more beginner friendly."

Not to make light of the OPs issue and invaluable insight but Ryan (and co) have already done an incredible job of making PW user-friendly.

Maybe thats just semantics (user-friendly Vs beginner friendly)  but I wouldn't say PW isn't user-friendly.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@peter:

I think that's a point we already had. Because there is somehow a misinterpretation of the word "user" in this whole topic. The user is the end customer, the person who is going to use processwire to add/edit content. And yeah processwire is user-friendly in that sense :)

But a user is not the person who programs the website (as long as it isn't for himself ;) ). That's the programmer/coder/designer/whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One aspect of this discussion, that derived from a very different meant thread of mine, is the difference in the definition of the word "developer".

For one party, this is equal to front-end, while the "other ones" are coders/programmers.

The other group defines development as both front- and backend.

So even the claim of being a "developer-friendly" system includes potential annoyance. The web development universe becomes more complex, more powerful and more amazing every day - but the words and titles do not catch up. I think one has to keep this in mind especially in discussions like this where one could easily generalize "...but a developer has to this and that".

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@peter:

I think that's a point we already had. Because there is somehow a misinterpretation of the word "user" in this whole topic. The user is the end customer, the person who is going to use processwire to add/edit content. And yeah processwire is user-friendly in that sense :)

But a user is not the person who programs the website (as long as it isn't for himself ;) ). That's the programmer/coder/designer/whatever.

Ah. I was going to mention that I'd only read about 50% of the thread. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. When I mention "user", I mean in fact the user of the platform, so the website builder. For me a developer=coder=programmer. So the user can be someone like me (good skills in HTML/CCS, decent skills in graphics and jQuery, minor skills in PHP, experience with all kind of CMS's), or a developer/coder/programmer, or someone who just installs a CMS for fun and tinkers around with it, etc. So a "user" is someone who uses the software to create a site, whatever his or her background and situation.

The person who just handles content, I would call an "end user", or "client". So the person(s) the site is built for, who hired the site creator (the "CMS user") to create it.

But I agree it's just as valid to call the end user (content admin) the "user".

Based on my experiences with other CMS's I have a feeling that end users will find the PW admin more confusing and difficult than WebsiteBaker (which has the easiest admin I know), and just as easy or confusing as Wordpress or Joomla. But I cannot make any valid statement about that since I never built a real site with PW.

But persoanlly, when I talked about usability and user friendlyness I had the sitebuilder in mind, not the end user.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on my experiences with other CMS's I have a feeling that end users will find the PW admin more confusing and difficult than WebsiteBaker (which has the easiest admin I know), and just as easy or confusing as Wordpress or Joomla. But I cannot make any valid statement about that since I never built a real site with PW.

No they don't. I did a lot of websites within the last 3 years using ProcessWire and everybody loved how simple and intuitive the backend is for them (they only see the page tree). I was never a big fan of the old admin backend. But I fell in love with the new Reno theme so me and my clients loving the backend now.

P.S.: My father's corporation website is made with WebsiteBaker and he never liked it. But he likes ProcessWire backend.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But persoanlly, when I talked about usability and user friendlyness I had the sitebuilder in mind, not the end user.

We already got that ;)

Based on my experiences with other CMS's I have a feeling that end users will find the PW admin more confusing and difficult than WebsiteBaker (which has the easiest admin I know), and just as easy or confusing as Wordpress or Joomla. But I cannot make any valid statement about that since I never built a real site with PW.

That's a difficult one. In some way you contradict yourself in talking about your experiences but on the other hand you admit you never really built a site with PW.

For me personally I have the impression that PW is remarkably easy to understand for end users (based on real experiences). But I know this is not a valid argument as others may experienced it the other way around. So on this point we can only give our own impressions and because in the forum are mostly PW-lovers the result will not be representative...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if anybody else could have said that better in this objective way. <3

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Code before talk. :) With 2.5.0 released Friday, and 2.5.1 dev released today, there's been a lot of code. 

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know :) I'm even surprised that you wrote such a long post. Did I ever tell you that you should keep a regular blog?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I appreciate Ryan's feedback, as well as the others. Although I may sound a bit locked in my own vision to some people, it all actually makes me rethink me own expectations about this system, and more important: my current and future situation and livelyhood. So thanks for making me have a small existential crisis, LOL

BTW Personally I don't like Wordpress at all, so I don't hope anyone suspects me of being a Wordpress fan, heaven forbid.

 

@Nico: Did your father use the default or the Argos backend?

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By benbyf
      Hello, and welcome to what I though was either my client being silly and changing things, or some evil doer. Turns out its reproducible and therefore something in Proceswire (I checked my templates and modules but couldnt find anything that would be doing this...). So what is it doing? Check out the video for evidence.
      A repeater field is interacting with a page template and another repeater field somehow to swap the fields in the template and repeater over...
      I have a template called team, and a repeater field called team_repeater with label Team. Some how and for some reason, when I change my fields on repeater called main_menu_links my team template gets those fields and when I try and revert the team template fields to the fields it should have, they get given to the repeater main_menu_links. Also this to say HELP!!!!!
      video: https://www.dropbox.com/s/exkdhc6n7x0xpsa/strange-repeater-PW-mega-bug.mov?dl=0
    • By Aleksey Popov
      Hi! Is it possible to specify explicitly the parent section when creating a new child page with a single template?
      The idea is to save the user from the possibility of mistakenly choosing a section, but not to create unnecessary identical templates
      What I mean:
      Let's say I've got 2 parent categories with names articles & news. Each of them utilized the same admin-template (category) with the category.php file. Also, I have 2 different templates for child pages (article & news).
      Next, I need to add an article page to the articles category with the "create new" button in admin. At that moment, I must choose the category to place (because both categories use the same template). 
      To runaround this (and create a page right into the exact category without the choosing step) I should create 2 templates for each category, and setup parent-children relations for each pair of templates, right?
      But Is any way to use only the one category template and different children templates and at the same time, explicitly specify which section to use for child pages, thereby removing the process of selecting a child section?
       
      articles (category.php) Article page 1 (page-article.php) Article page 2 (page-article.php) Article page 3 (page-article.php) + Add a new article page here without category chooser news (category.php) News page 1 (page-news.php) News page 2 (page-news.php) News page 3 (page-news.php)  Update: found module  but I can't get it work.
       
    • By fruid
      Hi,
      this is the first time I'm using ProcessWire.
      I thought I get how fields, template and pages work, but when I create a template in the CMS, it doesn't generate any file in site/templates/
      Then I thought I might need to create a blank file myself manually on the FTP (which already seems odd to me).
      Once I did that, I tried to add fields to the template but again, doesn't write to the php file.
      When I create a new page and apply said template to it, the page stay blank.
      AFAIK the mod_rewrite of the apache is on and I went for the worst case scenario described here https://processwire.com/docs/security/file-permissions/ and set all file-permissions for future files to 0666 and folders to 0777 in the config.php
      What am I not getting and what am I doing wrong?
      Help is appreciated, stay save everybody,
      Fred
    • By cboetens
      Hi guys
      I guess this is the right forum to post my question. If not, do let me know. Ok, I'm fairly new to ProcessWire and so far I really like the CMS! It's magnificent to use and really straight forward. Big thanks to Ryan for that.
      Now, the question I have. I have a template called 'products_categories.php' in which I collect and render all the different categories (the categories basically act as a filter) for a variety of products and next to the categories, I render all the products, like so:
      <?php include('includes/header.php') ?> <?php $categoryName = $sanitizer->pageName($input->urlSegment(1)); $subcategoryName = $sanitizer->pageName($input->urlSegment(2)); pre($categoryName); pre($subcategoryName); $categories = $page->get("template=products_categories"); $category = $categories->get("template=products_categories_item, name=" . $categoryName); if($category->id){ $session->category = $category->id; $subcategory = $category->get("template=products_categories_item, name=" . $subcategoryName); if($subcategory->id){ $session->subcategory = $subcategory->id; } } $selector = "template=products_item"; if($category->id){ $selector .= ", products_categories=" . $category; } if(isset($subcategory->id)){ $selector .= ", products_categories=" . $subcategory; } $products_items = $page->find($selector); ?> <div class="uk-section"> <div class="uk-container"> <?php if(!empty($page->headline)) { ?> <h1><?= $page->headline ?></h1> <?php } ?> <!-- **** COMMENT: create grid for products **** ---> <div class="row"> <div class="col-md-3"> <div class="uk-card mr-3 uk-card-default uk-card-body"> <h3 class="uk-card-title">Productcategorieën</h3> <ul class="uk-list"> <?php foreach($categories->children() as $c){ ?> <li class="<?= ($category->id===$c->id ? 'active ' : '') ?>"> <a href="<?= $page->url . $c->name . '/' ?>"><?= $c->title; ?></a> <?php if($c->hasChildren){ ?> <ul> <?php foreach($c->children() as $sc) {?> <li class="<?= ($category->id==$c->id && $subcategory->id==$sc->id ? 'active ' : '') ?>"> <a href="<?= $page->url . $c->name . '/' . $sc->name . '/' ?>"><?= $sc->title; ?></a> </li> <?php } ?> </ul> <?php } ?> </li> <?php } ?> </ul> </div> </div> <div class="col-md-9"> <div class="uk-child-width-1-3@s uk-grid-match uk-grid-margin-small uk-grid-small" uk-grid> <?php foreach($products_items as $product) { ?> <div class="uk-card"> <?php if(isset($product->image)) { ?> <div class="uk-card-media-top"> <img src="<?= $product->image->URL; ?>" title="<?= $product->title; ?>" alt="<?= $product->intro; ?>"> </div> <?php } ?> <?php if(!empty($product->title) || !empty($product->intro)) { ?> <div class="uk-card-body uk-card-default"> <?php if(!empty($product->title)) { ?> <h3 class="uk-card-title"><?= $product->title; ?></h3> <?php } ?> <?php if(!empty($product->intro)) { ?> <p><?= $product->intro; ?></p> <?php } ?> <?php if (!empty($product->price)): ?> <h3 class="uk-card-title">&euro;&nbsp;<?= $product->price; ?>&nbsp;(excl. btw)</h3> <?php endif; ?> <a class="uk-button uk-button-primary" href="<?= $product->url; ?>">Bekijk</a> </div> <?php } ?> </div> <?php } ?> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <?php include('includes/footer.php'); ?> Now, I can't seem to get the filter to work. The URL behind every (sub)category should go straight back to the template 'products_categories.php', that way I can get a range of products according to the selected/ clicked URL.
      What am I missing here? Is this not the correct way to handle things?
      Any help is welcome!
      Thanks.
      Cédric
×
×
  • Create New...