| 12:52 am on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
You can build one yourself if you have a database and a scripting language to work with.
Even a Microsoft Access database can be used to produce pages from a template if you just have a static site.
| 1:09 am on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
A huge majority of CMSs are suffering from advanced featureitis, but the features they contain are rarely necessary or useful in most cases.
What's needed is a simple framework which allows templating basic content pages with a menu, and with all the other stuff like comments, forums, shopping carts, polls or whatever available as separate modules - kind of like the approach taken by the Firefox browser project.
I'm currently adapting a very simple wiki script for a CMS, and even there I'm ripping out some features before adding functionality needed for my project.
| 1:37 am on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
"What's needed is a simple framework which allows templating basic content pages with a menu, and with all the other stuff like comments, forums, shopping carts, polls or whatever available as separate modules - kind of like the approach taken by the Firefox browser project. "
I completely agree, I want something to handle/organize my content (as in articles), and do it DAMM well. That is it.
I do not need it to be a photogallery that is worse than php gallery, a directory that is worse than in-link, or a forum that is worse than phpbb or vbullitiin. Those items can be handled by other scripts, and handled well.
It would be nice to have them all in one big CMS, but nobody has the time to make all those extra features well, so they end up having all the features ****ty.
| 1:40 am on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Moveabletype is close to what I want, but it doesnt have unlimited subcategories which is the killer.
| 3:42 am on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I agree that MT can be kick@ss. I like typepad even more, but wish they would make the interface available to host on your own server. I guess I like to keep it simple, yet most CMSs are overkill. I like to jump in and start creating, not spend hours trying to figure the thing out.
| 3:49 am on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
The problem is that you just about need to be a programmer, and the people in particular who want to use one for saving time do NOT generally have the time available to learn to program.
I've resisted even looking at MT because of what they did with the licensing.
| 3:53 am on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Again I agree,
My content makes money, not my impressive coding. The whole reason I want a CMS so I can concentrate solely on writing (which is what I love to do).
Moveabletype is what I want, simple, functional, stable, static. But I have FAR to many articles to not have unlimited categories.
The way it stands now I'm gonna have to learn php so I can hack and slash Mambo into something like I want, and I am not looking forward to it.
| 4:49 am on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
MT is supposed to have a new category feature in the next release which is due out soon.
|Subcategories: A new category management interface gives you fine-grained control over the organization and display of your posts. You can even easily move a subcategory from one parent category to another. |
There are pretty easy ways to hack in subcategories now...but...
|This release of Movable Type is currently scheduled for release on August 31. |
...if you can wait a few days ;)
| 5:45 am on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Take a look at the new kid on the block ExpressionEngine [pmachine.com]
| 3:15 pm on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
"Subcategories: A new category management interface gives you fine-grained control over the organization and display of your posts. You can even easily move a subcategory from one parent category to another. "
Those could be good, but I need unlimited subcategories, and it doesnt go into detail about if you can have sub-sub-sub categories and such.
| 3:19 pm on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I'm open to the option of trying a CMS, but I still struggle with understanding how it's actually supposed to save time, if you already know html. (The advantages for a non-html writer are clear).
If I want to write a new page, identical to another page I already have, I save the old page under a new file name, find&replace any menu items that need to reflect the page being in a different section, delete the copy from the old page and write the copy for the new page.
How exactly does a CMS make that quicker?
| 6:06 pm on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
CMS's making publishing much quicker on larger sites.
When to hand make all your pages (even templated pages) you run into problems of organization and interlinking after a while.
The entire MAIN section of the site has been made by hand (and MT for the blogs). You can see that it is a complete mess because as they added new documents, sections, categories, domains, sites, etc.. they have to go back into their old documents and redo them with the new changes (whether to the main menu, or related items, and such)
CMS also allows for faster publishing. I can open up my site admin, type in my content and press "ok". No need to manually update the homepage with my new document, or add something to the main menu, or anything... Click and POOF it is up.
[edited by: Brett_Tabke at 3:17 pm (utc) on Aug. 26, 2004]
| 6:18 pm on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Not sure if this qualifies as everyone's definition of CMS, but for the past week I have been using the Contribute 3 demo from Macromedia. If your needs are simple, it may work great for you.
Works great for static pages, other than crashing here and there.
| 7:40 pm on Aug 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I've had the same types of problems... lots of interesting technologies out there, but nothing is quite right. I'm hoping the new java portal specifications will open the door to much better solutions- the open-source exoplatform looks like it's going in that direction, as well as a few Apache projects.
As for the complaint that you have to be a programmer- well, these are probably not going to help you folks much. But really, why not just hire a programmer when you need a programming task? A CMS is no trivial piece of software and until that segment matures, it's going to take tweaking.
| 12:46 pm on Aug 26, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Articlelive is almost perfect for what I want, to bad it is ASP... *mutters*