Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Web design companys using Joomla and templates
-
15-08-2010 11:00pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
You're saying you wouldn't recommend WordPress because there are other options out there?
"That can easily put down to the fact that Wordpress can be easily customised and is extremely easy to use and understand from a clients perspective."
That's exactly what makes it an excellent CMS.
It all comes back to what you need the website to do. If the client just wants a simple CMS, there are many other more simple CMS's that are easier to install and use.
If there are other reasons that make Wordpress the more appropriate choice, then I would recommend it.WordPress stopped being just a blogging tool years ago.
Wordpress is still a blogging tool, people have just started using it as a CMS in recent years - mainly due to the extensions available for it now. The framework of Wordpress was never built from the ground up to be a CMS, therefore the admin is focused around a blogging and publishing system rather than a CMS. And no, I didn't say that was a bad thing.Whufee's post
He seems to be under the impression he has some sort of technical edge over Irish web designers who use WordPress because he used Joomla to build 4 holding pages.
I don't think it's fair to say that he implied that. He was stating fact that his web developers had told him it would cost extra to create the site in Joomla over wordpress.
He did say he didn't see the facination - which I don't either. But when people talk about Drupal and Joomla, I don't see the facination there either!
In fairness to Whufee, he never bashed Wordpress, he just mentioned that there seems to be a facination with it - and I agree with him on that front.0 -
-
-
By the way guys I looked back over the post to see where the "wordpress bashing" happened - I don't see it?? Am I missing something??
Apologies if I made it sound too harsh. I based my remark on the (already discussed) issue of 4 page Joomla site being somehow superior to a pro-designed Wordpress site, as well as the "Wordpress is still big thing for Irish web designers...." which actually made me chuckle WP is - at the moment at least - definitely more modern and standard-aligned solution than Joomla, which is carrying many years' worth of baggage. Which may or may nor change with Joomla 1.6 release. As of now, Joomla is the popular tool of choice for out of the box, crudely adapted template driven sites - and there are reasons for it (I've run websites on Joomla myself). It's really fast and handy if you want to set up a cookie cutter website before lunch but less so if you want to design and build from the ground up.
Also I do not understand the critique of the 40k government website based solely on the fact that it's WordPress driven. Certainly many questions can be asked about the tendering procedure and (over)pricing of public services. But whether such a website is custom coded or based on a recognised, well-tested and documented open source solution such as WordPress, Drupal or Typo3 should not really matter. If anything, it makes handovers and documentation easier. It might allow the contractor to save on developer time but unless we know what exactly was contracted we can't really tell that those savings were pocketed by the contractor. As for any corporate project, they still need to bring in a designer, a developer and a project manager, possibly information architect. If they provide initial consultations and structure work, then hosting, documentation and support afterwards, I can see the bill totalling a handsome amount. Not 40k perhaps, but that's another story, probably more suitable for the Politics forum.flashforward wrote: »Could I ask your reasons for putting Joomla behind WP or Drupal?
Joomla is just much less flexible. It's a CMS full stop while Drupal and Wordpress can be viewed as frameworks rather than CMSs and that's how I see and use them.Wordpress is still a blogging tool, people have just started using it as a CMS in recent years - mainly due to the extensions available for it now. The framework of Wordpress was never built from the ground up to be a CMS, therefore the admin is focused around a blogging and publishing system rather than a CMS. And no, I didn't say that was a bad thing.
[...]
In fairness to Whufee, he never bashed Wordpress, he just mentioned that there seems to be a facination with it - and I agree with him on that front.
You may find it hard to understand the fascination unless you drop the notion of Wordpress being merely a blogging tool It is that of course, and if I can integrate blogging streams into the site easily I certainly won't complain. But I mostly see WP as a PHP framework - I can design and code from scratch in XHTML/CSS, then hook up only the functions and plugins I need and let the site grow while remaining lean. Sites can be more unique and flexible. Admin backend can be easily modified so that blogging functions are less prominent and content management functions more pronounced.
I do like Drupal too but it appeals to the techie streak in me, it's a workhorse but can be a monster too. WordPress is more like putty in your hands, you can really tweak it and make it work the way you want it.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
flashforward wrote: »And to tomED, could you elaborate as to why you feel joomla is so bad?
Yes, I don't think it's intuitive or the easiest in terms of usability. And of course, it's well known for security holes.WP is - at the moment at least - definitely more modern and standard-aligned solution than Joomla, which is carrying many years' worth of baggage.
Agreed 100%Also I do not understand the critique of the 40k government website based solely on the fact that it's WordPress driven. Certainly many questions can be asked about the tendering procedure and (over)pricing of public services. But whether such a website is custom coded or based on a recognised, well-tested and documented open source solution such as WordPress, Drupal or Typo3 should not really matter. If anything, it makes handovers and documentation easier. It might allow the contractor to save on developer time but unless we know what exactly was contracted we can't really tell that those savings were pocketed by the contractor. As for any corporate project, they still need to bring in a designer, a developer and a project manager, possibly information architect. If they provide initial consultations and structure work, then hosting, documentation and support afterwards, I can see the bill totalling a handsome amount. Not 40k perhaps, but that's another story, probably more suitable for the Politics forum.
Yes as I mentioned - we don't know what is going on in the background, but from what we can see - it doesn't like look much has been done to customise it in anyway as most of the features are available through plugins.
Do I think that's really bad that they paid €40k for *we can see* - hell yeah. But clearly we don't know what else is part of the overall package.
And I don't think we need to discuss politics when talking about a website that *looks* well over priced.Joomla is just much less flexible. It's a CMS full stop while Drupal and Wordpress can be viewed as frameworks rather than CMSs and that's how I see and use them.
That's fine if you view them that way, but that's not what they were built for. Drupal nor Wordpress were built to be used as frameworks.
So again depending on the project, it would be like using a car for something you need a ford transit to do in some cases.You may find it hard to understand the fascination unless you drop the notion of Wordpress being merely a blogging tool It is that of course, and if I can integrate blogging streams into the site easily I certainly won't complain.
But I mostly see WP as a PHP framework - I can design and code from scratch in XHTML/CSS, then hook up only the functions and plugins I need and let the site grow while remaining lean. Sites can be more unique and flexible. Admin backend can be easily modified so that blogging functions are less prominent and content management functions more pronounced.
I do like Drupal too but it appeals to the techie streak in me, it's a workhorse but can be a monster too. WordPress is more like putty in your hands, you can really tweak it and make it work the way you want it.
And that's really my point. If I need to keep stating it I will. Wordpress is a blogging and publishing tool. It CAN be used as a CMS but isn't developed as a CMS. As you say, to get it to work as close to a CMS as possible you need to extend and amend it.
I don't have a fascination with Wordpress, because I can see it's value. I know what it was built for and what situations it can really excel in.
Again, please don't get me wrong - I have and will continue to use Wordpress for websites we build where suitable.-
- WordPress is a blogging tool, I never said it wasn't, it's also a CMS - as they say on the first line of their homepage: "WordPress is web software you can use to create a beautiful website or blog."
As answered above - it's not a CMS, it can be used as one... If you want to go on about quotes on their website, you could just to their about us page:
WordPress started as just a blogging systems, but has evolved to be used as full content management system and so much more through the thousands of plugins, widgets, and themes, WordPress is limited only by your imagination. (And tech chops.)- The Admin section is focused on blogging & publishing web content, if it isn't CMS enough for you, you can download any of the 200 or so CMS plugins to extend its functionality.
Yep - as I said it can be extended...- WordPress is a great choice if you're looking for a SE-friendly, user-friendly and accessible CMS with a fantastically simple publishing system and admin interface which creates clean code. It's software that can be extended to suit the majority of your needs using any of the 10,000+ plugins. If you find your needs reach beyond that you'll probably want to look at something a little more specialised, however it's more than capable of catering to the needs of the vast majority of SMEs looking for a standard & solid web-presence.
AgreedI also think there are a lot of web designers in Ireland who rip off the client, baffle them with tech talk to keep them quite. I have spent a lot of time outside Ireland and am fuking amazed at the arrogance at some of the companies attitudes here and the prices they charge - why should the client pay for the designers fancy D2 office and car?
I don't think that's fair - there are a few - but not a lot. To hire a web designer isn't cheap, therefore to get a properly designed website is going to cost you money.0 -
Yes as I mentioned - we don't know what is going on in the background, but from what we can see - it doesn't like look much has been done to customise it in anyway as most of the features are available through plugins.
Do I think that's really bad that they paid €40k for *we can see* - hell yeah. But clearly we don't know what else is part of the overall package.
And I don't think we need to discuss politics when talking about a website that *looks* well over priced.
We might if we want to know why exactly it was overpaid. It could just as well be half a year worth of meetings, concepts and general toeing and froing (I wouldn't expect anyone on the client side to know exactly what they want apart from a rise in ratings). But what I'm trying to say is that for this type of work I would actually appreciate someone using an open source solution - rather than going the (sadly popular) route of developing some convoluted bespoke system with a handful of nasty surprises stitched in in order to stay the only person who can control it. Then charging an arm and a leg for "custom development" and "ongoing support".That's fine if you view them that way, but that's not what they were built for. Drupal nor Wordpress were built to be used as frameworks.
So again depending on the project, it would be like using a car for something you need a ford transit to do in some cases.
And that's really my point. If I need to keep stating it I will. Wordpress is a blogging and publishing tool. It CAN be used as a CMS but isn't developed as a CMS. As you say, to get it to work as close to a CMS as possible you need to extend and amend it.
I don't have a fascination with Wordpress, because I can see it's value. I know what it was built for and what situations it can really excel in.
Again, please don't get me wrong - I have and will continue to use Wordpress for websites we build where suitable.
Actually the concept of "Drupal as a framework" is an old one, I remember it from years ago. It might very well be there from the beginning because it's clearly the mindset behind Drupal.
And even if WordPress was a blogging engine in its conception, it has outgrown it a good while ago and is now a recognised modern CMS (it received an award for the Best Open Source CMS 2009, before ModX and SilverStripe). A significant and growing segment of the industry is now treating WordPress as a building tool in exactly the way I describe (see books "Digging Into WordPress", "Rockstar WordPress" etc.). The framework part comes from the fact that you don't really need to hack into the core to make it work your way, it's designed to yield to your plans and you can cherrypick what you want.
Now I'm not saying it's good for everything, of course. But it's good for much more than people give it credit for due to outdated assumptions ("Wordpress is still big thing for Irish web designers...."). But that's OK too - it's a competitive industry after all 0 -
But what I'm trying to say is that for this type of work I would actually appreciate someone using an open source solution - rather than going the (sadly popular) route of developing some convoluted bespoke system with a handful of nasty surprises stitched in in order to stay the only person who can control it. Then charging an arm and a leg for "custom development" and "ongoing support".
I would totally agree with you on this. I don't believe in reinventing the wheel at all.
There are too many excellent open source applications out there that in the majority of cases, you don't need to build a bespoke system for a lot of projects.Actually the concept of "Drupal as a framework" is an old one, I remember it from years ago. It might very well be there from the beginning because it's clearly the mindset behind Drupal.
http://web.archive.org/web/20020122183251/http://www.drupal.org/And even if WordPress was a blogging engine in its conception, it has outgrown it a good while ago and is now a recognised modern CMS (it received an award for the Best Open Source CMS 2009, before ModX and SilverStripe).
Seriously do we have to keep going over this? It's not a CMS, yes it can be used as one, but it was not developed as one.A significant and growing segment of the industry is now treating WordPress as a building tool in exactly the way I describe (see books "Digging Into WordPress", "Rockstar WordPress" etc.). The framework part comes from the fact that you don't really need to hack into the core to make it work your way, it's designed to yield to your plans and you can cherrypick what you want.
There are so many open source systems that you can do pretty much the same, but they still wouldn't be classed as a CMS - take Magento for example....Now I'm not saying it's good for everything, of course. But it's good for much more than people give it credit for due to outdated assumptions ("Wordpress is still big thing for Irish web designers...."). But that's OK too - it's a competitive industry after all
I don't agree, I think it is given too much kudos and is over hyped. It's good for a certain job - once you know what that is, it's a great piece of software (albeit bloated).0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Yeah but you see I'm much less concerned with what is was developed as, and much more with what I can do with it now in 2010 Anyway, as suggested, EOT.
Which is where we have a major difference in opinion!
But let's not go down that road - maybe that discussion is for another day, but let me finish by saying, that people's definitions of what a CMS have greatly changed over the last few years - it has become a throw away word for a system that allows someone to update their websites themselves without knowledge of HTML - which of course isn't exactly what a CMS is.
In fact, this thread has kind of turned into (myself to blame) using CMS's to define the value and professionalism of a website, when in fact that's only a small part of it.
I think it's fair to say that most of us in the industry would agree that both sites in the OP don't look very professional at all and we have an eye at spotting what sites are template driven or bespoke.
If you are paying for site, as mhge says, it comes down to the quality of the graphical appearance. Of course, we could all argue all day about what is the best CMS, how the site should be coded etc - but to a normal joe soap, the first impression and the brand image created by a website comes from the professionalism of the imagery and not the engine running behind it.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
flashforward wrote: »I've just recently started with Joomla, and while in essence I disagree with templates I'm finding it hard to justify not using them for a small brochure site.
I would say it all comes back to what your client is expecting to achieve. For example, is your client happy to have a site that looks exactly the same as possible thousands of others on the web? Is your client happy to just have a web presence.
I think you'll find that most serious businesses understand the importance of seperating themselves from their competition to get that competitive edge. But there is another market, which we choose not to target that are just looking for a web presence and are happy to have a templated website.
There is also one key point and that is if your client is happy to go this cheap and nasty route, they clearly don't see the benefits of having a properly designed and developed website. They also don't understand how beneficial the web can be to their business.flashforward wrote: »Doubling up on your point: I think most would agree that Joe soap has no idea what is a template site and what isn't nor how much time was put into its creation.
Yes I agree they won't know the difference. However, they are able to decide from a BRAND whether they are interested in buying their service or products. Take a shop front for example - would you go into a coffee shop if the windows were filthy and clearly not managed properly? I wouldn't, but if I see a clean window with nice food on display, yes I'd definitely go in there before the other.flashforward wrote: »They will see a rotator on the home page and automatically think 'Wow this is a great site'
Some will for sure - but the majority will not. You also have to think about what is the competition in terms of the brand. Again, using the shop analogy. If a shop offers the exact same thing, but one looks better than the other, you know which they'll choose.flashforward wrote: »They will be sold, why should a small business fork out 2k + for something that can be done for less?
Well if you can't see the reasons why, then your clients never will!flashforward wrote: »In terms of SEO there is no guarantee that a well coded bespoke design will rank well. For a sales site, both options may rely mainly on the likes of adwords to get traffic.
SEO does not rely on good code at all - you can rank with the most poorly coded website. But I don't think we need to go into that discussion!0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
The original questions...flashforward wrote: »What should be the difference in cost between a Joomla template site and a non-template site to the same standard?
Answer: None!
If a developer builds a site from scratch there is no reason why he should charge any more or less than someone who used a CMS to build the same site. No reason at all. If I ask you to put a forum on my site and you build it from scratch should you be paid more than someone who installs phpBB? No.
In the examples given there is a clear difference in the quality of the work (though neither have spent much time 'personalising' the template) and one should certainly have charged more for their work than the other. The Irish site is a very poor standard and you only have to look at the designers home page to see that they produce poor quality work. Misspellings everywhere! Poor styling, etc. Incidentally both sites are using unlicensed templates (I'm Scotty from Joomlart btw). Wonder how the clients would feel about that?
€1300 for a Joomla site may be a rip off or it may be great value. All depends on the finished product.0 -
-
Advertisement