Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

You need/want an older version of sNews ? Download an older/unsupported version here.

Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: sNews review  (Read 3662 times)

nukpana

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: 71
  • Posts: 663
Re: sNews review
« Reply #15 on: August 13, 2010, 02:30:09 am »

Lightweight
Quote from: nukpana
Lightweight, compared to what?
Compared to almost all other CMS' *I* have tested, including a bunch of the other "light" systems. Lightweight in the sense that it has few files, a small download package and a small database. Putting sNews on a server doesn't add a lot of "weight" (kilo- or megabytes). Ergo, lightweight.
You know.... CMS systems like Cushy CMS have no installation, no files, etc.  Ergo, no weight....
To note, 1.6, as *light* as it was, was on a server and added a huge headache for the database... Sven can recall... Lightweight, should be on (total) resources, as Joost once said... (addition by me)

Customizable
Quote from: nukpana
The system is customized by it's CSS only. The layout, unless you are tinkering with the core system, is locked in.
That's not entirely true. Yes, many functions have too much HTML structure within them, which makes them "locked in", but compare for example with a Wordpress or MODx template -- which is usually built with a number of separate files -- and you'll see that the sNews way is in fact easier to use for the general population of developers. Some functions could definitely have their HTML paired down to give developers more layout freedom. Some functions could or should be broken out of their parent functions, again to make developing easier and more flexible.
The flexibility for a WP or MODx template is there to allow a single file template if desired, just like sNews has it. sNews doesn't allow the other way around.    

Quote
However, the fundamentals of the sNews construction, using an index.php file with the basic function calls in it and an external CSS file to control the styling, is more flexible than the way CMS' traditionally has worked (and many of the poplar CMS' still follow the traditional route).
What are you talking about?  They are done the same way sNews does it.  May be it differently, but essentially the same.  

The statement "sNews is a developer's tool" doesn't mean "it's a wonderful tool for this particular group of developers", it simply means that in order to get the most out of the system you need certain basic knowledges, which tend to be part of "developers" skillset, in other words it's an attempt to say "this is not for someone who wants to just plug a CMS into their website and let it do its magic". It's not a promise, it's a warning label - even though that may not be the best term for it. Also, "developer" has many levels in itself so I don't really see a problem with the statement. It would be troublesome if it said "sNews is perfect for the skilled PHP/MySQL/Javascript/DOM developer", because that's much more specific and would (probably) be a bit misleading.
I have always been against the "developer's tool" statement for awhile now.  Same with the "base to build websites with" sentence.  Someone like MKRD may mistake that phrase for a CMS framework, which sNews clearly isn't.

(Patric, here is your sales pitch...) sNews is an easy to use system to manage website content. Period. You can add the sNews CMS into your website and let it do its magic! What are you waiting for?  

Quote from: From Doug
Take CMSMadeSimple as an example... it's a nice CMS... nothing really 'wrong' with it but... it is far from being light-weight... severly bloated actually... at a whopping 19MB (2,640 files in 280 folders and directories)  once it's un-bundled. From a simple CMS developer's point of view... waaayyy too complex and not worth the time getting into. It also requires usage of empty index.html files in every directory and sub-directory - even in the template css folders - to keep nosey viewers from viewing directory file-lists in the same way the old, antiquated php-Nuke system did, which really isn't necessary in an efficiently developed CMS package.

CMSMS is complex and heavy, from a "users" point of view, forget the filesize. Seriously, if you need to study each file, then something is wrong. CMS Made Simple provides an API to allow the "developer" to add functionality to the system, similar to many (almost all) CMS's, so you don't need to review EVERY file in the file structure to figure out what is going on.  Are you asking Flickr or Twitter to look at their system files to figure out what is going on to "use" or "develop" with their system or API? Compare that to sNews and the sNews mentality...

Quote from: From Doug
All in all, from a developer's point of view, I've not yet found another CMS that offers the same flexibility in as small and simple a package as sNews is.
If Get Simple had SQL capabilities, I bet some may change their tune...
« Last Edit: August 13, 2010, 03:26:50 am by nukpana »
Logged

Fred K

  • Still trying to learn stuff
  • ULTIMATE member
  • ******
  • Karma: 130
  • Posts: 2728
    • Personal
Re: sNews review
« Reply #16 on: August 13, 2010, 03:53:19 am »

Jason, we obviously have different perspectives which come to light on the whole "user"/"developer" definition.
What I'm talking about? If I have to dig through X modules to find the correct spot to make changes to the output, or edit three files to propagate a  change throughout a site, then that workflow is distinctly different to sNews'. Been there, done that, not interested. But that is me saying things from my perspective. Which clearly is different than yours.

The weight discussion is another matter - yes I agree that we should look at the whole load when discussing weight. I have personally never experienced the situation Sven found himself in. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, just that I've never had it happen to me. If I see that my databases weigh on average less than 1 kb (as reported by my host), that my site file transfers land at on average 3 mb when uploading a site (I discount images and video clips that don't have anything to do with the system), and that the sNews download package is, what, under 1mb? zipped ... that to me spells "light" as a whole. I can only judge a system by what I see, not by what others may have seen or experienced.

Cushy is a hosted CMS, of bloody course it doesn't weigh anything in our hands. If I recall rightly, someone mentioned apples and comparisons earlier...

GetSimple, SQL? You should tell the GS developers that... Personally I still wouldn't use it, my rejection of it is based on other things. But that's me. You do as you like.
Logged

nukpana

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Karma: 71
  • Posts: 663
Re: sNews review
« Reply #17 on: August 13, 2010, 05:30:14 am »

Jason, we obviously have different perspectives which come to light on the whole "user"/"developer" definition.
That's where clarification needs to be addressed. Do I really need to be a "developer(s) with beginner-to-advanced PHP skills" (can't we just say PHP skills? beginner to advanced is covering all the bases, eh?) to use the system?  Or flip the script, is the system allowing a developer to easily develop with documentation or api, or do I have to go through code to figure things out? 

Quote
What I'm talking about? If I have to dig through X modules to find the correct spot to make changes to the output, or edit three files to propagate a  change throughout a site, then that workflow is distinctly different to sNews'. Been there, done that, not interested. But that is me saying things from my perspective. Which clearly is different than yours.
We are saying the same thing.  I agree with you here, which is different than you noted before which was an index file with a function calls and an a css, which almost every CMS does at the core. I do not want to go through (for example) 19MB of code ala CMS made simple, to figure something out - that is totally absurb!

Quote
The weight discussion is another matter - yes I agree that we should look at the whole load when discussing weight. I have personally never experienced the situation Sven found himself in. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, just that I've never had it happen to me. If I see that my databases weigh on average less than 1 kb (as reported by my host), that my site file transfers land at on average 3 mb when uploading a site (I discount images and video clips that don't have anything to do with the system), and that the sNews download package is, what, under 1mb? zipped ... that to me spells "light" as a whole. I can only judge a system by what I see, not by what others may have seen or experienced.
Ok, let's look at it from a developer standpoint.  The center/articles function drastically changed from 1.4 to 1.5/1.6 and now to 1.7.  Any user changes broke future upgrades and the system itself broke upgrades by not allowing simple upgradability.  I know I am beating a dead horse, but the center/articles function handled way too much, and at what cost?  To allow simpler templating? To control the "center" column of the site in one massive function?  Is that lightweight? is that easy to develop against? Can I easily add to it without fearing of breakage of the whole center section?

I am looking at it from different angles and examples. 

Look I am not looking to start a fight or anything.  If I was outside and looking in and reviewing CMS's I would question those things. How easy is the system to use, who is your target audience, have you addressed their needs?

Quote
Cushy is a hosted CMS, of bloody course it doesn't weigh anything in our hands. If I recall rightly, someone mentioned apples and comparisons earlier...
If we just look at file size alone, then yes apples to apples....

Want an apple?

lol...

Quote
You do as you like.
I am, and taking notes. Care to help? You have my email addy.
Logged

Fred K

  • Still trying to learn stuff
  • ULTIMATE member
  • ******
  • Karma: 130
  • Posts: 2728
    • Personal
Re: sNews review
« Reply #18 on: August 13, 2010, 07:18:04 am »

no worries Jason, arguments -even half heated ones- are necessary. We actually agree on most things, but maybe we look at some things differently or word them differently. And fwiw I don't think that sNews is so great that it can't be improved on -which you already know. Center/Articles is one mess that needs cleaning up. All in all though, while the discussion is necessary, it feels like we're straying from the point of this topic (certainly part of that is my fault for which I apologize).
Ahm-a shoot ya an email thing instead. ;)
Logged

Keyrocks

  • Doug
  • ULTIMATE member
  • ******
  • Karma: 449
  • Posts: 6020
  • Semantically Challenged
    • snews.ca
Re: sNews review
« Reply #19 on: August 13, 2010, 02:40:49 pm »

...... we're straying from the point of this topic ..... Ahm-a shoot ya an email thing instead. ;)

If you have something related to the topic in the lead post - "sNews Review" - please share it.
Otherwise... take the old, re-hashed personal debate over sNews function structure elsewhere.
Logged
Do it now... later may not come.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sNews 1.6 MESU | sNews 1.6 MEMU

Patric Ahlqvist

  • Nobodys perfect, but Im pretty effing close
  • ULTIMATE member
  • ******
  • Karma: 65
  • Posts: 4867
  • I'm a self-made man and worships my creator.
    • p-ahlqvist.com
Re: sNews review
« Reply #20 on: August 13, 2010, 02:54:22 pm »

Quote from: Jase
Patric, here is your sales pitch...) sNews is an easy to use system to manage website content. Period. You can add the sNews CMS into your website and let it do its magic! What are you waiting for? 


Yes ;) thanks.
Logged
"It's only dead fish that goes with the flow... "
Updated
Pages: 1 [2]