My Love Hate Relation with CMS!

[TDBF]

Okay, firstly, this is a rant...... if ranting offends you.... please look away now ?

I seriously have this love hate relationship with CMS... It can be such a wonderful, powerful, customisable (I'm Scottish get over it) tool, but at the same time it really gets me to the point where I want to punch the living crap out of every one of my monitors one at a time, and then another once just for good measure.

What I love about CMS is the fact that it is a powerful, flexible and highly customisable tool, and what ever you can think about doing, go right ahead and do it. However, it should come with a small warning, as you need a PhD in Information Theory, Coding and Cryptography, Scientology, technology, PHP/HTML/Javavscript, mathamatics, particle physics, spiritualism and well being, and all of this before you start. Okay, maybe not the last couple in the list, but it will save on the monitors you are about to punch face with!! ?

Hey, I love coding like the next person, but there is just so much coding you can take when all you want to do is create a post about what Aunt Jeanie was doing for her 100th birthday...... Look, I have had to tell her to hold on till she is 105! I'm sure she will understand, but not for long mind you.

For all that CMS/Pages/IPSPages/IPContent (See even the name is so 'phucking' complicated) has, the one thing it lacks is its 'simplicity' of use, of doing the simple things right! The people just want to create Articles and Pages straight out of the box, without days worth of coding behind the scenes. Look, WordPress gets it, Joomla gets it, and even Drupal gets it! Just make the simple things as simple as humanly possible for us simple folks.

For example, I just want to create a simple page about what I had for yesterday's dinner, of course being Scottish it was a culinary dish of Scotch Broth, Porridge oats, Haggis, fried Mars Bars and Irn Bru. But the process of making ma' dinner was a lot damn quicker than creating a post about it.

Seriously, the process of creating a simple page in CMS:

1. In ACP: Add Page, choose page builder or Manual HTML (oh the choices!!!! Lovely!), ach well......Page builder it is!
2. Add Page Name, Page file Name..... Again the choices, which template and css should I use for all of this!!! ?
3. Add Page includes, Title and Meta tags and
4. should I add this to the menu?

Great, how do I add the Page Content? Erm, well: 

1. first you need access to the Block Manager (faeces outta luck if you don't have admin rights huh!),
2. then add a WYSIWYG widget to the page you just created (don't mention anything about custom blocks because we don't want to confuse our poor Admins and Writers),
3. add this WYSIWYG widget into one of those dancing ants boxes,
4. click the edit button and add your content and wallah... you have just created a Page.... Simple huh?!

So, to give the writers the ability to edit pages, I have to give them admin rights to the Block Manager.... Not on my Nelly!

So to edit a Page afterwards: You have to do this from two different places? The ACP to edit the Title and Meta tags etc, and the Block Manager to edit the content! Seriously you couldn't make 'faecesz' like this up! Oh, wait you did........... ?

This could have been so much easier and much more of a simplistic process with some forethought. Not just adding Pages but editing, and 'write' permission for groups as well. But hey, don't get me started about explaining why you can't move an article from one Database to another to our writers.................. sigh.

Anyway, my apologies on the long winded rant.... or my monitors wouldn't have made it through the day!

Cheers! ?

[opentype]

Interesting how you jump between Pages without databases and Pages with databases just to make the rant work. ? 
Because as you know of course, Pages databases have the front end editing, group permissions and so on. It is as easy to use for your writers as adding a WordPress post. Pages pages on the other hand are not meant this way. This is not a lack of forethough, it’s just a different intention. 

WordPress has recently started to rethink their interface in terms of “blocks” you can put anywhere on the page. So yes, WordPress gets it, but there aren’t there yet. Pages already has that functionality since 4.0. 

[TDBF]

2 hours ago, opentype said:

Interesting how you jump between Pages without databases and Pages with databases just to make the rant work. ? 
Because as you know of course, Pages databases have the front end editing, group permissions and so on. It is as easy to use for your writers as adding a WordPress post. Pages pages on the other hand are not meant this way. This is not a lack of forethough, it’s just a different intention. 

WordPress has recently started to rethink their interface in terms of “blocks” you can put anywhere on the page. So yes, WordPress gets it, but there aren’t there yet. Pages already has that functionality since 4.0. 

I'm sorry, I was talking about Pages here and NOT Databases. There is a massive difference about creating single static 'Pages' to Database articles, in fact, if I could create a Page in the same way you could create a Database article, with proper group permission without going into two different area's I would be over the moon. As it stands, creating single static 'Pages' which have nothing to do with Databases is a nightmare and poorly though out.

[opentype]

1 hour ago, TDBF said:

 As it stands, creating single static 'Pages' which have nothing to do with Databases is a nightmare and poorly though out.

If you expect it to work like a WordPress page, you might come to that conclusion. On the other hand, the way it works in Pages is exactly what makes it …

4 hours ago, TDBF said:

… powerful, flexible and highly customisable tool

Nothing of the drag-&-drop stuff you can do on a Pages page is available in a standard WordPress installation for example. Nothing! So I don’t agree to the “nightmare”. 

You just need to know when to use a Pages page or a Pages DB record. If you try to do stuff suitable for DB records with Pages pages, you will get frustrated. But because you made the wrong choice, not because the Pages page feature is bad. 

[Joel R]

I get your rant.  Pages is, by far, the most powerful and customizable app in the entire suite and can power a rocketship.  But it has a steep learning curve and IPS needs to continue to lower the barriers while still letting power users change and customize everything.  

1. I think you're confusing the intention of IP.Pages database versus IP.Pages page.  Yes, setting up a Pages page requires too many clicks, but they're not meant to be blog updates like a Database record. I think that's part of your problem.

2  IPS has the better architecture with blocks and hot zones.  WordPress has the better UIX.  They'll eventually meet in the middle.  

3. Don't want to wait? Give yourself InvisionPress by integrating WordPress with IPS using the new login handler in 4.3.  

[The Old Man]

Totally agree with you all. I think it's inevitable that Pages will become more user friendly, just as it has become more powerful, but it just seems progress is so slooooooow. I was just reading a thread when in 2015 @Lindy said more article layout templates was something they'd love to release. Come on, already!

Have you seen Divi 3.x for Wordpress by Elegant Themes? It's not perfect, but it certainly getting there. In fact when I saw v3, I immediately bought a lifetime license. It comes as a full theme you can use as a base but you can also just use the standalone Divi Builder plug-in on any third party theme, simply adding components and features, full drag and drop, just click on anything to edit its properties etc. Or if you want, use the Advanced options to get into the CSS etc.

I really hope IPS give Pages some 'Divi' style treatment perhaps also powered by React, for these reasons so eloquently explained in this video...

 

Imagine Pages if it was as easy and intuitive to use as this out of the box, it would be revolutionary and groundbreaking compared to other community software...

 

Come on IPS, give Pages some love and take the Community Suite to the next level! This is the kind of thing we need Pages to evolve into, whilst keeping its strong intergration with databases and the rest of the suite.

[TDBF]

4 hours ago, Joel R said:

1. I think you're confusing the intention of IP.Pages database versus IP.Pages page.  Yes, setting up a Pages page requires too many clicks, but they're not meant to be blog updates like a Database record. I think that's part of your problem

With all due respect, I fully understand the difference between the two and I apologise if I not making myself clear on this.

I will use WordPress as an example (and comparison).

You have Posts (Databases) and Pages (Pages) both of which serve different purposes. Databases (Posts) is for dynamic content, such as creating News/Articles/Blogs with many different categories etc.

Pages (CMS Pages) are for 'one-off' content, such as an about page which are not published, cannot be set to expire, cannot have comments or reviews attached etc.

The fundamental difference between WordPress and CMS when creating 'Pages' is the UI. In Wordpress, creating a  'Page' pretty much uses the same user interface (Title textbox and a Content Textarea) as you would create a Post. Pages you create are then listed within Pages Table where you can perform different actions edit, delete etc.  This is simple for those who are not technically minded. Pages in WordPress can also be created and edited by members who have permissions.

CMS on the other hand is a different story. I do not like the mechanics behind creating single static content Pages. Having to input data in two different parts of the Suite to add a static content Page is counter intuitive, over complexed and non user friendly.

I also do not like the fact that Single static content Pages are lumped together with Pages created for Databases (I hope I am making myself clear here). Pages should have its own area away from 'pages' created for the Database or at least there should be some sort of visible distinction between the two types, Static or Database Pages.

4 hours ago, Joel R said:

3. Don't want to wait? Give yourself InvisionPress by integrating WordPress with IPS using the new login handler in 4.3. 

I have already thought long and hard about this, I could have used any number of CMS's for content (I would have used Joomla anyway), but I decided against this as this starts causing its own issues and problems. I did not want to maintain two different setups for users, themes and setups, this just creates more work.

I choose and bought CMS (Pages) because it was integrated into the suite, and has the features which all me to create complex Databases and Templates. For me it is just not a case of just swapping over and starting again, I have 10,000's of News, Blogs, Articles, Fixtures Lists, Teams, Stadiums and Players Data that would require porting over, and I am not about to do that. I've invested too much time and money in CMS just to walk away.

Thanks for your reply :)

[TDBF]

4 hours ago, The Old Man said:

Have you seen Divi 3.x for Wordpress by Elegant Themes? It's not perfect, but it certainly getting there. In fact when I saw v3, I immediately bought a lifetime license. It comes as a full theme you can use as a base but you can also just use the standalone Divi Builder plug-in on any third party theme, simply adding components and features, full drag and drop, just click on anything to edit its properties etc. Or if you want, use the Advanced options to get into the CSS etc.

I really hope IPS give Pages some 'Divi' style treatment perhaps also powered by React, for these reasons so eloquently explained in this video...

Imagine Pages if it was as easy and intuitive to use as this out of the box, it would be revolutionary and groundbreaking compared to other community software...

Come on IPS, give Pages some love and take the Community Suite to the next level! This is the kind of thing we need Pages to evolve into, whilst keeping its strong intergration with databases and the rest of the suite.

Yes I have, I use Wordpress on other Websites. I love the fact that I can create feature rich content out the box and display it in a style which I want (I mainly use the NewsPaper theme by DivTag) without touching line of code for templates.

You cannot just install and expect to use CMS out the box. The default Templates are the stock Forum table look, which is not the intended look you want for your News website. If you are looking for an application to install and start creating articles, then this Application falls far short in the aesthetics department and will require a lot of work before you even think of creating the articles you want.

I just wish that CMS was workable out the box as WordPress and Joomla. If I want the bells and whistles, then I know I have to put in the hard work at a later stage.

[Tom S.]

53 minutes ago, TDBF said:

or at least there should be some sort of visible distinction between the two types

I may have misunderstood what you are talking about. But it is clear which pages are for databases:

I agree with the guys above. You have just used Pages incorrectly. I have done that in the past too. I shied away from the database section because I did not fully understand how it worked and what it was for.

[Tom S.]

5 hours ago, The Old Man said:

Imagine Pages if it was as easy and intuitive to use as this out of the box, it would be revolutionary and groundbreaking compared to other community software...

Learn to code people. Not being able to code in 2018 is more embarrassing than being illiterate.

...I kid, I kid, I kid.

However, your statement implies that this app is not groundbreaking, which I think it already is in many ways. This app alone sets IPS apart from other community software providers. But certainly no objections from me to making it more "revolutionary and groundbreaking" ?

[opentype]

7 hours ago, TDBF said:

I also do not like the fact that Single static content Pages are lumped together with Pages created for Databases (I hope I am making myself clear here). Pages should have its own area away from 'pages' created for the Database or at least there should be some sort of visible distinction between the two types, Static or Database Pages.

Not seeing any logic in doing that and people could easily argue the opposite had IPS chosen to do this.

There is just one page type. A Pages page is a blank container you put blocks on. But if I later on add a database block to it on the front end it disappears from its old sections and moves somewhere else in the ACP? Not seeing how this is better. It would only confuse people. 

The visual distinction you ask for is there already by the way:

[The Old Man]

6 hours ago, Tom S. said:

Learn to code people. Not being able to code in 2018 is more embarrassing than being illiterate.

...I kid, I kid, I kid.

Have been coding for years, thanks Tom! 

[Tom S.]

4 hours ago, The Old Man said:

Have been coding for years, thanks Tom! 

I was speaking tongue in cheek. No offence was intended

[Ramsesx]

No doubt, pages is a complex but powerful system. It took me a lot of time (several months) to get satisfying results.  And I am still struggling sometimes with the settings or finding them. For example some days ago I was searching 30 minutes for the proper permission of a pages database. It helped me a lot to read pages related posts by @opentype and comparing stuff other sites using pages have done. Hopefully IPS will find a way to keep the balance, attracting more customers for the pages app and keeping it powerful as it is.