Wordpress Builder

[johnsmith0251]

I don't care for WordPress and am not interested in using it. The wp design process is weird to me, especially because I'm a visual person and like to see and play with the layout in a visual editor. wp seems to require you to do that through a series of menus and widgets. It might be because I never used wp - but, to me, it's just not a visual editor. There have been times I toyed with the idea because some small clients want some control over their site adjustments or updates - but I realized I work better for clients that are at the point where they can or need to delegate webwork out. Plus, I always found giving clients access can create headaches which suck up time to troubleshoot. I think I got a bit insecure when I noticed a few larger companies switching over to wp.

I am just curious about these three questions.

There's one offline website builder that allows you to build visually in their software and then upload it into wordpress on your own server. Would giving WWB the same capabilities be a big jump for wwb from where it is now?

Does anyone feel that wp sites have an easier time with search engine ranking? I'm curious if there are items that are already optimized for SEO in all that bloat that you would need to do manually in wwb.

Why do you feel some larger companies choose wp?

To be clear, I have no interest in wp. I'm really just curious.

[Pablo]

Would giving WWB the same capabilities be a big jump for wwb from where it is now?

There are no plans to implement this functionality. This is beyond the scope of this project.

Does anyone feel that wp sites have an easier time with search engine ranking?

I strongly doubt this. WP websites are generally much bulkier. It's a mixed mess of unrelated components. Just take a look at the generated HTML code and you will understand what I mean.

[alan_sh]

I can only answer the first question from my experience.

I have a small Synology NAS box in my house (OK, I've got 3 and 3 more powered down ) on which I've set up a small web server. I've set up a file share and pointed my PC to it as the W: drive

When I do web sites in WWB, I always publish to a local folder on my W: drive. Once that is done, I just (using FIle Explorer), find index.html in the W: folder, click on it and it starts up my web site - but locally. The Synology NAS box has PHP installed so everything just works.

Once I am happy with that, I then use FileZilla to copy the files up to my real web server.

So, that is how I have an 'offline' server that I can use before it goes live. You could do it to your local C: drive, and it would all work apart from PHP.

Does that help?

Alan

[johnsmith0251]

There's no right or wrong to any of this.

The current economic situations created frustrations of cutting costs, improving development times, and simplifying processes - all that are making my head twist. Sales angles like "html files are lighter" are being more challenged in other development spaces. The idea that you can refresh a look just by uploading a new theme is a pretty big deal. Most clients dont care about the freedom of html design until they need something very specific.

My love for wwb is extreme. As time goes on, I save the blocks I build so that I can repurpose them in future builds, and create newer looks with more ease. It is just a drag on resources and takes time. The program cost is phenomenal given the total value for what wwb can do.

I havent leaned into some of the new wwb features yet. I do remember one that allows you to put a bunch of items into a card and then you get freedom to move those items around. I'm really looking forward to playing with that. I don't know if cards can function like a layer would. I havent played with anything but am excited to do so.

[wwonderfull]

1. There's one offline website builder that allows you to build visually in their software and then upload it into wordpress on your own server. Would giving WWB the same capabilities be a big jump for wwb from where it is now?

2. Does anyone feel that wp sites have an easier time with search engine ranking? I'm curious if there are items that are already optimized for SEO in all that bloat that you would need to do manually in wwb.

3. Why do you feel some larger companies choose wp?

1. Its better the way it is right now for WWB.

2. SEO is good when Wor*P*** milks money from people monthly yearly and gives it to Google so they give special preference to it. Unless you did not use Wor*P*** and waiting long days with same content, meta data, title, description every thing in the html is same still not reaching that level for some reason. Although I can assure you that WP is more bulky and has unnecessary things in SEO. Some of them which you can not even control or change, but WWB gives you that full freedom to do whatever you need to do even better. There are more factors about seo but it would take a whole article to acknowledge some facts.

3. Large companies are lazy people. They want the work to be done quick they want it easy that's why they use plugins and themes mostly. They are so lazy they pay wasteful money without even knowing what they need and that a plugin can hack their website without them even knowing. They always have to relay on the one who made the site. They want this ready made now a days. They just install a theme and change some text here and there change the images and logo and done. They dont even take the time to make something creative instead they take something which is already created. In my website I gave a brief understanding how Wor*P*** is falling with proof as it was hyped because some industries were related with them. WP was doing the business as an agent.
If you want to see why you should not be using WP then care to visit my site and see why choose us page. Everything is written there.

[onlye]

One of the biggest request from users that pushes WP is "I need/want to be able to edit my own site". Typically those are not my customers. But if you take a bit of time to ask "what" do you need to edit, it is usually small segments. Pablo added editable content a bit back that accomodates this nicely. My customers identifiy where they want to make changes, say daily to monthly, and they can do it easily via a hidden page. There are other simple customer editable widgets/scripts that play nicely with Wizzy; blog, ecommerce, image galleries, event calendars, appointment scheduling, etc. (I use several scripts from PHPJabbers.com)

If these editable options work for your customer, then the added benefit is they are specified and confined so the threat of screwing up the entire site is greatly reduced.

[johnsmith0251]

1. Its better the way it is right now for WWB.

I don't have any desire to start using wp, but I am curious to why you feel this way.

[johnsmith0251]

This isn't a challenge to your software, so I hope I'm not coming off like I'm making a feature request. Even if you added this as a feature, I would not use it. This is just pure curiosity. Would adding this feature be a big thing for you to even do?

There are no plans to implement this functionality. This is beyond the scope of this project.

[Pablo]

It will most likely be a couple of month of work.
There is no way to make such an investment profitable.

[johnsmith0251]

This isn't a challenge to you. I appreciate the feedback and I'm enjoying this conversation.

The points you make aren't motivating for someone like me.

I don't know what monthly or yearly bills you're referring to. I thought wp was a free platform. Since I don't use the platform, I wonder to what extent the widgets are necessary. When I think of a widget, I think of something along the lines of adding an Instagram feed or a live chat, which is something I would need with WWB anyway.

In my case, clients do pay ongoing maintenance fees. These fees cover monitoring everything, including the backend stuff, UI improvements as I try to optimize for how people interact with the website, continuing tweaks and adjustments, and tech support when things break - which happens. What happens when new versions of serverside software arise? WWB is updated to support and play nice with that. For clients with SEO, that's a consistently moving target. From a business standpoint, monthly fees make sense. I have yet to see any wp designers that offer anything different.

The big difference I agree with is design freedom. However, once you start using the latest standard - layout grid - you also have some design limitations, much less than WP - but they are there. I also agree with wp code bloat being a big problem. However, most people don't understand how that affects them, and if you work with very small clients, they usually don't care. Many people at that level just need a website to have one.

Things may be different for me because I usually won't work with one-time projects. I focus on businesses where the owners are at the point where they need to delegate. I found working with clients smaller than that to be a miserable experience.

If you want to see why you should not be using WP then care to visit my site and see why choose us page. Everything is written there.

[johnsmith0251]

It will most likely be a couple of month of work.
There is no way to make such an investment profitable.

The headaces you must feel when it comes to figuring out which features to add or not lol

[johnsmith0251]

This comment is not a request - just an observation. I'm starting to realize that most programs have a big focus on the premade blocks and templates made by graphic designers. I'm curious to know if that focus would bring in a whole new set of wwb users to make the extra r&d worth your wild.

It will most likely be a couple of month of work.
There is no way to make such an investment profitable.

[johnsmith0251]

This is exactly how I would handle this situation too! Some great advice!

One of the biggest request from users that pushes WP is "I need/want to be able to edit my own site". Typically those are not my customers. But if you take a bit of time to ask "what" do you need to edit, it is usually small segments. Pablo added editable content a bit back that accomodates this nicely. My customers identifiy where they want to make changes, say daily to monthly, and they can do it easily via a hidden page. There are other simple customer editable widgets/scripts that play nicely with Wizzy; blog, ecommerce, image galleries, event calendars, appointment scheduling, etc. (I use several scripts from PHPJabbers.com)

If these editable options work for your customer, then the added benefit is they are specified and confined so the threat of screwing up the entire site is greatly reduced.

[wwonderfull]

This isn't a challenge to you. I appreciate the feedback and I'm enjoying this conversation.

The points you make aren't motivating for someone like me.

I don't know what monthly or yearly bills you're referring to. I thought wp was a free platform. Since I don't use the platform, I wonder to what extent the widgets are necessary. When I think of a widget, I think of something along the lines of adding an Instagram feed or a live chat, which is something I would need with WWB anyway.

In my case, clients do pay ongoing maintenance fees. These fees cover monitoring everything, including the backend stuff, UI improvements as I try to optimize for how people interact with the website, continuing tweaks and adjustments, and tech support when things break - which happens. What happens when new versions of serverside software arise? WWB is updated to support and play nice with that. For clients with SEO, that's a consistently moving target. From a business standpoint, monthly fees make sense. I have yet to see any wp designers that offer anything different.

The big difference I agree with is design freedom. However, once you start using the latest standard - layout grid - you also have some design limitations, much less than WP - but they are there. I also agree with wp code bloat being a big problem. However, most people don't understand how that affects them, and if you work with very small clients, they usually don't care. Many people at that level just need a website to have one.

Things may be different for me because I usually won't work with one-time projects. I focus on businesses where the owners are at the point where they need to delegate. I found working with clients smaller than that to be a miserable experience.

You can trigger your own motivation to nock yourself cold but the feature won't come hot unless the developer is motivated right now. I hope you get the point.

WWB was not meant for cms but it was pushed for it, even the ecommerce thing. It mainly focuses on the general webdesign of html and css and some scripts which a tradition website would have. Now advancing with modern webdesign features. It never was a competitor for WP, wix, squarespace or any others. WWB does not take others as a challenge but mostly it is based on what is possible to make along with what the people want. So that means a feature capable of providing to the general people.

Those who are satisfied with WWB do not dream it to be the next WordPress. WWB is more like a modular when it comes to extra features.

Every feature you see @pablo has to make it and keep trace of things. Why not some one else? Because if there is a bug or a problem who would give you support! WWB is single handedly developed and maintained by @pablo. It is not like he has to learn the whole features and things of Word***S*** just to satisfy a user unless it benefits for many. @pablo here is not trying to rival with WP. WWB has its own set of users. Well you might say then what is the future. I would say uncertain to your desires. Cause no one knows what comes next unless @pablo takes what would be best for the rest. Many people make request here and wait for years. How long can you wait for this feature... Nothing against.

[zinc]

While I appreciate Pablo's points on the scope of WWB, one thing that perhaps can be suggested an "E-commerce" edition of WWB where the focus is purely on the ecommerce capabilities by picking on one popular platform such as Shopify and marry WWB's features with Shopify's E-commerce end. I am sure they would support this project. While it is good to add bits from various e-commerce companies, personally I have found his implementation of PayPal the best. However I do also understand not everything is in Pablo's hands but this gives food for thought and moving with times and tapping into different parts of the market.

My thoughts...