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

Web design companys using Joomla and templates

Options
  • 16-08-2010 12:00am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 314 ✭✭


    What are peoples opinions on web design companys who use Joomla and its templates as a base for their business?

    Here are 2 examples of websites using the same core template:

    http://www.avcfurniture.co.uk/
    http://www.tommydalydecorators.ie/

    Heres the original template:
    http://templates.joomlart.com/ja_kyanite_ii/

    The 2 examples above are in my opinion both good looking sites (AVC more professional logo though) helped of course by the high standard of the original template.

    What should be the difference in cost between a Joomla template site and a non-template site to the same standard?

    For those used to producing Joomla sites how much would you charge for sites like the two examples above?


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭tomED


    Once the client knows what they are getting, I don't see anything wrong with it. There is a big problem however, with companies who compare their work with companies who create their own designs.

    There is a market for cheap and nasty websites, and there are so people providing a really professional service to this market. Then of course we have the other ones who over value what they are doing and end up ripping their customers off.

    The difference in cost comes down to how you value your service and of course the extra work required to integrate the bespoke design with Joomla.

    You could buy a Joomla template and have a site up, fully tested and up and running in less than a day. In comparison to a bespoke design, which could take days to complete, nevermind to the twoing and froing with the client to finalise design sign off. The next stage is integrating the design with Joomla... so it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that there is a lot more work involved.

    You could get someone to install a basic Joomla template site for as little as €300 (can't vouch for anyone here), whereas a bespoke design integrated with Joomla could be as much as €1.5-2k or more.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 128 ✭✭whufee


    Wordpress is still big thing for Irish web designers....
    I built 4 holding pages for my company using Joomla, pretty fast and easy to manage, but most of web companies are using wordpress. We are a propery developer group, each of our office building has its own website, most of them are built via wordpress (before i came in), and those 'pro' designers charge us big money. And they are saying that if we want to use Joomla instead, the cost will be higher due to 'advanced technology'..... LMAO

    A 19-page website + customized Googlemaps = €18,000
    No mistakes, 18000 EURO !


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭tomED


    whufee wrote: »
    Wordpress is still big thing for Irish web designers....
    I built 4 holding pages for my company using Joomla, pretty fast and easy to manage, but most of web companies are using wordpress. We are a propery developer group, each of our office building has its own website, most of them are built via wordpress (before i came in), and those 'pro' designers charge us big money. And they are saying that if we want to use Joomla instead, the cost will be higher due to 'advanced technology'..... LMAO

    A 19-page website + customized Googlemaps = €18,000
    No mistakes, 18000 EURO !

    It's most likely they don't know how to skin Joomla and are charging for their learning curve!

    Don't forget the government spent €40k on a wordpress skin there recently.... need I say more...


  • Registered Users Posts: 742 ✭✭✭Pixelcraft


    Nothing wrong with it IF a client knows the difference. If the web isn't core to someones business there's no need to invest heavily in a website. If it is, templates just aren't going to cut it.

    Unfortunately there are countless people selling templates whilst comparing them to bespoke design and how much cheaper they are, this is at best misleading.


  • Registered Users Posts: 66 ✭✭site designer


    tomED wrote: »
    Don't forget the government spent €40k on a wordpress skin there recently.... need I say more...

    Link?? that makes me feel sick, nice work for whoever got it


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,070 ✭✭✭Placebo


    "Once the client knows"
    so obviously its the designers obligation yes? what if this isnt specified, does the client have a case? cyber police?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭tomED


    Link?? that makes me feel sick, nice work for whoever got it

    http://www.merrionstreet.ie/

    We obviously don't know what is going on in the backgroud - but the from the front end, it's clear that it's a wordpress install


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭tomED


    Placebo wrote: »
    "Once the client knows"
    so obviously its the designers obligation yes? what if this isnt specified, does the client have a case? cyber police?

    Well if they are professional web designers, I would expect them to specify to the client what they are getting.

    I think it is the designers obligation to inform their clients of exactly what they are getting.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭strandroad


    whufee wrote: »
    Wordpress is still big thing for Irish web designers....
    I built 4 holding pages for my company using Joomla, pretty fast and easy to manage, but most of web companies are using wordpress. We are a propery developer group, each of our office building has its own website, most of them are built via wordpress (before i came in), and those 'pro' designers charge us big money. And they are saying that if we want to use Joomla instead, the cost will be higher due to 'advanced technology'..... LMAO

    A 19-page website + customized Googlemaps = €18,000
    No mistakes, 18000 EURO !

    What's with the WordPress bashing here? WordPress is a fantastic CMS framework, very flexible and extendable. Much more so than Joomla. I'd have no qualms recommending properly set up WordPress installation for a large corporate/institution site (of which there are many examples) while Joomla is more small business targeted - way easier to set up out of the box on a ready made template, but then way less flexible.

    If I was to hazard a guess who is more "pro" based on their CMS choice exclusively, I'd definitely put WordPress (or Drupal) ahead of Joomla.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,801 ✭✭✭cormee


    mhge wrote: »
    What's with the WordPress bashing here? WordPress is a fantastic CMS framework, very flexible and extendable. Much more so than Joomla. I'd have no qualms recommending properly set up WordPress installation for a large corporate/institution site (of which there are many examples) while Joomla is more small business targeted - way easier to set up out of the box on a ready made template, but then way less flexible.

    If I was to hazard a guess who is more "pro" based on their CMS choice exclusively, I'd definitely put WordPress (or Drupal) ahead of Joomla.

    I agree 100%, I'm mystified by these blanket statements dismissing particular software packages, usually based upon little more than a poor understanding of the full capabilities of the software being dismissed.

    You've summarised quite well why WordPress is an excellent CMS out of the box and with a little customisation it's probably one of the most user-friendly CMS out there (and let's face it that's a large part of what defines a CMS). It also has thousands of excellent plugins, a massive community behind it and has been tried,tested and proven itself on many large, busy sites.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭tomED


    mhge wrote: »
    What's with the WordPress bashing here? WordPress is a fantastic CMS framework, very flexible and extendable. Much more so than Joomla. I'd have no qualms recommending properly set up WordPress installation for a large corporate/institution site (of which there are many examples) while Joomla is more small business targeted - way easier to set up out of the box on a ready made template, but then way less flexible.

    If I was to hazard a guess who is more "pro" based on their CMS choice exclusively, I'd definitely put WordPress (or Drupal) ahead of Joomla.

    Well since Wordpress isn't a CMS per se, I wouldn't sell it to a client as a CMS. Wordpress has its uses of course, but if a client requires a simple CMS, I personally wouldn't recommend wordpress because there are so many other options out there.

    There does some to be a fascination amoung some web developers lately with Wordpress. 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.

    Oh and just for the record, I wouldn't recommend Joomla to my worst enemy! Joomla is just wrong IMO!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭tomED


    mhge wrote: »
    What's with the WordPress bashing here?
    cormee wrote: »
    I agree 100%, I'm mystified by these blanket statements dismissing particular software packages, usually based upon little more than a poor understanding of the full capabilities of the software being dismissed.

    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??


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,801 ✭✭✭cormee


    tomED wrote: »
    Well since Wordpress isn't a CMS per se, I wouldn't sell it to a client as a CMS. Wordpress has its uses of course, but if a client requires a simple CMS, I personally wouldn't recommend wordpress because there are so many other options out there.

    There does some to be a fascination amoung some web developers lately with Wordpress. 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.

    Oh and just for the record, I wouldn't recommend Joomla to my worst enemy! Joomla is just wrong IMO!

    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.

    WordPress stopped being just a blogging tool years ago.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,801 ✭✭✭cormee


    tomED wrote: »
    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??

    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭tomED


    cormee wrote: »
    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.
    cormee wrote: »
    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.

    cormee wrote: »
    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 314 ✭✭flashforward


    mhge wrote: »
    If I was to hazard a guess who is more "pro" based on their CMS choice exclusively, I'd definitely put WordPress (or Drupal) ahead of Joomla.
    tomED wrote: »
    Oh and just for the record, I wouldn't recommend Joomla to my worst enemy! Joomla is just wrong IMO!

    It seems that Joomla is getting bashed the most in this thread.

    Could I ask your reasons for putting Joomla behind WP or Drupal?
    And to tomED, could you elaborate as to why you feel joomla is so bad?


  • Registered Users Posts: 447 ✭✭PaulPinnacle


    whufee wrote: »
    And they are saying that if we want to use Joomla instead, the cost will be higher due to 'advanced technology'..... LMAO
    To be fair, he seems to be bashing Joomla more than WP there ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭strandroad


    tomED wrote: »
    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.
    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.
    tomED wrote: »
    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,801 ✭✭✭cormee


    tomED wrote: »
    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 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, installation can not be considered a deciding factor with WordPress, if it's taking you more than 5 minutes to do even a manual install you're doing something very wrong.

    - 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."

    - 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.

    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 62 ✭✭dublogic


    Plus 1 for Joomla. I have used Drupal but for me its about contextual solutions - Drupal for framework solutions great but in terms of availability of add ons and good looking templates its pretty poor - Joomla on the other hand has so many add ons - the variety is huge and lots of it is free (though a donation to the developer is always welcomed) plus for me it integrates perfectly into the Learning Management system I use (Moodle) and its got great templates which can be easily changed (though avoid at all costs the TemplateMonster ones. ) I like the fact that one of its add ons allows me to run a daily automated backup and then have it croned to Amazon S3. Nice.


    Having said all that I would not describe Joomla as intutitive as WordPress however as I use it everyday its not an issue. I always tell my clients about the templates.
    I do this to demistfy the process so they are comfortable updating the site should they so wish. <RANT ON>I 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? Obviously a lot of that is about perception however I regularly come across situations where they are charging 500 - 700 per day where they should be getting 200 per day max.</RANT OFF>

    I feel better now. Please agree with everything I have just said so I can sleep soundly.:p


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,801 ✭✭✭cormee


    dublogic wrote: »
    <RANT ON>why should the client pay for the designers fancy D2 office and car?

    So is your boss paying your mortgage/rent or are you?

    It's an open market if they are unhappy with the service that's being provided for them they need to find a new designer.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 62 ✭✭dublogic


    I pay my own rent and as for your "if they don't like it they go somewhere else" attitude - thats just bs - how about building a site that they are happy with for a fair price so they don't have to go through the hassle of going somewhere else?

    For a non techie person to have a site built for them can be completely stressful so moving to another developer is not as easy as you make out not to mention the time involved and distraction from their core business.

    Clients should be charged what the job is worth not what the developer can get away with - unfortunately in this country there seems to be the attitudes of "let the client pay for my lifestyle" rather then let the client pay for what the site is worth.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,801 ✭✭✭cormee


    dublogic wrote: »
    I pay my own rent and as for your "if they don't like it they go somewhere else" attitude - thats just bs - how about building a site that they are happy with for a fair price so they don't have to go through the hassle of going somewhere else?

    For a non techie person to have a site built for them can be completely stressful so moving to another developer is not as easy as you make out not to mention the time involved and distraction from their core business.

    Clients should be charged what the job is worth not what the developer can get away with - unfortunately in this country there seems to be the attitudes of "let the client pay for my lifestyle" rather then let the client pay for what the site is worth.

    OK, you pay your own rent so you'll agree clients aren't paying for the D2 office and the car?

    "How about building a site they are happy with ?" - I'm pretty sure 95% of designers and developers do aspire to do just that. However responsibility for picking the designer remains with the client, that's why they need to do their research - look at the designer's portfolio, past clients, interview them, have some sort of structured pitching process, and at the end of that process come to an informed decision - does the designers skills merit their price? If it does they take them on.

    If they follow that process the quality of work, in the vast majority of cases, will be what they expected.

    If they don't follow that process the results may not be what they expected. And if that's the case I'm afraid they have no one to blame but themselves.

    There is no conspiracy on the part of designers/developers - they're in the business to make money and to make a living, and here's a bit of news for you - they're not philanthropists, they want a nice car and a nice office and if clients are willing to pay that price in return for a product so be it, the designer is entitled to that reward for their time.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭tomED


    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.
    mhge wrote: »
    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%
    mhge wrote: »
    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.

    mhge wrote: »
    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.
    mhge wrote: »
    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.

    cormee wrote: »
    -
    - 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.)
    cormee wrote: »
    - 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...
    cormee wrote: »
    - 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.

    Agreed
    dublogic wrote: »
    I 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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭strandroad


    tomED wrote: »
    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".
    tomED wrote: »
    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 :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭tomED


    mhge wrote: »
    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.

    mhge wrote: »
    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/
    mhge wrote: »
    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.

    mhge wrote: »
    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....
    mhge wrote: »
    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).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭strandroad


    tomED wrote: »
    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.

    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 182 ✭✭worc


    I use Joomla templates but do not charge, purely for friends. My opinion, given I use template, is biased but I think their use is perfectly fine as long as someone using them is 100% up front about it and give detail about how they "develop" a site in black and white plain language with a clear pros/cons list.

    Problem with it is that when it becomes "easy" to do things (step 1: install joomla, step 2: install template, step 3: paste content, step 4: sign off), many people jump in trying to make a quick buck and this leaves the unknowing vulnerable to those "professionals" who don't do their homework on all the steps (e.g security, .htaccess, SEO - which are all pretty dead easy to do) or just don't bother. Same thing happened in graphic design with photoshop - step 1: buy photoshop, step 2: install photoshop, step 3: learn the gradient tool, step 4: "I'm a graphic designer".

    Trouble is that it's worse to get a shoddy template setup than getting a nasty logo (IMO) because the site might just never see the light of a customers monitor because it's badly setup and either doesn't rank or gets hacked.

    In relation to the original question about price - if I had ever decided to charge I'd have felt it was daylight robbery to expect more than 20% of what a non-template custom build would be - I don't think changing a few CSS values, putting in a lightbox, contact form, organising the modules where they should be etc. deserves anything more.

    On a side note, when I considered doing it for money I have to admit I felt like I'd be the ridicule of the webdesign profession (and I use the term "webdesign" very loosely). So I spent an awful long time going through website designers sites/portfolios (found through a prominent design blog showcasing webdesigners sites to see the "high caliber" work) for the common elements to make sure I knew how to create them myself. This research made me feel that templates have a bad rap, though justifiably so given so many who don't do it right. I can't say I saw many sites that with some custom_html modules you wouldn't be able to emulate in Joomla. Many sites subscribed to a showcase position, then 3-4 lower "boxes" with a little image and content, left/right/top alinged menu, then a footer filled with the usual suspects.

    Those pro designers even made mistakes that suprised me and further made me lose the feeling of being labelled a half-ass Joomla templateer. One business site always stood out because the designer put up a little google location map for them that was just too small to really see where they were; so you had to zoom out but zooming out to view the city showed the locations of 9 of their competitors on the google map as well, I just thought that was crazy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 314 ✭✭flashforward


    worc wrote: »
    In relation to the original question about price - if I had ever decided to charge I'd have felt it was daylight robbery to expect more than 20% of what a non-template custom build would be - I don't think changing a few CSS values, putting in a lightbox, contact form, organising the modules where they should be etc. deserves anything more.

    What would you say to me if one of the sites I linked in the o.p cost €1300 to develop? 'daylight robbery'?
    worc wrote: »
    I can't say I saw many sites that with some custom_html modules you wouldn't be able to emulate in Joomla. Many sites subscribed to a showcase position, then 3-4 lower "boxes" with a little image and content, left/right/top alinged menu, then a footer filled with the usual suspects.

    Those pro designers even made mistakes that suprised me and further made me lose the feeling of being labelled a half-ass Joomla templateer.

    Is there a case to say that a Joomla site (or Wordpress/Drupal) templated site is better value for money for the customer than a 'pro designed' site? For the same money a Joomla template site could give a good looking site with a lot more time developing custom code etc. than a 'pro designed' site purely due to the time saved not having to create a bespoke design.

    For example could the sites linked in my o.p be emulated from the ground up and incorporate a CMS for under €1000?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭strandroad


    What would you say to me if one of the sites I linked in the o.p cost €1300 to develop? 'daylight robbery'?

    Since you give quote in euro i presume you mean the second one. Without dissecting the costs, I'd say that whatever the cost would be it would still be overpaid because the site is a very crude job, a good example of half-baked template adaptation by slapping some poorly done graphics on and forgoing typography completely. There's plenty more if you visit the studio website, all the same MO - Joomla template, pixelated stock photography, 1998 logos, haphazardly placed content. It's exactly this type of work that gives "weekend Joomla designers" bad name because unfortunately Joomla is particularly easy to abuse in this way.
    Is there a case to say that a Joomla site (or Wordpress/Drupal) templated site is better value for money for the customer than a 'pro designed' site? For the same money a Joomla template site could give a good looking site with a lot more time developing custom code etc. than a 'pro designed' site purely due to the time saved not having to create a bespoke design.

    False dichotomy. In many cases (and most likely always in case of a brochure website) it's actually much faster to write clean code from scratch the way you want it and hook up a simple CMS for the client than to delve in Joomla's modules and templates written long ago by someone else to modify them to the spec.


Advertisement