why so few extensions?

Hello,

I am a newbie-programmer.

Joomla, Typo3, Drupal have thousand of extensions.

a) Why it isn’t so with modx? Is it to difficult?

Perhaps this is why they are so successful. I mean
the community is sooo big.

Surely all this extensions don’t developed from zero.
I think this and that are free scripts from sourceforge.net,
hotscripts.com, phpclasses.org etc.

b) I am right?

I am quite new to modx myself, so I can just offer my own opinions.
I think that this is at least partly because there was no easy way to pass along extras in modx evolution. This should change with the transport packages introduced in revolution (as soon as there is an easy way to create these packages).

The size of the userbase is a factor as well.

In my opinion the sheer number of extensions is not the best indicator for a good cms. It is far more important that there are extensions that fit your needs and that you are able to find them. A good search function (perhaps including some sort of rating system) is extremely important, especially if you have a lot of extras/add-ons/extensions. Otherwise you spend a lot of time installing and configuring extras/add-ons/extensions that you don’t use in the end.


Hth

I guess I (or others) can explain this more detailed later, but one of the main reasons is that you can do with Ditto, Wayfinder, Jot and eForm what you need dozens and dozens of extensions to do in other systems.

Think flexibility within a few, not numbers of do-only-one-thing extensions. That’s MODx. At least for me.

Another factor leading to fewer extensions is that the architecture of MODx makes it very easy for developers to code custom add-ons that do exactly what they need it to for a specific site and nothing more. Generic add-ons are fine for simple, low-usage sites, and I’m sure as more folks become aware of MODx and adopt it, there will be more of these available, but as a developer the best benefit of MODx for me is to be able to quickly create custom applications and code snippets that favor efficiency and concise functionality over generic, do-it-all features.