Framework vs CMS, Tattoo vs MODx : lets revive this and clarify !

A little confused. Has the aim shifted from being a satirical look at the faults of the general problems of "common" CMS in general terms and showing people how "annoyingly" easy it is done with MODx to just being a how to be able to make modx actually suck or are both possible and equally funny and beneficial?

I don’t know. Which makes me the one that sucks right now. Noodling on it though ...

Personally, I am against any form of "attack" or public criticism of other CMSes on any of our sites. Let their products speak for themselves. If we attack them, then we go down to their level.

We want to show a level of maturity as a product, and hold respect. People who hold respect in communities usually do not attack others in the community. The best marketing platform we can provide is one that shows the strengths of our product, and in no way mentions the weaknesses of other products. Eventually it will be MODx’s capabilities that make people stick.

What we don’t need to do (and I will vote down any attempt to do so) is attack - either directly or implied - any other CMS out there. I don’t care how bad Joomla and Drupal are, they’re still good products that people have poured months and years into. We have no right to attack any of their efforts. We can show ours and MODx’s strengths - that is the only respectable right we hold.

There’s an old Moroccan proverb that goes like this: "Among walnuts only the empty one speaks."

It’s worth thinking about.

Shaun,

I don’t that anyone is truly suggesting that any CMS should be derided or attacked. I have significant respect for any successful OS project that is able to build a community around itself.

The way I see using modxsucks.com is to ironically point out the features and benefits of MODx. We should even skip the idea of the Kubrick theme. I feel that using a character and humor could be a seriously effective way of communicating some of the key standout features of MODx. Kind of an Oscar the Grouch on CMS Street character. Not slagging anyone at all. Not pointing out any specific flaws in any specific CMS system or Framework.

It could be as simple as 10 things I hate about MODx and each point be a clear important feature of MODx written as a attack at the feature. No comparisons to other CMSs. Example: Number 1: MODx forces me use plain (X)HTML and CSS to create site templates! I want to have lots of billable hours to show for building my templates into the CMS.

Here I talk about a feature and a benefit that addresses a concern of Web Desingers relating to ALL CMSs and not to any CMS.

It may be a little harder to do than slagging on other CMSs but I think that laughter and irony can really make a point.

Lets keep it positive!

Cheers,

Jay

@modxsucks.com

Man... thats for sure IS a *superb* stuff for April 1! ...

Quote from: smashingred at Feb 22, 2008, 11:12 AM

The way I see using modxsucks.com is to ironically point out the features and benefits of MODx.

Quick note : I agree with Shaun, and that’s one of the things I liked about the MODx project when I came aboard, the constructive, proud yet humble approach !

I think what happened was a creative process with great ideas skidding off the road for a few minutes. I have no doubt after cooling off or sleeping on it, those ideas would have seem a bit too wild and gotten re-adjused.

Still, the anti-marketing bit and the modxsucks.com registration is genius and Jay is summing it up for us here.

Just like Ryan, I think this could be a way to make it to digg’s front page !... and even if it isn’t that efficient, it would still reflect good on the project, if done well. That’s why everyone’s point of view is important

Quote from: smashingred

We should even skip the idea of the Kubrick theme. (...)

Definitely the Kubrick theme is too associated with WordPress.

Quote from: smashingred

It could be as simple as 10 things I hate about MODx and each point be a clear important feature of MODx written as a attack at the feature. No comparisons to other CMSs.

The more I think about it, the more I think it should be simple, very simple.
It’s easy to overdo it when you’re letting your imagination go wild and have fun

I think we have our guidelines here : keep it simple, no comparison, a so-called self deprecative tone with an ironic spin to finally show MODx’s strength and identity, and some well calculed FUD to our forum users (make them believe it’s true !).

Quote from: smashingred

Example: Number 1: MODx forces me use plain (X)HTML and CSS to create site templates! I want to have lots of billable hours to show for building my templates into the CMS. Here I talk about a feature and a benefit that addresses a concern of Web Desingers relating to ALL CMSs and not to any CMS. It may be a little harder to do than slagging on other CMSs but I think that laughter and irony can really make a point.

lol that’s great stuff !

Let me give a try at a few others...

Number 2 : Installing MODx addons is complicated : instead of relying on a simple wizard to install components and a few UI options to set them up, you have to copy-paste you way into it and even manually set parameters to fine-tune every aspect !

Number 3 : MODx forces me to use code with an esoteric built-in syntax ! It doesn’t even have a UI to add, move and configure content blocks as I like. I have to manually create chunks of code to define how my components format every bit of the html output, and decide where to place them in my website’s templates !

Number 4 : MODx support forums are a confusing maze, one member gives you instructions to do things one way, the next one gives you another and another one points you toward the documentation, which of course contains yet another one. How am I supposed to know what to do ?

David, great insight and thoughtfulness. What great company.

Gentle, self deprecating and all with the simplest points.

Have a great night all!

Quote from: rthrash at Feb 22, 2008, 08:27 AM

LOL ... now we’re the proud registered owners of MODxSucks.com.

Cool. Maybe we should buy MODxSux.com for backup?

Bob

Quote from: OpenGeek at Feb 21, 2008, 08:59 AM

xPDO is an API for building an API into a specific model. The model represents the data structures and related logic that make up the functional part of an application. MODx 0.9.7 is a model in xPDO, and thus it is an API (replacing the one from 0.9.6 and before) into the MODx application.

I’m chiming in late here, but I’ve been thinking about this for a while now and I think I finally have an opinion.

Jason’s probably not going to like this, but I think that from a marketing standpoint, it’s too late to call MODx anything other than a CMS.

I understand that MODx can be considered a CMF or an API underlying the MODx application and that MODx can be perceived as a series of layers, but if we say that publically, it will sound like gibberish to 99% of the people who see it and make them less likely to take a serious look at MODx. I’ve been reading about computer software systems for about a million years now and whenever I see a discussion of "layers" (the application layer, the database layer, the database API layer, the user interface layer, etc. etc.) it makes me want to grab people by the lapels and say "Please, please, hire some marketing experts."

I believe that what won the Packt award was MODx the CMS. A whole lot of what’s currently in the Wiki and docs is read by outsiders as referring to MODx the CMS. And, let’s face it, we’re having this discussion on modxcms.com.

If we want to make a public distinction between the application and the framework (and I’m not convinced that it’s a good idea), I really think that they need two different names and that it’s too late to use MODx as the name of the framework.

If we try to say that MODx is two (or more) different things, we’ll just confuse people (and ourselves).

Many of us came to MODx because we were unhappy using an inferior CMS (or no CMS at all). When we saw MODX, we said, "Ahh, that’s the CMS I’ve been looking for." Unless we really concentrate, we tend to think of the API, Plugins, Snippets, and Chunks in the same way we think of the MODx manager -- as part of the CMS. I understand the desire to separate MODx from its add-ons but marketing MODx that way would be like trying to sell an auto shopper a car engine.

So, in summary (thanks for reading this much of my rant), I think we need to emphasize that MODx is a single tool (possibly built on the amazingly powerful and robust --your name here -- Framework) that will take you to CMS heaven, the Swiss Army knife of CMSs, the preferred brand -- not of techies -- but of people who want a solid CMS that will make web-site creation and maintenance a dream instead of a nightmare, in other words, the ultimate CMS.

Bob

Not at all. MODx is a CMS, it’s just built on the xPDO APIs. Two different things. For marketing purposes, that’s all that is necessary to know. Of course Jason will dwell on the API part, it’s his baby (and a grand lovely one at that, even if I still can’t make heads nor tails of it ).

Car advertising doesn’t go into the theory of engine or transmission design; at most it just touches on the wonderful benefits of its wonderful design. Beer commercials may well revolve around the pure water used in their making ("From the land of sky-blue waters"), but don’t go into any detail about the actual brewing process; lame frog jokes seem to be more popular anyway. Although I always like the horse teams better. Did you know that there is (or was, anyway) an entire family who generation after generation bred and trained those Budweiser Clydesdales? The babies crawled around in the straw in the horse’s stalls, that’s how gentle those horses are. But I still don’t like pale beer.