MODx vs CMSMS: Comparative Review

MODx is a tool. It’s up to the user to use it properly. If I give someone a gun and they shoot themselves in the foot with it, I then tell them to not to do it, and they continue to categorically state that the gun is broken because they shot themselves in the foot ... resembles your "expert" caching argument. Re-run your tests without the template switcher plugin in your outdated version 095.

The next/previous links: One of your own examples of using next/previous links doesn’t even have them that are readily visible: http://www.christchurchguildford.com/index.php?page=finances-and-giving (maybe it did at one point but they realized it’s a fairly useless feature for all but simple site without hierarchy ... and certainly not anything which should be used as a benchmark of what makes for a good site).

Rahul, I hope it’s just a language barrier thing, but you certainly only seem interested in a passive-aggressively pontificating and making corner case assertions to prove how brilliant and right you are (real-world application be damned), not in making a better article that would actually provide value rather than spreading misinformation.

Quote from: splittingred

You’re actually saying that you know more than anyone else in the world on this subject? That screams tinfoil hat to me, and is horridly arrogant.

"Chances are" is the key phrase. I spent countless hours doing web searches on both CMSs (and also Drupal and Textpattern), and many weeks installng them and wading through their documentation and writing snippets for them. Then I spent more time doing more web searches looking for postings where anybody had used both CMSs and expressed any opinions about one versus the other. Based on this, I think it’s accurate to say that "chances are" that nobody else knows more about both of them, though of course there are numerous people who know more about just one of them.

Rather than simply calling me names, maybe you could try to find something on the net that somebody else wrote that shows a greater knowledge of both CMSes (not just one of them).

Rahul

It depends on what the definition of "is" is...

Quote from: rthrash

The next/previous links: One of your own examples of using next/previous links doesn’t even have them that are readily visible: http://www.christchurchguildford.com/index.php?page=finances-and-giving (maybe it did at one point but they realized it’s a fairly useless feature for all but simple site without hierarchy ... and certainly not anything which should be used as a benchmark of what makes for a good site).

I did say that "This one has REL links" for that URL. You won’t see REL links unless your web browser supports viewing them. Using Opera, enable the Navigation toolbar. Firefox has an extension that does the same (don’t recall its name). Rel links are great for navigation using the keyboard. The browser recognizes them in the HEAD of the document.

Rahul

Quote from: crossconnect at Jan 24, 2008, 05:42 PM

MODx’s advanced functionality as "Probably excellent[4]", and footnote 4 says: "Due to lack of good advanced documentation, a lot of effort may be needed to benefit from the full power of either CMS."

First, I understand the point you are trying to make, but do not agree with it. The lacking¹ "good advanced documentation" you reference does not define Excellence in regards to the functional capabilities of the MODx framework, or any other for that matter. (e.g. Opting to "Install the Help Files" for Microsoft Office does not make it any better/worse of a program (functionally) because their is accompanying documentation...)

---

[table][tr][td] [/td][td]
¹ Documentation (< 0.9.7): http://modxcms.com/documentation.html
Forums: http://modxcms.com/forums/
Wiki: http://wiki.modxcms.com/
and soon 0.9.7+ Documentation http://docs.modxcms.com/

[/td][/tr][/table]

Quote from: crossconnect at Jan 24, 2008, 05:42 PM

Quote from: Photowebmax

Interesting thread...
But in the end the main attraction with MODx is how adaptable it is with respect to design. To me MODx’s strength is that YOU are in control of the design process. Its a web designer’s CMS. I like how you can create your XHTML and CSS...

I summarized MODx’s advanced functionality as "Probably excellent[4]", and footnote 4 says: "Due to lack of good advanced documentation, a lot of effort may be needed to benefit from the full power of either CMS." Do you agree or disagree with this? If you disagree, how would you improve that summary, without making it any longer?

Rahul

I am not going to agree or disagree with you there as I have not gone through the CMSMS documentation to a degree that will aid me in jousting with you (and it seems like you like the sport...)

I am not a member of the MODx developer team, just a very wet behind the ears new user. I have gone through periods of anguish during the "newbie learns MODx" process. I have also made some public statements here over the documentation issue.

That being said I must say that most of the folks on this board have been very civil, understanding, and above all HELPFUL to me as I moved forward during the learning process. Like I said I have tried several CMS systems: Drupal, Joomla, Wordpress, CMSMS, Textpattern and MODx. I make no claims to be the world’s ("dead or alive") most knowledgeable authority on any of these systems. I downloaded them all, installed them, observed the support forums, worked on tests sites and observed how it all went to creating a CUSTOM site rather than hacking some other fellow’s theme. I like some of the elements/features of them all, including CMSMS, but for me MODx won out in the end.

MODx IS different than CMSMS, which gets back to your original thesis. The one thing I think you are missing in your "analysis" is that the target audience is different. The things that appeal to me with MODx are the things that I found missing in CMSMS: flexibility in building a custom design rich site from scratch.

One thing about writing strongly worded reviews: don’t be surprised when informed folks will review your review...

Rahul,

A very simple yes or no answer please (for questions 1 through 3) to the following questions:

1) Have you run your existing demo site you based your review on built in version 0.9.5 after removing the Template Switcher plugin (just delete it from the resources > plugins page)?

2) If no, do you plan to do so?

3) If yes, do you plan to revise your article to reflect a real-world application of MODx?

4) If yes, when?

Quote from: rthrash

1) Have you run your existing demo site you based your review on built in version 0.9.5 after removing the Template Switcher plugin (just delete it from the resources > plugins page)?

2) If no, do you plan to do so?

3) If yes, do you plan to revise your article to reflect a real-world application of MODx?

4) If yes, when?

I’m not sure if/when I will do any of those things as described above, but what I will do is revise my review by essentially summarizing what you have told me about the caching issue. Coming soon.

And I will be happy to make any other factual corrections as requested.

Also, if you disagree with any of the entries in my summary table near the beginning of the review, please suggest improvements.

Please note that the review contains a link to this forum thread so that readers will get the benefit of all the discussion here.

Rahul

Thank you Rahul. As I said in my first response to this post the caching thing was where the inaccuracy came in. As long as the table and analysis reflects what would have been written, I’ve got no problems worth further discussions. Note this is grossly different than simply adding a footnote retraction in my mind; it would mean changing the content, and if you feel a change history is important, putting your original assertion in a footnote.

While we’ll almost certainly never agree on the real-world validity of some of the other evaluation criteria you’ve chosen, those choices are yours and I have to respect that. On those points we’ll just have to agree to disagree amicably.

It’s a fact that out of the box MODx does not provide global previous next links, and therefore fails your requirement.

It’s also a fact that within a matter of minutes, even a hack coder like me could take the prev/next/jump snippet and make it fit that requirement. It’s also a fact a new user just today created such a snippet that works on an individual level from scratch. Extending that to recursively drill down at each level for container documents would make it fit your requirement perfectly I think.

Rahul, just to be different I want to thank you for your comprehensive review. Of course there are some inaccuracies and outdated information and you’ve made note of that in your review. Despite the flaws, you have provided a ton of helpful information. I haven’t found any better or more comprehensive comparison of CMSMS and Modx. You are also reaching out to both communities for feedback which is commendable.

Also, considering you’ve shortlisted CMSMS and Modx (just like me), you are surely an intelligent individual.