Need help understanding the differences between WB and CMSMS

[kweitzel]

no wiki, but a manual module ...

on the other hand, you can always use the one of your choice in an wrapper ... or go for an manual integration ...

cheers

Klaus

[maagnh]

Thanks for all the help. I'm going to setup WB this weekend.

Is there a Wiki I can add to WB?

[kweitzel]

XAMPP is a complete ready to use distribution of Apache, PHP, MySQL, FileZilla Server(FTP) and a Mailserver. You do not need to be a whizz to get it all to run after the installation. http://www.apachefriends.org/en/projects.html

Abyss Web Server seems only to be the server itself, you need to seperatly install and configure at least PHP and MySQL.

cheers

Klaus

[ruebenwurzel]

never tested it

Matthias

[maagnh]

So the issue isn't so much with Windows as it is with the web server IIS? I'll check out XAMPP.

What about ABYSS? http://www.aprelium.com/

I learned HTML on my personal server using this web server. It's small, simple, and quite fast or at least seems to be.

[ruebenwurzel]

Yes, but not really good. There are a lot of problems with wrights and permissions if IIS is not wright configured. Try it with XAMPP.

Matthias

[maagnh]

LOL!! OK I'll give it a try this weekend.

Will WB run on a Windows 2000 server with IIS?

[ruebenwurzel]

Is it really that easy?!?!?

yes 

Matthias

[maagnh]

Is it really that easy?!?!?

Forgive my skepticism but after looking at other CMS's this sounds almost too good to be true.

[ruebenwurzel]

Hello,

1. : This forum as modul for WB you find here:http://forum.websitebaker.org/index.php/topic,232.msg16840.html#msg16840

2. + 3. : In Completed Modules you find different gallery modules more. Look here: http://forum.websitebaker.org/index.php/topic,1293.0.html

To install this modules download the zip-files to your lokal machine. Go in admin interface of WB to addons, modules. Browse to the place where you have stored the zip Files, hit install. That all.

To activate them make a new page and choose instead of WYSIWYG the Modul you want.

Have fun

Matthias

[maagnh]

Thanks for all the helpfull replies. I think I will be deciding on WB but I have a couple of more questions if you guys don't mind indulging me.

1) Can I integrate a message board like this one into WB without having to do any coding? If so what message boards can I use with WB?

2) Same question but for uploading/storing/managing pictures. Something like a photo gallery?

3) Same question but for a simple/basic shopping cart?

If I can "plug" in those three functions into a WB based site without knowing how to program then WB would be absolutely perfect for me.

[Ryan]

Just a note: you guys talked about opensourcecms.org, and opencms.org (which is where opensourcecms.org redirects to). I think you mean to say opensourcecms.com

[kweitzel]

Hi Marvin,

I actually looked and tried some of the CMS Testsites which are on opensourcecms.org, and I stuck with WB because of the ease of use. The template system rocks and also the use of different sections (different modules) on one page I think is great.

Some of the CMS i tried did put me off directly by the way their admin interface look, uttlery cluttered, you don't find what you want ... WB for me stuck out as easy, tidy and understandable ...

My brother in law did choose "CMS-Simple" for his project and he dispairs with understanding it ... I had my first couple of pages up in a couple of hours (with WB, and my own design/template!).

I think it's the way to go for an easy system ...

cheers

Klaus

[edit] thanks to Ryan for pointing out this error (see below), corrected [/edit]

[Stefan]

I'm one of the developers of WebsiteBaker, so I'm obviously biased but I'll try to be impartial.
First of all: you can try out both (and many more) on opensourcecms.org and see which of the administration interfaces suit you better.

I think both systems work fine, though I've read complaints about speed and memory usage on the CMSMS board. WebsiteBaker is really extremely slim and doesn't waste any resources, whereas CMSMS uses more high-level coding practices which helps maintainability of the core code but may affect performance.
CMSMS has some advanced feature that will be interesting for some people: caching, tags that can be embedded in pages to include dynamical content, ...
WB on the other hand is superior in its handling of multiple content blocks and the ease of use of the modules.

If you just want to maintain your private page without having to reupload html files for every single change, both systems will do for you.

[Hans]

Hi
I have used both and I find WB more mature at this moment, (much) easier to use / more customisable and faster.
Hans

[Marvin]

I am new to CMS's and am looking for an easy one to implement for my new site. I am experienced with HTML and some CSS but I have no PHP or programming experience.

I would appreciate any help in understanding the differences between WB and CMSMS to try and help me decide which one to use. Thanks.