Maybe it's the people using it? Maybe the free hosting company can't
cope with the load, who knows. The system itself seems pretty light
on
resources, so maybe the switch to a paid for host will help.
My own website (http://qdosmsq.dunbar-it.co.uk) - or maybe I should
call
it George's web site as he is doing most of the updating at the
moment
(thanks George) - is run on a simple Wiki (www.Dokuwiki.org) which
is
useful and simple and works pretty well even when broadband is
reduced
to an 11 mbs (bits not bytes!) wireless connection! (Which is what I
have to use at work!). However, I don't think that would be suitable
for
Quanta.
11mbs?!? I'd give my right arm for a broadband that works that well.
I've said in the past here I get just under 2mbs at best, or around
30kbs at times when it's "kids on facebook" time in this village.
I do think that CMS is the way to go with a enterprise web site
these
days, it takes far too long and is not really cost effective to be
hand
coding HTML - even with a WYSISWYG HTML editor - you need to be able
to
connect, edit, save and disconnect, not messing about with HTML and
then
trying to FTP the results to the right place etc etc.
Absolutely, I agree. I didn't want to name the CMS when I had my
little rant in case of comebacks, but you did guess right. I use other
CMS'es for the tanslation work etc with no problem whatsoever, even
over this cr***y broadband :-)
However, I've been on the site (using the above mentioned wifi link)
and
it's very responsive, quite fast - and it looks good. So, I'm rather
concerned at the fact that you have problems with it when editing or
updating - I'm loathe to believe that the free hosting is at fault,
unless your bandwidth is throttled somehow and the editing process
is
hitting a limit?
Probably the useless broadband around here. There are times when doing
things online you type a character, wait a couple of seconds and then
it appears.
I don't usually give up on things too easily but the Quanta CMS has
been quite frustrating for me personally. Technically, it probably
ain't the CMS per se, but the entire experience of the entire system
it's implemented on. I really don't know about that part of it and am
happy to leave that to others who have designated responsibilities for
that part of the system.
I think it might be more of a case of which OS the servers were using,
and which software utility support was in place to allow the CMS to
function, but I don't concern myself too much with that, so you might
be better asking Dan or Keith about it in case I give incorrect
information about it.
Not much help I know, just random thoughts mainly, and a bit of
encouragement.
Well, throwing random thoughts into a brainstorming session often
generates good ideas. We've seen that on this list plenty of times in
the past :-)
Dilwyn Jones
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
