You make excellent points. I agree with all of them.
On May 10, 1:54 pm, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: > All, thanks so much for your thoughtful responses -- very helpful and > encouraging. I can see this is a very active, open, and supportive > community, and I believe I will give web2py a try. (I followed > Massimo's advice and posted a similar question on the ROR list, and > Massimo even popped up over there to add to the discussion -- nice > work.) > > I appreciate the points made regarding why I'm not finding a lot of > impressive looking examples of web2py-powered sites (i.e., focus on > intranet development; lack of design-oriented web2py developers). > Digging into the list a bit, it appears this issue has come up before: > > http://groups.google.com/group/web2py/browse_frm/thread/22d37d27b6fc969fhttp://groups.google.com/group/web2py/browse_frm/thread/e70143ebf8be476c > > I know I'm new here, and I don't want to be presumptuous, but perhaps > it would be useful to hear the perspective of someone who has recently > been "shopping" for a web framework and comparing the different > alternatives. For me at least (and I suspect I'm not alone), it's very > helpful to be able to identify some high quality examples and/or some > high profile organizations using the framework. These "used by" > examples (a) tell me that other successful organizations have found > value in the framework, (b) demonstrate real-world capabilities and > use cases, and (c) boost confidence in the long-term viability of the > framework (i.e., it's more likely to continue being developed/ > supported if it's got lots of users and/or at least a few high profile > users). > > Given web2py's unique situation, you might consider some of the > following: > > * Identify a handful of your best public examples and highlight just > those. Among the existing crop, a few that stood out to me were > several of Julio Flores' sites (i.e., pyforum.org, techfuel.net, and > the screenshots of pyshowcase.org and pystack.com posted on > techfuel.net), web2pyslices.com (though the design could use a little > polishing), and qualitysystems.com. > > * Just as important as what you include is what you don't. Don't list > 50 sites just because they all happen to use web2py. The unimpressive > ones may actually detract from interest in web2py, and they make it a > lot harder to find the few good ones (not to mention that some of the > sites listed don't even exist anymore). If there are a few sites that > have some impressive capabilities under the hood but just happen not > to look so pretty, maybe call those out separately, but provide some > explanation (e.g., "Doesn't look pretty because not intended for wide > public consumption, but it does XYZ in only 100 lines of code..."). > > * For internal/intranet projects with notable companies, try to get > permission to mention the company name (possibly with logo) on the > web2py site. > > * If you can't get permission to mention the company name, provide a > general description of the type of company and nature of the project > (e.g., "A Fortune 500 financial services organization uses web2py to > power its mission critical XYZ system..."). > > * In some cases, you might also be able to show redacted screenshots > (i.e., blur out confidential/proprietary details or replace with > generic data). > > More generally, compared with some of the other frameworks (even > Pylons and TurboGears), I think the web2py site itself could use a > little more polish and organization. There appear to be a lot of great > resources, but they seem a bit scattered. For example, there's the > book, which includes its own wiki pages, plus a separate wiki style > FAQ (which is just a very long unorganized list), plus an entirely > separate wiki site, all with different UI's. In addition, there are > examples and applications on the main site (not particularly well > organized), a separate plugins site, and additional apps, plugins, > examples, and snippets on web2pyslices.com, again all with different > UI's. That's a lot of seemingly related documentation and resources > scattered across a lot of different places (that are not well > integrated or universally searchable). Also, I can't find a way to > navigate to the "Powered By" list without already knowing the URL > (actually, that's probably a good thing for the time being), and at > least two of the affiliated companies listed don't appear to exist > anymore. I could go on, but you get the idea. > > Honestly, coming from the sites of some of the other frameworks, > web2py suffers a bit by comparison (I think unnecessarily so). You > seem to have all the ingredients -- they just need to be organized and > presented a bit more effectively (and attractively). Fair or not, > prospective users will make inferences about the substance and quality > of the framework based on the presentation (not to mention the fact > that the organization/presentation of the resources directly impacts > the ease with which prospective users can learn about web2py and new > users can become proficient with it). > > Anyway, I'm sure you've thought about and discussed some of these > issues before. I just thought it might be helpful to hear from someone > looking at it with fresh eyes. > > Again, thanks everyone. > > On May 10, 12:00 pm, mdmcginn <[email protected]> wrote: > > > But, as has been pointed out, people might be confused or discouraged > > by the look and feel of web2py.com, if all they want is easy, good- > > looking websites/webapps. It's great that Massimo is making Drupal and > > Wordpress templates to work with web2py. But we should strive to make > > web2py.com, web2pyslices, etc. look beautiful, so we don't give the > > impression that great design is incompatible with web2py. > > > On May 8, 11:30 am, Thadeus Burgess <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > One thing I have noticed is django and RoR is for the most part, a > > > designer oriented community. IE: Lots of designers, few real > > > programmers/engineers, this is why you see design-oriented keywords > > > floating around in those frameworks. Most of us here in the web2py > > > community are programmers/engineers/physicists, etc... we don't have > > > the best design skills, even if we are brilliant =) > > > > -- > > > Thadeus > > > > On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Alexei Vinidiktov > > > > > On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> From what I've read, web2py sounds like a great framework -- > > > >> comprehensive, well-integrated, easy to set up, learn, and deploy, > > > >> etc. However, although it sounds good on paper, I haven't yet found a > > > >> single site built with web2py that looks all that impressive (at least > > > >> superficially). It's easy to find quite a number of sophisticated and > > > >> impressive looking sites/apps built with Ruby on Rails and Django, but > > > >> I haven't seen anything remotely comparable based on web2py. I'm > > > >> wondering why the disparity. > > > > > What you've seen on those sites is the façade. It's the work of > > > > graphic designers and not a merit of the underlying frameworks. That's > > > > what you see. > > > > > I'm sure the same effect can be achieved with any web2py based > > > > website. You just need to hire a great graphic designer and usability > > > > expert.
