Serendipity is Stellar
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| devnet Jul 18, 2006 11:46 AM EDT |
I've been using Serendipity on my blog exclusively since its inception. I also help others by setting up webpages/blogs/cms's and help small businesses get a web presence using open source software. So far, out of all blogging software currently available (wordpress included) I have not found an equal to serendipity. It is the most outstanding blogging software available for free today. Period. Now to address the review: Quoting:he only thing I didn't see under Serendipity's Spam Protector plugin is something like the Bad Behavior plugin for WordPressIt's 2 clicks away from being installed. It's available through Spartacus http://spartacus.s9y.org/ and it is the same service that bad behavior is. Stops everything in its tracks and then if you use askimet, you never get spam anymore (as I haven't for months now) Quoting:such as adding images or setting background colors for text, were a bit faulty.Odd, they've worked flawlessly for me for 3 versions now. One might conclude that the problem lies elsewhere. Quoting:If you want to upload a file, you have to go through the media library first and then insert the image using the "manage images" dialog. One thing that really irks me about the media library, and the insert image dialog, is that they're both set up to allow image hotlinking.You're using the wrong image inserter on your htmlarea toolbar. Don't use the Insert Images button, use the Manage Images Button right beside it. Works far better and allows you to position the image into the HTMLArea. This is just inexperience with the software for this one. No fault of the reviewer. I also tried adding a background color to text in one of my posts, but it wouldn't take. Changing the font color itself worked fine, but background color doesn't seem to work in HTMLArea. Quoting:Apparently, the Serendipity team feels a bit defensive about being yet another CMS platform. On the features page the Serendipity team has a "Why Serendipity is better than..." section to explain why its platform is "better" than competing CMSes.If you read the section underneath, they claim only to be 'up to par' with wordpress and moveable type. Dunno where the reviewer got otherwise. Quoting:Plenty of "commercial" sites are powered using GPLed software, so I'm not sure where this FUD comes from, but the Serendipity team could use their time a bit better by working on the software rather than license-bashing.Yeah...not sure why they're touting it better. FUD though? Most likely not. The developers are german, perhaps it is in the translation? Quoting:it's not better than what I'm already using.If you're using wordpress it is I'm afraid...I've converted 5 people in the last 2 months because serendipity is easier to customize and easier to blog with. Ask someone who doesn't know html and they'll hands down use serendipity. |
| techiem2 Jul 18, 2006 12:43 PM EDT |
I love s9y. Finally registered after lurking for a while. :) *waves* I agree with devnet. I searched around when I was planning to integrate a blog into my site. (p.s. how do I add links in here?) and settled on s9y because it seemed much easier to setup and customize than the others I looked at. I've been glad I did. Sure, it has it's glitches here and there, but overall it's a nice, easy to use, and very customizable blog package. |
| jimf Jul 18, 2006 1:04 PM EDT |
> Ask someone who doesn't know HTML and they'll hands down use serendipity. I always find that I always code in HTML attitude strange. I 'can' write pretty good HTML if I have to, but if given the choice, I'll always use a WSWG like NVU. There might be a case for making minor changes in code, but overall, coding for visuals is just counter intuitive, and no way as quick or consistent. Experienced users should know this best. |
| techiem2 Jul 18, 2006 1:47 PM EDT |
Oddly enough, I go exactly the opposite way. I can't stand WYSIWYG editors. Maybe it's my programming background or something, but I feel more comfortable when I can see the code and know that it's exactly as I wrote it, not how some editor thought I meant to write it. Now maybe if I was doing some serious CSS work I might use an editor, since I don't know the language real well yet, but overall I just plain prefer to work in pure code. :) |
| jimf Jul 18, 2006 1:55 PM EDT |
> when I can see the code and know that it's exactly as I wrote it Well I could see that if the final product was not a visual image. To me, that's the only real proof. |
| grouch Jul 18, 2006 2:12 PM EDT |
I can't stand WYSIWYG HTML editors, either. Most of them insert tons of pure garbage. I don't blog, though, so my preference for just editing the HTML probably has no bearing on CMS. |
| dinotrac Jul 18, 2006 4:23 PM EDT |
>I can't stand WYSIWYG HTML editors I think it's all marketing. No less an authority than Richard Stallman believes that what you call something is very important. Henceforth, I propose that we refer to bluefish and its text-oriented friends and compatriots as WYSIWYC editors -- What You See Is What You Code. Failing that, WYCISWG, or What You Code Is What You Get. |
| techiem2 Jul 18, 2006 7:42 PM EDT |
haha.
I like that. My personal favorite "web editor" is mcedit. I use nano if I'm doing a quick tweak or working across the net and mc is too laggy on the connection to work with efficiently. |
| grouch Jul 18, 2006 8:04 PM EDT |
Joe or mcedit, with proper syntax highlighting. (The evil vi[m] also does syntax highlighting, but I lack the necessary collection of small, furry mammals to sacrifice to attain an exit from vi[m]). dinotrac: You're getting close to lyx's motto of what you get is what you meant. :) |
| jimf Jul 18, 2006 8:09 PM EDT |
> You're getting close to lyx's motto of what you get is what you meant. :) More like 'thought you meant' :D. |
| SFN Jul 19, 2006 5:13 AM EDT |
Quoting:Henceforth, I propose that we refer to bluefish and its text-oriented friends and compatriots as WYSIWYC editors I'd settle for a mandate that people stop pronouncing WYSIWYG. |
| grouch Jul 19, 2006 7:06 AM EDT |
SFN: My pet peeve is that made-up thing some folks use in place of SQL. Jeez, there are only 3 letters to say. |
| dinotrac Jul 19, 2006 7:33 AM EDT |
Is that what they mean? I always thought they were referring to the next installment... |
| SFN Jul 19, 2006 7:34 AM EDT |
Yes. Totally unnecessary. And if they must pronounce it, they should say "squeal". Possibly "squall". |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!