OT: A little bit more about Wappler - confusion

[osgood_]

I never really could understand DMXzones main website and the myriad of different extension available and what extension would be required to do this or that.........it seems Wappler is going to be just as confusing.

https://wappler.io/extensions.html

Thankfully I have no need for extensions otherwise it would take me a week to understand what ones I needed.

I mean the 'basic' version includes:

App Connect Data Formatter

App Connect Browser

What the heck are they? Doesn't actually say anything about what they do and why you might need them and dont forget we are appealing to 'Bob the Builder' type of developers so if I have no clue they arent going to for sure. A link perhaps to the info on their main site would be good or even better a modal window which pops up detailing in what situation you may need to use them

Does the 'Pro' version contain  all the 'basic & free' extensions???.... the way the info is provided you could be forgiven for not really knowing?

Why not just have 3 headings Free, Basic, Pro and list whats included in each option under the 3 main headings..........far too simple and logical I guess

[W_J_T]

I find it beyond hilarious that for an app deemed a "visual app" and "no code needed", you can use the Bootstrap grid for free, but need to pay to have a BootStrap Navbar on the same site.

That should be really beneficial to those whom can't code. so much for the "you will be able to design, build and publish responsive websites", the only covet is "just without a navbar". Let alone common stuff like: animate css, smooth scroll, slideshow, lightbox, forms, mailer, etc., all part of the basic package.

So out of the gate they are obviously pigeon holing "code free" users into the Basic Package, because any of those people wishing to create a site will need quite a few of the Basic package items to put together a site, including a basic menu/navbar.

The fact that they are segmenting the navbar is just hilarious though. I feel sorry for folks whom have to rely on "code free" and don't ever learn basic HTML/CSS/JS. They will always be trapped inside and burdened by these apps, in one regard or another. If you can work with syntax and code, you can use apps to enhance your workflow but will never be bond by them.

Knowledge does not require a subscription, nor does learning.

At this rate, the free version will probably be part of the crowdfunding as well - pay for early access to the free version. LOL

[osgood_]

W_J_T  wrote

I find it beyond hilarious that for an app deemed a "visual app" and "no code needed", you can use the Bootstrap grid for free, but need to pay to have a BootStrap Navbar on the same site.

Yes, seems beyond stupid because it makes the FREE version virtualy useless to a non-coder, which is of course what they want.

W_J_T  wrote

So out of the gate they are obviously pigeon holing "code free" users into the Basic Package, because any of those people wishing to create a site will need quite a few of the Basic package items to put together a site, including a basic menu/navbar.

Yup, I see no point in offering the FREE version because only coders can use it and its not an app aimed at coders according to the website mantra.

W_J_T  wrote

At this rate, the free version will probably be part of the crowdfunding as well - pay for early access to the free version. LOL

Hummm....its all very unclear and messy.

[BenPleysier]

I wish you'd behave yourself, I'm getting sick of have to OK the post every time 

[osgood_]

BenPleysier  wrote

I wish you'd behave yourself, I'm getting sick of have to OK the post every time 

I'm not aware that I'm or have been misbehaving recently, that was all in the past, many, many, many, many months back when 1 single Adobe employee (who shall remain namless) who wasn't doing their job correctly in managing the forum in my opinion disagreed with my yes rather forthright posts about the unacceptable situation. The concequences of that was I had my status removed, which was neither here or there but just shows how 'controlling' some institutions can be when you imply something that they dont like or disagree with as a result of their own inificiencies.

I didnt let that effect my input into the forum and you would be hard pressed to find another contributor who spends as much time as I do helping posters out with their code issues, most regulars post 'snippets' of code while I on the other hand will spend time writing bespoke solutions specifically for a posters need.

Adobe, if anything should be grateful that I am helping their customers.........not trying to stop me from posting.

Maybe if Preran sees this post he could have a polite word in the ear of whoever it is that is controlling this silly nonsense.......

[Jon Fritz]

The automated filter is part of Jive's forum software that Adobe rents.

As such, it makes no sense and likely can't be changed without help from NASA.

[osgood_]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Jon+Fritz+II  wrote

The automated filter is part of Jive's forum software that Adobe rents.

As such, it makes no sense and likely can't be changed without help from NASA.

Noted.........but the mods posts are not moderated so there is a workflow which allows posts from 'selected' contributors through..............it may also be intrinsically entwined why this forum is pretty much dead these days, along with obvious other reasons.

[osgood_]

Test.

Moderated.........hummm.

[W_J_T]

osgood_  wrote

shows how 'controlling' some institutions can be when you imply something that they don't like or disagree with as a result of their own inefficiencies.

Yeah, fun.

For me after making this comment, now I see the following with every post.

  Which does not seem like a coincidence, given the direct correlation of the two events.

[pziecina]

The real trial for Wappler, (if it gets that far) will come a few years after it is released, as it will then have to up-date to support newer methods. How it handles those up-dates will decide if it has a future.

The problem with proprietary extensions, is that they write proprietary code that cannot be modified easily without the extension.

This ties the developer into using the development program and the extension(s), and the web site owner into using the developer who created the site. Not necessarily a bad thing initially, but in the long term the developer can only sell their business as a going concern to another developer who is willing to pay for that program and all the required extensions.

As for the web site owner, they are stuck with finding a developer that uses the same program and extensions, should their developer cease trading, not have time or retire. They are also going to suffer a loss should they wish to sell the site at some point, as a new developer will charge extra to cover the cost of 're-tooling' to the development program and extensions.

[osgood_]

pziecina  wrote

The real trial for Wappler, (if it gets that far) will come a few years after it is released, as it will then have to up-date to support newer methods. How it handles those up-dates will decide if it has a future.

I got tired with it after all the broken promises for a pubic beta release some months ago, until then I was quietly optimistic but I feel the app is not really going to offer anything more that the dozens of other drag and drop apps out there. The business model is confusing to say the least. It will sell a few but its not going to change the landscape of things...........the wait for a 'complete' coding app for coders continues....or at least one that offers the basic requirements.

[pziecina]

osgood_  wrote

....the wait for a 'complete' coding app for coders continues....or at least one that offers the basic requirements.

Agreed.

The one advantage Wappler may have over other similar apps. for none coders, is its server-side features.

[W_J_T]

pziecina  wrote

osgood_   wrote

....the wait for a 'complete' coding app for coders continues....or at least one that offers the basic requirements.

Agreed.

If an individual knows how to code, then what remains missing as essential features regarding the current selection of various code editors? What do they all lack currently in regards to them all being considered not complete or lacking basic requirements ?

[pziecina]

W_J_T  wrote

If an individual knows how to code, then what remains missing as essential features regarding the current selection of various code editors? What do they all lack currently in regards to them all being considered not complete or lacking basic requirements ?

As we discussed in another thread, most fall well short in css, html5 and javascript support. Then there are the other essentials that I think are required before an app can call itself an ide. Things like de-buggers, runners and fully functional/configurable auto-prefixers.

[W_J_T]

pziecina  wrote

As we discussed in another thread, most fall well short in css, html5 and javascript support. Then there are the other essentials that I think are required before an app can call itself an ide. Things like de-buggers, runners and fully functional/configurable auto-prefixers.

I simply inquired based upon all that is successfully being accomplished by developers across the world leveraging various code editors, languages, syntaxes and workflows. Then it would appear that if a person knows how to code, then things seem to be in pretty good order with the current tools available given the proven results being displayed by developers all across the world.

So I just wanted to understand the perceived lack of a complete tool that remains missing essential basic requirements. Obviously a one size fits all solution will probably never exist, especially to everyones liking. So its more about an overall workflow to accomplish the required task and reaching the desired end result.

In the end, this recent article seems perfectly fitting regarding things:

https://css-tricks.com/what-you-build/

[pziecina]

I like this quote from the link you posted -

"Software, much like people, is born with a whole lot of potential and not much utility. Newborns — both digital and meaty — are exciting and cute but they also lead to sleepless nights and pools of vomit."

The problem with code editors is that they are generalised code tools, and not specific to the requirerments for producing modern web sites or browser based applications. If you look at the html5 specs, (as an example) you will not find any code editor that support all the features, (VS Pro supports more than most, but not all) most stop at code hinting for the main semantic elements.

A lot depends on what one is developing, but I think it is fair to say that most apps do not go beyond the basic requirerments anymore.

[pziecina]

W_J_T  wrote

So I just wanted to understand the perceived lack of a complete tool that remains missing essential basic requirements. Obviously a one size fits all solution will probably never exist, especially to everyones liking. So its more about an overall workflow to accomplish the required task and reaching the desired end result.

I've been trying to think of the best example of an essential feature for web development that is an essential, but not included in code editors as standard, or essential to any other type of coding.

The best example I can think of is image managment.

Most people under about 45 years of age, probably will not remember how revolutionary the inclusion of the 'img' tag was in html, and how browser support enabled everyone to have easy access to images. Before the html img tag, if 99% of the worlds population wished to see an image then it was an hard copy that had to be sent to them via snail mail, (or one they had to take themselves using a film camera, (not digital)). Yes there was email attatchments back before the web, but a fast internet connection then was 14kb/sec. but even by that method one required a program in which to view the image.

The use of images on the web is today something that everyone takes for granted, and image managment for even a small site is essential. This used to be one of the features that Dw led the way in, and one that most code editors still ignore.

[W_J_T]

pziecina  wrote

Most people under about 45 years of age, probably will not remember how revolutionary

Well I make the cutoff age and have been able to see and experience things looking back and moving forwards.

But I still feel it remains as I mentioned above in post #24. With the importance placed of upon learning the foundation of the underlying HTML/CSS/JS etc., and not on any tools themselves. Then the tool becomes irrelevant once you have the actual knowledge and understanding. But I guess things like duct tape and super glue exist for a reason. 😉

[pziecina]

W_J_T  wrote

With the importance placed of upon learning the foundation of the underlying HTML/CSS/JS etc., and not on any tools themselves. Then the tool becomes irrelevant once you have the actual knowledge and understanding. But I guess things like duct tape and super glue exist for a reason. 😉

we can all agree that knowing html, etc is more important than the tools we use, but the reason I think 'other features' are important is that we all like to make life easy no matter what we do.

For me it is also a question of value for money, as everyone could use a free code editor, or just a text editor, but when it comes to paying for a program, (especially the £350 per year for Dw) I expect much more than what is currently offered by all the paid for web dev programs, as I am certain others also do.

[W_J_T]

I understand and agree pziecina​ , regarding the monetary value of tools, as well as feature value and efficiency of use - as it all relates to one another. Sadly, this mythical unicorn app may never be developed, especially to all our expectations. But I suspect we all keep an eye out, just in case. In the meantime back to work for all of us. 😉

osgood_ , where did you go? Did you become an Angel Investor ? EDIT: you showed up when I was posting.

[osgood_]

I dont invest in anything unless l get to test it first to see if its worth investing in.........all l can assume is the 9 who have so far invested are the invited beta testers from DMX's database or employees of the company.

[osgood_]

W_J_T  wrote

pziecina   wrote

osgood_    wrote

....the wait for a 'complete' coding app for coders continues....or at least one that offers the basic requirements.

Agreed.

If an individual knows how to code, then what remains missing as essential features regarding the current selection of various code editors? What do they all lack currently in regards to them all being considered not complete or lacking basic requirements ?

For me an inbuilt css prefixer has become my number one requirement. A prefixer that doesnt require you to use sass or less or a third party apps like codekit or prepros or grunt, gulp build tools etc.

Id also like to get back to the days where you could validate html, css directy through the validation website not some mix and match inbuilt systems which most web editors seem to have these days.

There is hardly a code editor out there that has any useful file management tools, thats one area that DW excels at along with the likes of php storm. I cant name another one which updates the links if you decide to drag a file from one folder to another one in the file tree.

Coda to me comes close to being all that l require but it desperately needs a make over and it needs to include the latest web-kit engine, file management, the new auto complete hints etc..........there were so many great web editors around the 2012 period which for some reason died in the water instead of being updated. Now we have rubbish like Sublime, Atom, VC Code etc which dont even have a snippets panel as such, they practically all run on this json file rubbish .

I much prefer the look and feel of  the web editors which were popular 5 years ago but unless the developers keep them up to date with the advances in web development  they become dinosaurs very quickly.

[W_J_T]

Back to discussing Wappler for a moment, it appears the lofty self-proclaimed marketing tactics continue.

Wappler: The Best Web Builder So Far!

https://medium.com/@boris_dmxzone/wappler-the-best-web-builder-so-far-9-reasons-to-choose-it-1c0a003...

...  and apparently they consider it to be the heralded Dreamweaver Killer.

[W_J_T]

Well thats disappointing the countdown was not allowed to reach zero, even that was muffed.

But anyway here it is: Wappler Crowd Funding.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/wappler-world-s-top-visual-web-app-creator-design-website#/

Ranging from €25 to €10,000 Euros.

Still no access to 'FREE' version. But for €25 Euros, you get a "Thank You" ... ?

[pziecina]

Personally I think the €550, (approx) would be value for money, providing there are no major problems, and a 14 day free trial was offered.

I know I am certainly not the intended user type for an app such as Wappler, but cost wise compared to a Dw stand alone subscription, and purchasing the Wappler pro bundled extensions for Dw to bring it to the same spec, it is very good value.