Ok, I’m a recent convert to WordPress! For years, I dismissed it as just a blogging platform with security issues. But I actually quite like it now and I am finding that many of the web designers I’m dealing with are also beginning to use it more as well.

From my point of view as a content marketing specialist, it’s easy for me to update and create content for clients.

So my question is do you build and design now on WordPress?

Nope I spend a lot of time migrating sites away from Wordpress though

I gave up wordpress entirely about a year ago, I tend to do most my work on expression engine now although it depends on the client and the work.

We do most our sites on WP including some big sites for multinational PLCs its far more capable than a lot give it credit for. Yes if you are building something super complex it probably isnt the best option. But the vast majority of sites are not hugely complex. If you know your php you and javascript so you can avoid poorly written plugins its very capable.

We do most our sites on WP including some big sites for multinational PLCs its far more capable than a lot give it credit for. Yes if you are building something super complex it probably isnt the best option. But the vast majority of sites are not hugely complex. If you know your php you and javascript so you can avoid poorly written plugins its very capable.

 

I would second that and would add WP is just a CMS like any other, question of choice and if it fits the project.

I think the biggest problem with WP is the abundance of poorly written plugins that can leave security loopholes, pollute the global scopes of PHP and JavaScript and so forth. If you abstain from using these and create your own php and JS functions then you shouldn't run into too many issues, we have 150+ websites built on WordPress and we're yet to have a problem.

This is not to say WP is the best CMS as the best CMS doesn't exist it's all down to the project requirements and for information based websites WP is sufficient but best of all most clients are comfortable and familiar with using the interface. There's no point in using a CMS if the clients can't figure it out.

 

There are some very well written plugins that we do use though, they are Advanced Custom Fields and their various extensions such as the repeater field etc. and SEO by Yoast. That's literally all the plugins we ever use. If we build a shopping cart or something with complex functionality then we of course look to other solutions rather than WP.

 

We recently released this, and it's far from a 'blog' http://cajsas-kok.se/ Wordpress was perfect as it was not an overly complicated backend and the client had already used WP in the past which meant less time wasted on both ends teaching them a new interface.

Edited September 26, 201411 yr by rbrtsmith

Most clients tend to want to use WP as a CMS simply because they know the name. It's easy to use and interface is pretty intuitive, though from a back end point of view, you end up with a lot of code you have no need for.

 

If a client wants a design built on a CMS from the ground up, then I'll use something like ModX, but a lot of jobs are simply creating custom WP themes, which saves me a lot of time and keeps the cash flow going.

Like you I was very sniffy about Wordpress for a long time and refused to use it. Recently I've begun to mellow and used it for a couple of sites and been pleasantly suprised.

 

As rbrtsmith says, a lot of the performance and security issues with Wordpress are caused by the overuse of plugins and general lack of awareness (e.g. there are various processes which only make sense for blogs and can be easily turned off).

 

Like all development tools, it takes a bit of experimentation to find the right workflow and decide which bits of it we're going to use and where its just simpler and more flexible to code things ourselves.

 

My personal view is that Wordpress is not suitable for large projects or sites with a complex data model. Its a bit weak on the database side, even with Advanced Custom Fields.

Like you I was very sniffy about Wordpress for a long time and refused to use it. Recently I've begun to mellow and used it for a couple of sites and been pleasantly suprised.

 

As rbrtsmith says, a lot of the performance and security issues with Wordpress are caused by the overuse of plugins and general lack of awareness (e.g. there are various processes which only make sense for blogs and can be easily turned off).

 

Like all development tools, it takes a bit of experimentation to find the right workflow and decide which bits of it we're going to use and where its just simpler and more flexible to code things ourselves.

 

My personal view is that Wordpress is not suitable for large projects or sites with a complex data model. Its a bit weak on the database side, even with Advanced Custom Fields.

 

Pretty much spot on, I think it's fine for large sites like the 1k page mark, CSS-Tricks is big and that runs well on WordPress (hint, Chris Coyier knows to use WP having written books on it) However yes a complex data model you'd be looking for something else - I'd be inclined to look into back-end js (Node & Meteor) comined with mongoDB for this kind of stuff, seems that is what all the cool kids are doing these days.. Failing that the really big stuff just build out their own custom backend system.

Edited September 29, 201411 yr by rbrtsmith

This is not to say WP is the best CMS as the best CMS doesn't exist it's all down to the project requirements and for information based websites WP is sufficient but best of all most clients are comfortable and familiar with using the interface. There's no point in using a CMS if the clients can't figure it out.

 

This is often why form based CMS admin with simple 'complete and save' forms are ideal for many clients; especially the SME market where they know loads about their industry but couldn't find the 'any key'. I think this is why I didn't get into the pre-built engines, if I let some of my clients have access to all the content, inserting images, changing meta data etc all hell would break loose.

 

How many here have made a site and the client thought that you would load all the stock / content for them? So you maybe say 'we can do it for £X, but that's what your CMS is for' and the client goes 'HOW MUCH? I'll do it myself'. Then the call comes 3 months later, 'We're not doing well in the search engines', so you say 'sure let me take a look' only to find they have either squeezed every keyword into every pixel space on the page or they have simply copied and pasted other peoples descriptions from around the web.

 

Ooops where was I? Maybe wrong thread

Edited September 29, 201411 yr by BrowserBugs

...if I let some of my clients have access to all the content, inserting images, changing meta data etc all hell would break loose.

The trick is only giving them access to what they need, rather than allowing them access to everything. Typical case WYSIWYG fields, if you simply bung all formatting buttons in there they will inevitably butcher things. The solution if to only give formatting tools that are required for that content field.

 

How many here have made a site and the client thought that you would load all the stock / content for them? So you maybe say 'we can do it for £X, but that's what your CMS is for' and the client goes 'HOW MUCH? I'll do it myself'. Then the call comes 3 months later, 'We're not doing well in the search engines', so you say 'sure let me take a look' only to find they have either squeezed every keyword into every pixel space on the page or they have simply copied and pasted other peoples descriptions from around the web.

That's usually part of the quote, adding content data, copywriting and so on. I do provide writing tips in documentation so where client is able to change things they can refer to them. In the case of things like adding meta data, more often than not this is restricted to certain admin levels for top level content, or is part of the editing process where an editor reviews all new content before committing to live. That way an author can add new data, but the editor can review/amend as needed.

The biggest problem I have with WP is that it's just not clean slate enough. There are so many options, dropdowns, settings, for things that I have no intention of using, and have to spend time removing. I use Craft quite a bit, and love how fresh a new install is. You literally build the platform up yourself, defining the custom fields, asset sources, sections, everything that you need. No assumptions are made. EE works in a similar way, but there are a lot of differences between the two. Statamic is also something that's well developed, but I don't get to use it much.

The biggest problem I have with WP is that it's just not clean slate enough. There are so many options, dropdowns, settings, for things that I have no intention of using, and have to spend time removing. I use Craft quite a bit, and love how fresh a new install is. You literally build the platform up yourself, defining the custom fields, asset sources, sections, everything that you need. No assumptions are made. EE works in a similar way, but there are a lot of differences between the two. Statamic is also something that's well developed, but I don't get to use it much.

That's where modern content systems are trumping old legacy style systems with total freedom to design/build in any way. Let's face it with Craft or EE (and Statamic to a certain extent) you can build for virtually any sort of content/data structure with out of the box tools and have little or no reliance on 3rd party addons.

 

Don't tell anyone about it though

Edited September 29, 201411 yr by BlueDreamer

The biggest problem I have with WP is that it's just not clean slate enough. There are so many options, dropdowns, settings, for things that I have no intention of using, and have to spend time removing. I use Craft quite a bit, and love how fresh a new install is. You literally build the platform up yourself, defining the custom fields, asset sources, sections, everything that you need. No assumptions are made. EE works in a similar way, but there are a lot of differences between the two. Statamic is also something that's well developed, but I don't get to use it much.

 

I do hear you here, it is a bit of a pain to remove them, but I'm assuming you have a general template and file structure that you base all / most of your projects on, why not just remove all this extra stuff in the functions file then it's done for every future project going forward. I don't see it as a huge hinderance when you consider how easy WP is for clients to use.

Edited September 30, 201411 yr by rbrtsmith

 

I do hear you here, it is a bit of a pain to remove them, but I'm assuming you have a general template and file structure that you base all / most of your projects on, why not just remove all this extra stuff in the functions file then it's done for every future project going forward. I don't see it as a huge hinderance when you consider how easy WP is for clients to use.

 

You shouldn't really have to mess around with this sort of stuff, especially a PHP file. It should be built into the core.

 

It would make more sense to me to have it in reverse. You install Wordpress and enable the features you need (links, comments, tags, users, media), only then will the UI appear. Even the installer could prompt you to see what kind of content you're starting out with initially (post based, pages or both). Wordpress assumes that every site is going to be a blog from the outset, which we know isn't true anymore, far from it. It could be a single page site with a few custom fields, making the entire posts section in the CP useless.

 

I think the UI is getting much better though (it used to look like PHPMyAdmin), but I think some thought is needed on the initial setup of a site. You could always re-enable stuff you need later on.

 

I do hear you here, it is a bit of a pain to remove them, but I'm assuming you have a general template and file structure that you base all / most of your projects on, why not just remove all this extra stuff in the functions file then it's done for every future project going forward. I don't see it as a huge hinderance when you consider how easy WP is for clients to use.

 

I think that's ones of the issues with WP, because it assumes so much in the default install and you end up hacking it to death to get to a clean(er) base.

 

That's the benefit of modern systems, a fresh install assumes nothing, so you have to add what you need - it's always easier to add than take away...?

But i have yet to find a modern system that we can build out a backend faster than wordpress - and a backend that has a comparable interface that clients are comfortable using.

I do get your point though we shouldnt be having to hack away in the first place. But with our current start template we are able to build out a totally custom theme very rapidly. Of course if budget and time allowed wed love to start from a clean slate but with most projects you limit your profit margins going this way.

 

You shouldn't really have to mess around with this sort of stuff, especially a PHP file. It should be built into the core.

 

It would make more sense to me to have it in reverse. You install Wordpress and enable the features you need (links, comments, tags, users, media), only then will the UI appear. Even the installer could prompt you to see what kind of content you're starting out with initially (post based, pages or both). Wordpress assumes that every site is going to be a blog from the outset, which we know isn't true anymore, far from it. It could be a single page site with a few custom fields, making the entire posts section in the CP useless.

 

I think the UI is getting much better though (it used to look like PHPMyAdmin), but I think some thought is needed on the initial setup of a site. You could always re-enable stuff you need later on.

Having things as you described would be a very nice addition. And it is a fault that things are done in this way. But a lot of the other criticisms of WP that i see are unfounded or way out of date. All this said id never use WP for something with complex processes. Its usefulness is those websites that are information based. And of course blogs or news sites.

Having things as you described would be a very nice addition. And it is a fault that things are done in this way. But a lot of the other criticisms of WP that i see are unfounded or way out of date. All this said id never use WP for something with complex processes. Its usefulness is those websites that are information based. And of course blogs or news sites.

 

I'm on the same level here ... I actually pass business to others when a Wordpress wonder will more than suit their requirements and don't get involved. IMO it's a talent working with Wordpress as it takes time to learn how Wordpress likes to do things, muchos respect to those that do.

I'm on the same level here ... I actually pass business to others when a Wordpress wonder will more than suit their requirements and don't get involved. IMO it's a talent working with Wordpress as it takes time to learn how Wordpress likes to do things, muchos respect to those that do.

Yeh, our company doesn't touch WP either, but that's just how it has always been. I don't have anything wrong with people using it, I've seen a lot of good stuff built on WP and it obviously has a large marketshare for a reason. I still think they could improve on minimising the UI and assumptions it makes, who knows, they might just do that in the future. It certainly wouldn't be a step backwards.

Yeh, our company doesn't touch WP either, but that's just how it has always been. I don't have anything wrong with people using it, I've seen a lot of good stuff built on WP and it obviously has a large marketshare for a reason. I still think they could improve on minimising the UI and assumptions it makes, who knows, they might just do that in the future. It certainly wouldn't be a step backwards.

 

Ditto here really. I pass on any requests for WP work, unless it's migrating away from it which is obviously why they come to us.

 

WP's big weakness is having to support all it's legacy stuff, both with the default "blog" setup and the core, that's why do do anything past "post and pages" you have to do expensive custom development or rely heavily on plugins do to relatively basic stuff.

 

What do you WP people do when looking at a very complex project? Do you persist with WP or reach for something else?

 

I'm sure if the WP devs could start again they would build it totally differently.

 

Ditto here really. I pass on any requests for WP work, unless it's migrating away from it which is obviously why they come to us.

 

WP's big weakness is having to support all it's legacy stuff, both with the default "blog" setup and the core, that's why do do anything past "post and pages" you have to do expensive custom development or rely heavily on plugins do to relatively basic stuff.

 

What do you WP people do when looking at a very complex project? Do you persist with WP or reach for something else?

 

I'm sure if the WP devs could start again they would build it totally differently.

 

We would look for something else for a complex project, for those information and news based sites which are very common and highly profitable WP is very well suited, provided you know how to use it properly. The main reason they are so profitable is that we can build up the backends quickly. The legacy support thing is a drawback but for us as it stands WP is a great option and our clients love it. We've never ran into any major issues with it, even on big websites. Problems and bugs tend to creep in when you start using plugins as then you have little to no quality control. Overall the pros outweigh the cons. I do hope they find a way to address the issues discussed in this thread though.

 

* Some plugins are good like AFC but most are just aimed at inexperienced or non-developers who just wanna throw a bunch of things together like lego and hope they will somehow all work in perfect harmony.

 

I am sure the WP devs would do things differently again, same goes for JavaScript which was created in little more than a week! hence it has a lot of bad parts, but at the same time it has some of the best parts of any programming language. Problem is for both of these that they are now almost impossible to change without releasing something entirely new.

Edited September 30, 201411 yr by rbrtsmith

Lots of interesting points coming up here! It's good to hear what people are using as alternatives to Wordpress, and some of the criticisms coming up seem very common to those of us who come to these things with more of a 'traditional' developer's perspective.

 

I've come across a lot of sole traders doing WP sites who are mainly designers or marketing people, and they use themes and plugins for everything. I suspect some of these people are going to struggle in the future as site-generating tools like Squarespace continue to improve.

 

One thing I've noticed is that clients and users really love the Wordpress admin, although I personally find it a bit annoying.

 

Chris Coyier has been very vocal about not migrating CSS Tricks from Wordpress, but even though that site has a lot of content it's still basically a blog. Its a great resource, but I would argue that some bits of it are getting a bit unwieldy, and if he had to actively maintain all that content I'm not sure that would be realistic with WP. It interesting that he has talked recently about using Jekyll to do some new sites.

Lots of interesting points coming up here! It's good to hear what people are using as alternatives to Wordpress, and some of the criticisms coming up seem very common to those of us who come to these things with more of a 'traditional' developer's perspective.

 

I've come across a lot of sole traders doing WP sites who are mainly designers or marketing people, and they use themes and plugins for everything. I suspect some of these people are going to struggle in the future as site-generating tools like Squarespace continue to improve.

 

One thing I've noticed is that clients and users really love the Wordpress admin, although I personally find it a bit annoying.

 

Chris Coyier has been very vocal about not migrating CSS Tricks from Wordpress, but even though that site has a lot of content it's still basically a blog. Its a great resource, but I would argue that some bits of it are getting a bit unwieldy, and if he had to actively maintain all that content I'm not sure that would be realistic with WP. It interesting that he has talked recently about using Jekyll to do some new sites.

 

I think this is mostly whyc WP gets a lot of it's criticisms from is because most of it's users haven't a clue how to write php and javascript so have to rely on prebuilt templates that they hack to death and throw in plugins. I agree I think these guys will struggle in the future.

 

In our case our backend devs are pretty much full stack, the reason why we use WP so often as I've pointed out is that its very fast to develop for, and the clients love and are familiar the standard interface. These things add up to a far better profit margin than using something else or building the CMS from scratch.

Edited October 1, 201411 yr by rbrtsmith

 

I think this is mostly whyc WP gets a lot of it's criticisms from is because most of it's users haven't a clue how to write php and javascript so have to rely on prebuilt templates that they hack to death and throw in plugins. I agree I think these guys will struggle in the future.

 

In our case our backend devs are pretty much full stack, the reason why we use WP so often as I've pointed out is that its very fast to develop for, and the clients love and are familiar the standard interface. These things add up to a far better profit margin than using something else or building the CMS from scratch.

 

Do you guys write your own plugins? That would make sense to me if you have backend devs, rather than using a third party solution. It also helps separate out the logic from the core files.

Well we don't write plugins that get published so to speak, we have a library of functions we have created, each in it's own file that gets included in the functions file.

 

A lot of the plugins I see are javascript based or things using other APIs like Google Maps and so on which really have nothing to do with the actual CMS. I code up all the JavaScript on our projects and I've built a library of common functions and use a few selected JavaScript & jQuery plugins like Modernizr etc.

 

The way we have things set up gives us a lot of control over the user doing dumb things, we have automatic image resize along with responsive versions, limitations on text for fields, hidden a lot of the dashboard features to them that would otherwise leave them confused / able to break the site.

 

I've already pointed out though I'm no WP fanboy, I personally want to start writing things in JS along with Mongo-DB but as it's a bit overkill really for an information based website, which tend to be kind of sites our clients want.

 

I am a JS fanboy though haha

Edited October 1, 201411 yr by rbrtsmith

Yup, JS fanboy here too. Can't write it for s*** though.

Yup, JS fanboy here too. Can't write it for s*** though.

 

Are you registered on CodeSchool? Their JavaScript roadtrips really helped me out, especially the 3rd one which goes in depth into closures, prototyping and how functions can be passed around and returned. Everything for me became a lot clearer.

 

Some great JS screencasts on Frontend Masters too but they are quite advanced but if you've covered everything from CodeSchool you should be able to understand most of what is going on. I'm improving but there still stuff I don't fully get and have to constantly reference. Then there's all the frameworks on top of this too! I think you could do a degree just in JavaScript!

Are you registered on CodeSchool? Their JavaScript roadtrips really helped me out, especially the 3rd one which goes in depth into closures, prototyping and how functions can be passed around and returned. Everything for me became a lot clearer.

 

Some great JS screencasts on Frontend Masters too but they are quite advanced but if you've covered everything from CodeSchool you should be able to understand most of what is going on. I'm improving but there still stuff I don't fully get and have to constantly reference. Then there's all the frameworks on top of this too! I think you could do a degree just in JavaScript!

 

I can write a bit, just not enough to make anything useful. I did look at the CodeSchool tutorials, I think I'll progress through them when I have more time. I also have the Modern Javascript book by Larry Ullman which is really good. I'll most likely get Javascript: The Good Parts next, or Eloquent JavaScript, which is out in November.

 

Frontend masters looks like it covers a lot of the frameworks I want to get seriously into. But, I'm fully conscious of getting a good understanding of vanilla JS first, just like how every framework should be approached.

 

I think you could do a degree just in JavaScript!

There are similar things around, like hack reactor.

On Frontend masters they cover a lot of vanilla js, they have a section Called JavaScript the Good parts, the seminar is done by Douglas Crockford, author of the same book, they also have advanced JS another seminar by Kyle Simpson who's also published books on JavaScript.

 

Eloquent JS is available as a free resource and is better than JS the Good Parts as a beginner / intermediate. The Good Parts is more intermediate -> advanced, a very good read.

 

I'm still not digging into the frameworks yet (apart from jQuery), I write a lot of JavaScript but would prefer to put the hours in to fully understand the language at a deeper level before I move onto the frameworks. I'm in no rush to use them so in my opinion it's worth the probably hundereds if not thousands of hours needed to get that deep understanding.

Edited October 1, 201411 yr by rbrtsmith

I've seen Eloquent JS online, but I struggle to read anything lengthy when it's not on paper.