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/22d37d27b6fc969f http://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.
