On May 10, 7:44 pm, greenpoise <danel.sega...@gmail.com> wrote: > You seem to be concerned with the aesthetics for the most.
Admittedly, aesthetics is part of the issue, but it's not just about aesthetics. When looking at a web framework, I (and many others) am wondering, can it be used to build a sophisticated, high-traffic, commercial web application intended for broad public consumption? A quick, easy, and very convincing way to answer that question is simply to see if it already has been used to build such sites. The other frameworks answer that question very easily (http://rubyonrails.org/ applications; http://www.djangoproject.com; http://www.djangosites.org; http://wiki.pylonshq.com/display/pylonscommunity/Sites+Using+Pylons; http://www.turbogears.com). If web2py cannot produce such examples, it's reasonable to ask, why haven't any developers/organizations who build serious commercial web applications adopted web2py? Is it because web2py isn't well suited for that purpose (either technically, or for some other reason, such as licensing, documentation, support, long-term viability, etc.)? What other evidence is there that web2py is a good tool for this purpose (answering this question requires a lot more effort without any good examples or high profile endorsements to point to)? (Note: I'm only asking these questions rhetorically to illustrate the importance of having a good "Used By" list. I think we've covered the actual answers to these questions in the discussion already.) > My take is > this, there is the development part and there is the design part of a > web application. You can make any site look the same with any of the > frameworks you mentioned including web2py. You have to be good at CSS/ > HTML and some photo editing software and you are set. Yes, absolutely. But any serious commercial web application will have (reasonably) good design because that's a requirement for success in the marketplace. So, again, the question is, if you can make good looking sites with web2py, why isn't anybody using it for that purpose (again, I'm only asking this rhetorically -- I think we've already covered this as well)? > I also think > Web2py is new compared to the other frameworks you mention, however, > it does not lack any feature the others have, in any case the others > lack alot of features web2py has. Yes, I'm getting that sense, and it's good to know. > As for the documentation, I think almost every open source > technology documentation is scattered around. True, though some are better than others. web2py's documentation and resources are by no means poor -- it's just that they could be made a little more coherent and organized. > If you ask me, as a non > natural coder and someone who did extensive research on frameworks > before settling with web2py, web2py is nearly transparent for the > developer making it so much easier than any other framework. Thanks, it's very helpful to get this kind of feedback from someone who has done extensive research on available frameworks. Note, I am absolutely not trying to knock web2py in any way. I actually find it quite compelling, and I think this community is a real selling point. However, it probably took more effort for me to come to that conclusion than it should have, largely because of the issues I have raised. For every person like me (and you) who persist and decide to dig a little deeper to learn about web2py, there are probably several who abandon their investigation early on due to some of these perceptions. I suspect at least some of those people can be won over with a little extra effort.
