See also:
See also:
See also:
WB 2.8.2 running in a dead end street?
This is a translated article that originally was written by Chio, published on websitebaker.at
The Situation
After the unfortunate story with the Backup Module - more than a year ago! - some people got a big mouth and a thankful audience: WebsiteBaker is much too unsecure, the code is not up to date, it has to be coded everything new from scratch.
And last but not least by _real_ professionals.
I first noticed chief guru dark viper when he uploaded a great improvement from AnyTopics that produced just one thing: an error. Well, a few forgotten clips can easily happen again, but even gods sometimes should have tested their code in advance.
I don't warm this not because I'm vindictive, but because it is symptomatic for the general development of WB 2.8.2:
Big mouth, less results
The first thing the developers have even done was to emphasize their own importance by dramatizing potential security gaps and told us at any point in the forum that we would be lost without their gracious assistance and in any case the world will go down soon.
The next step: give themselves room by driving all engaged users down and prevent all new suggestions for improvement using two standard answers:
a) "We've already got a much better and smarter solution in the next version, you little Depp"
or
b) "This is childish bu..shit, go out again and play in your sandbox"
Therefore now it is probably understandable that even those who put a good face on WebsiteBaker and waited for improvements lose patience.
Not even the argument "We do this so free at leisure" is counting any further: if the cart is in the dirt, it does not matter how he has got in there, whether free or not. The damage ultimately have those who have been drawn around the cart for the dirt - for free as well.
The Current State
You can certainly use WB 2.8.2, if you have a total experience of WebsiteBaker, its code and databases. For fresh sites where pages are often copied from here to there it especially sucks, that it is often not possible to save a page when another page is opened in the same tab.
For existing sites you should be able to backup the database in worst case. Those who modified their installation may be trapeed on their site by some new features, such as the modified Access Files.
WB 2.9 seems - although the darling of the developers - to be completely immature.
The Stable Alternative: WB 2.8.1
WB 2.8.1 was "talked to be sick" , mostly without any realistic base. Most of the vulnerabilities are in that way:
a registered user can do something if he has detailed knowledge about WebsiteBaker and his structure.
For the typical installation with a small group of users (with extensive access to backend) this problem is negligible. The same is valid to XSS attacks and something like:
It is no Russian botnet released to get the passwords for "Heidi's hairdresser".
Also it is proved again and again that not WB-gaps are responsible for hacked site, but gaps on the server-configuration itself or in external (often forgotten) scripts, such as old image galleries and forums.
Kommentare
May 28 2011
superfan
I must say that after testing and having 2 sites of wordpress and seen alot of pain with joomla the WB is still far best.
WHY you might ask?
Idiotic simple structure of code - even i can modify it
Less security problems (try google joomla vulne..)
And most of all, wp changes it's admin layout between versions, cannot keep up with good language files. Too difficult to edit language-files. And most idiotic thing -updating is just not possible (see joomla 5 -> 6 )
Keep up the good work guys!
May 31 2011
sare
My 2 cents. I haven't been actively following what goes on in the forum nowadays, so can't say anything on the vulnerability accusations. I'm no expert on the subject either.
On a well-kept server, though, i haven't seen a single site get hacked. It's been about 3 years and around 50 sites. I guess WB keeps safe through obscurity; it's a very little player on the CMS market and because of that escapes the masses looking for vulnerabilities in the code. It also does have a slightly 'amateurish' feel to it in my opinion, that I think also works to put off the bad guys.
I do wish that there was a complete rewrite (even simple core code does get old with time) and a better plugin/module system that would encourage people to build and test modules better. I'd be willing to participate if that ever happened.
Hopefully the ball keeps rolling, it's a great product in many ways that just needs to advance to attract new users and devs.
Good luck!
Jun 03 2011
Availor
I have more than 50 sites running on websitebaker, some of which are big portal-like sites. True that WB has it's disadvantages, but in a long term run I found out it's very simple to develop custom modules to serve me in future, cheaper and better than on wordpress, for example. I hope a better core will be implemented, with backend tabs (banners, news etc). For the overall value for "money" I'd give WB 9.5 out of 10 - it can deal with 90% of the job I get.
Jun 04 2011
Unless I have misread your comments, I think your criticism of the developers is childish.
"We've already got a much better and smarter solution in the next version, you little Depp"
Can you show me where such a comment was made? - You have used quotation marks indicating it was a verbatim comment - I'd like to see it!
It appears you are finished with WB - what is your preferred cms now?
Jun 09 2011
I have more then 100 sites running WB and all al perfect manageble en look great to my opinion.
I have a real working portal running with WB at http://www.egmondonline.nl this site handels more then 1000 visitors a day.
I hope do that the makers make a good update script WHEN WB 3.0 comes out.
regards,
Erik Reemst
Jun 22 2011
Dee Jaye
Even though the developers have always been arrogant, self made super stars; it is still the very best CMS if you want to keep your sanity. It has always amazed me why people that have learned how to write a little code, promote themselves to god. Must be the storm trooper genetics.
Jul 05 2011
Mike Davies
I have been using WB for quite a few years, the earliest was in 2006 using v2.6, and i have several sites working well. I have never experienced any hacking, although as suggested by sare this may be because WB is relatively small and not worth the effort to hack.
Generally I find WB easy to use and to template exactly as I want. I have always managed to find modules to do what I need although sometimes it requires a little tweaking. I did try Drupal once and found it v. difficult to get to grips with so came back to WB.
I hope that WB continues to develop and improve, although I am a little concerned with the complete rewrite of the code base which I believe is happening for v3.0. Will v3.0 require a new learning curve to implement and can it be upgraded from v2.8?
@Mike
I think your questions cannot be answered today.
WB 2.8.2 isn't released yet -as far as I know - and no one knows what 2.9 will bring. 3.0 is lightyears away from today....
rgds
erpe
Jul 11 2011
I don't know... but untill now WB keeps on amazing me with flexibility, ease of use and also with the flexibility of adding custom code.
Jul 19 2011
Sgt.Nops
Nice Article form the guys that try to start their own Fork lol.
@Sgt.Nops
let me please correct you:
1.this article is - as written in the head of it - a translation of an article by CHIO published on websitebaker.at
2.CHIO is not part of LEPTON project (until now)
3.LEPTON is already started and it's much more than a try
Nov 25 2011
Newfy
I downloaded and installed Lepton...ok it looks nicer @ the backend but for the rest it's the same. I will stick to WB ;)
Apr 01 2012
P Oed
Yes the developers are self indulgent, rude, ego maniacs that are just adequate, and have always been so. But, WB is still one of the best around. You just have to look over their arrogance. They know not how insignificant they are.
Apr 08 2012
Hiroshima
I'm not a web coder except write some basic html. I came to know WebsiteBaker about a year ago while searching for an alternative to Wordpress and I was instantly hooked. WebsiteBaker is
- the most easy to use
- easy to modify
- the pages load very fast
- easy to migrate from desktop to live server
It's sad to hear that this wonderful project is coming to destruction by its creators and along with it the legacy of having built something truly useful for both site owners and readers. What will people say about you then?
___________________________________________
"what we do in life... echoes in eternity!"
Jun 27 2012
P Oed
PS
Not to defend the self indulgent, rude, ego maniacs, but what do you expect for free. Do you really think the developers are some kind of charity funded by Bill Gates. They work for free, the application is free, and they just may be sick and tired to the "I want everything for free" internet junkies that never contribute money and just want more and more freebies. If you are sick of it or them, dig into your pocket and buy a better one.
Jul 17 2012
Argos
I think all this hate, anger and frustration towards each other doesn't benefit both WB and Lepton. It's a shame there has been a dispute, and some people chose to fork, but why keep posting hateful stuf about each other? It doesn't benefit the image of both groups, and thus the image of both products. Please stop this silly fighting like children, and get on with the projects.
Oct 24 2012
CodeALot
The worst part of all this is that potential customers of many of us, might come to this site to check out that CMS I (and many of you) mentioned to them. They'll read all this and assume that a community that is SO immature can never produce a professional piece of software.
WebsiteBaker, Lepton, let them all exist, keep the bitch fights to yourselves and at least TRY to present the CMS that you endorse as professional as possible.
News-Feeder