Comment: Re:Criticism from a past MODx user (Score 1) 70
Comment: Re:Criticism from a past MODx user (Score 1) 70
Comment: Criticism from a past MODx user (Score 4, Interesting) 70
I was using MODx Revolution for around two years, and it has many good sides, about which you can read on their website, in the books they published and in their wiki. But there are also some issues that led me to seeking an alternative now. MODx developers, please take this as an attempt of constructive criticism (and sorry for my imperfect English).
- Too much is stored in the db, and that makes it very hard to work with git. Even with the 'static elements' functionallity one must have the actual 'element' in the database even if the code is stored in a file.
- Poor performance of the backend. The backend is implemented entirely on ExtJS and is slow. Despite it's ExtJS it still requires to reload the page too often.
- Very hard to develop own stuff on top of it. Just take a look at the tutorial on creating an extension (called 'extra'). I've developed different 'extras' to implement custom functionality in my projects, and I constantly had the feeling that they just made simple things much overcomplicated.
- Poor documentation. Just take a look on their API docs. For example, the documentation for the modX::addExtensionPackage() function just says: "Add an extension package to MODX", and no information on the arguments besides what types they are.
- Some serious problems in the core. For example, the widely used function modX::getChunk() has a performance bottleneck and can't be used in anything like, for instance, displaying a big list of products on a page, despite that this is exactly what it's for. If one instead reuses a same chunk object to iterate through a set of DB records (using $chunk->process()), the performance is dramatically increased. This issue has been reported on the forums, but didn't catch much attention (I can't even find the thread now.) The getChunk() function is widely used in some very important modx extensions, and yet the performance bottleneck doesn't seem to bother to the MODx community.
This isn't the full list. This is just some random (but major) inconveniences I can recall right now. To me, MODx is a great idea which for some reason wasn't implemented well.
Comment: Similar case in Russia (Score 5, Interesting) 104
Comment: Re:You mean crack fest? (Score 2) 183
Comment: Tough question (Score 1) 119
Comment: Re:48 vars, not 36, read the code (Score 1) 215
Comment: Re:They didn't get the memo (Score 3, Informative) 215
+ - Slashdot Deploys Annoying Pop-up Ads ->
Link to Original Source
+ - Canadian ISP Fights Back Against Copyright Trolls->
Link to Original Source
+ - Samsung laptop bug is not Linux specific->
Unfortunately, it turns out that some Samsung laptops will fail to boot if too much of the [UEFI] variable storage space is used. We don't know what "too much" is yet, but writing a bunch of variables from Windows is enough to trigger it. I put some sample code here — it writes out 36 variables each containing a kilobyte of random data. I ran this as an administrator under Windows and then rebooted the system. It never came back.
Link to Original Source
+ - helpsmo.com skype call 1
Now I run Linux and yes my system is slow because I run it on old discarded hardware that is still perfectly good (just not good enough for Windows). Vulnerable? Hardly.
I checked their DNS and the IP goes to 46.20.33.71 with port 80 and 21 open. I didn't waste too much time as it is obviously spam and probably malware.
Just curious if this is common? I've been using Skype for as long as it's been out and this is the first for me."
+ - Oracle makes Gnu-VirtualBox no longer free-> 1
Link to Original Source