October 13, 2004 | View Comments (72) | Category: Design Critiques
Summary: In this article I compare the design of the new entry pages for the three major blogging packages out today: MovableType, WordPress, and TextPattern.
In the world of weblogs there are 3 main self-hosted solutions that people consider: MovableType, WordPress, and TextPattern. Each tool has its own disadvantages and advantages which were thoroughly discussed when SixApart decided to change the licensing scheme on MT. I don't wish to cover the technical aspects of each system, but I am curious as to how each of them compares design-wise on their new entry pages.
There is a saying along the lines of “to the user, the interface is the software” and we all know how true this is. Many people are drawn to the OS X platform simply because the interface design works so well and aesthetically draws you in. Even if the software isn't as technologically advanced as its competitors the look and feel of the interface can hide its shortcomings. With that said you would hope each of the three systems under review would put some time and effort into the design of their interfaces.
The granddaddy of them all so to speak when it comes to blogging software. MovableType has the advantage of having Mena Trott to work on its interface design so you would expect a high quality design and this is what you get.
Click for larger image.
MT's interface consists of buttons on the leftside and the top of the screen. The buttons do their job of describing where they will take you and steering clear of getting in the user's way.
With the entry page, the interface to create a new entry is very solid. Each input box is well positioned and it is done in logical order. Dropdown menus help to keep everything clutter-free. Overall the page has a professinal feel to it and seems more polished than the other interfaces.
The images used in the interface are for the buttons and the header. They help to give the interface a more professional feel and also allow the user to build a visual association with each page in the backend. Nothing fancy, but applications like this do not require anything fancy.
MT has a logo which may not seem like a big deal, but the logo helps increase the professionalism of the app, something that is missing in WP as you will see later.
A very smooth and subtle color palette is used for the interface. The colors are used appropriately to separate sections on the page, which helps to guide the user's eye visually. The colors also serve the purpose of giving the software it's own identity and whenever I see these colors I immediately think of MT.
The entry page for MT 2.661 serves its purpose of getting to the point and helping users get the job done quickly. The main element of the page is the form used to enter in new entries. The boxes are well laid out and the labeling is clear and concise. The default page doesn't have all the options on as the page shown in the screenshot does because the majority of users won't need all the extra features.
I believe this is a quality design decision because it gets new users up to task quickly while more advanced users simply have to click on the “Customize...” link at the bottom of the page. New users however may not be aware that they have the option of adding more fields to the interface since the link is at the bottom so it might be better served at the top of the page.
WP is arguably the second most well-known personl blogging tool on the web today. It doesn't offer quite the features of MT or TxP so you would think that the interface would have at least the same professional feel as MT, but this isn't the case. Instead you get an interface that follows the disturbing trend of other open source projects of being clunky and unattractive.
Click for larger image.
What bothers me the most about this page design is that the interface uses the tabs paradigm, yet the tabs do not look like tabs at all. They are more just blocks not connected to anything. The main navigation has a tab for every page and these tabs should connect to the page to show a visual relationship. Instead the tabs are “stuck” in between the header and the content floating in limbo.
I am not looking for anything spectacular. It can be as simple as this:
Something else that WP has that the other two packages do not has is a liquid layout. I am not going to turn this into a fixed vs. layout debate, but let's just say it's hard enough to go back and edit your entries and even harder to do so when the line-length spans the width of the screen.
There are two images on the page that I can see. While this may help decrease the time it takes to load the page it also gives the site an unprofessional feel. Images work wonders when use properly because they improve both branding and recognition. Without any images I feel as though I have opened up Notepad on the web.
I find it surprising that no one has made a logo for WordPress yet that would help to build a strong brand. It doesn't even take a logo designer to go into their favorite graphics program, pick a font, and create a logo. Yes logo design is a much deeper process than this and for companies and other organizations there is nothing better than hiring a professional. However, when you are an Open Source project you don't always have that option, but you should have the option of creating something better than what WordPress is currently using. Heck, even this would be better:
The other image besides the logo that is used is a dropshadow below the header bar. Why is it there? I have no idea, but it seems to be just placed there to give the person a sense that some of the aesthetic qualities of the layout were put into mind. The page is better off without it.
You are pretty much just dealing with 2 colors here: black and blue. I love whitespace, but I think there is just too much white going on in this page. There are no color indicators to draw my eyes towards anything on my 1600x1200 resolution, so I am left to wonder around aimlessly.
WordPress may be an example of a quality software package, but I think it fails miserably at being a good example of interface design. Maybe it's just me, but I don't see any sans-serif working too well in this interface. If more open source projects would place a higher emphasis on interface design I think you would see a higher adoption rate.
Obviously, the aesthetics of the interface were a little more thought out here than on WordPress. TxP uses the same tabs paradigm and takes it a step further by using images to represent the tabs.
Click for larger image.
Of all the blogging tools looked at here, TxP probably has the highest learning curve associated with it and part of the reason is because of the interface.
The tabs. Oh the tabs. It's quite possible that TxP has taken the use of tabs to an extreme in this case. At the top we have two layers of navigation which use the image tabs. I would feel more comfortable with the interface if only the top layer used the images. This would help me build a greater association between the two layers because when they both use the same elements of design it makes me think that they are two separate entities.
For the entry form, tabs are used for the text, HTML, and preview buttons (good idea to have these in every software package). I think these would be better served on the leftside of the textarea because as they stand now they interfere with the options panel. Or you could move the options panel to the left side of the textarea, either way they should be away from each other.
Another curious decision to me is why use radio buttons for post status and dropdown menus for the cateogories and sections. This is understandable if you can select multiple categories and sections, but if you can't then I don't see why two separate form elements are used for the same action. I figure either they all use radios or they all use dropdowns.
The color palette for the TxP page consists of yellows and oranges with a red button thrown in for good measure. Although this isn't any more colors than could be found on the WP page, the colors for TxP are more vibrant and help the interface come alive. The color scheme is so bright and cheery that you get the impression you would love to write entries just so you can experience the environment. Contrast this with WP where the dull color scheme makes you want to get in and get out as quickly as possible.
What separates MT from TxP in design is that the MT interface seems more glued together. TxP has elements all over the place and it loses its sense of unity. The TxP interface lets you know immediately that you are going to have to take the time to learn the system. I wouldn't consider this a good thing.
When comparing the design of the interfaces for the three blogging packages I think that MT 2.661 clearly wins. Maybe that is no surprise since it is the only package built by a company, but that shouldn't be an excuse for the interfaces that TxP and WP present. When talking about blogging tools all of the talk centers around the technology, but if the interface prevents me from fulling utilizing the technology under the hood then it is useless. Hopefully in time their interfaces can catch up to the technology.
And just to show that I am not one to criticize without trying to help some I have put 30 minutes of my time in recreating the WP entry page my way (not optimized for IE :-). Obviously with more time and effort something more elegant can be created, but I think this is already an improvement from what they currently offer.
Click for larger image.
Note: I use MT 2.661 and therefore I reviewed it instead of MT 3.1 which has a different interface.
Trackback URL: http://9rules.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/361
You can click on the screenshot to head to the actual page in all its XHTML/CSS goodness. I have no problems with anyone taking the design and using it or tweaking it for their WP installations. However, since it only covers one page of the interface I don't know how well it will carry over to the other pages.
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
I just wanted to say whoa cool! I really like this write up. I've tested all 3 systems, yet currently use Wordpress, and implementing other sites with MT. That wordpress mockup is very well done. I hope something like this comes about in version 1.3 coming out kinda soon.
Thanks!
Daniel (http://www.blog.adion44.com)
Yeah I've been living on MT 2.x for a while now. I've taken a peek at Wordpress and was turned off by the clunky interface. TextPattern just scared me because it had taken me a lifetime to learn MT to a point where I was comfortable and I didn't want to do the same for Txp.
I'm comfortable where I am with MT and have very little reason to switch. I like my static pages and I sprinkle in some dynamic PHP as necessary.
That mockup looks much better. But how will users know they're supporting an open-source product if it doesn't look like one? ;)
Jack (http://boxofjack.com)
But how will users know they're supporting an open-source product if it doesn't look like one? ;)
Haha, well said Jack. Well said.
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
Just tried implementing your CSS in my WP install and it worked almost perfectly. Just a couple v. minorof tweaks to the admin-header.php and menu.php to separate the two links for the top right of the page and it's nearly there.
I must admit that I've been wanting to re-write the CSS for a while but my laziness got the better of me.
Scrivs, you make it too easy to be lazy.
Pete J Lambert (http://pixelicious.co.uk)
Glad to hear it Pete. Admittedly the programmers for WP did do an excellent job of using CSS, which made changing the interface quickly a snap.
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
Just a little note on the TxP use of radios/dropdowns. I wouldn't recommend to use a radio for dynamic data such as the ones that will be presented in the dropdowns.
Why they use a radio for the other option I can't tell, but maybe it's to seperate 'em?
Jonathan Holst (http://holst.biz/)
I've dropped Matt an email about this (WordPress guy), so who knows, maybe the new CSS will make it into the product!
As for the "how will they know it's open source", maybe WP could use a button.. like this one maybe?
Gordon (http://www.gordonmclean.co.uk/)
Here's a two-part silly question for ya
1. Why are you using MT when you have a sponsor / partner who is a supposed competitor to them?
2. Why didn't you include a write-up / critique of their interface in this post?
Mark (http://www.lightpierce.com/ltshdw)
Answer to two-part silly question:
1. Squarespace is a hosted solution whose competitor's are Blogger and TypePad.
2. Therefore I didn't include a critique of their interface in this post because then I would have to include Blogger and TypePad as well. But that doesn't mean one isn't coming :-)
And if taking on a sponsor excludes me from writing about their competitors then I guess I am always gonna be wrong. And besides all of my sites are spread out through different servers.
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
..."And if taking on a sponsor excludes me from writing about their competitors then I guess I am always gonna be wrong..."
Huh? Where did I even insinuate that you need not write about your sponsors' competitors?
Mark (http://www.lightpierce.com/ltshdw)
You didn't, just needed to get that out the way. ;-) So how bout that article Mark? :-P
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
haha, now watch Scrivs get a job offer from Wordpress as their lead designer :)
Bryan (http://www.juicedthoughts.com)
personnally I enjoy using wordpress though I do like how your redesign looks "like whitespace, cssvault, the roe and the 9rules homepage" which isnt a bad thing...
Derek (http://www.dexlo.com/blog)
Yes, yes, I would love to get a job offer from an Open Source project that would split half of their revenues with me...
Honestly though, anyone can do better than what I have done and that took me no time to create. I know the WP people work hard on their software and I just think it is a shame for a lot of their hardwork to go to waste behind an interface that just doesn't match up.
Derek, who knew I could combine 4 different sites into one? Wait?! Are you saying all my sites look the same?!?! :-P
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
Paul,
What would it take for you to allow using your CSS for the admin interface to be released under the GPL, or a license that is GPL compatible by FSF judgement, so that it can be distributed as an add-on with WordPress?
Samir M. Nassar (http://steamedpenguin.com/)
"...So how bout that article Mark?..."
Honestly, I seen better from you.
Generally, it was good article, but given the talent and abilities of your audience here, all the tweaks you're suggesting can easily be achieved since the HTML, CSS and graphics files are downloaded with the application. If the interface is bothering someone that much, it's easy enough to change.
What I personally would of appreciated more is a discussion of the hosted services. For instance, the fact the Blogger forces me to sign-in or create an account before I can post to a blogger site really irritates me.
I think doing that first (write-up on hosted blog services) would have been more applicable to your audience here, possibly more in line with the interface discussion going on at DxF, (I get the impression you were attempting to go along that route with this post) and finally, would have gone along nicely with your annoucement of your new partnership.
But, that's just my opinion.
Mark (http://www.lightpierce.com/ltshdw)
Ah Mark, but your blogger issue is more of a usability type issue than an aesthetic one which is what this article focuses on.
And yes the interfaces are easy enough to change, but I have yet run across anyone who has taken the time to actually change them. Interfaces shouldn't have to be changed with a product. Would you use Squarespace if you had to change the admin interface?
Andrei's article is more of a philosophical discussion than an interface discussion I believe. I was just critiquing how things look in the interfaces. And I can see how a hosted-services article would have gone perfect with the Business Logs announcement, but there are other items that need to be finished first before that article sees the light of day.
But, that's just my opinion. :-)
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
Samir, I guess I should talk to PhotoMatt to see what the best approach would be. If you want the CSS though it is there for you to take. I really don't care. Not like I changed that much of it.
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
Wow, dropped that into my local install of 1.3 and it's bee-ootiful (minus a few needed tweaks). Hooray for CSS (okay, and you too scrivs_1-4).
Funny that you write this up now. I've been monkeying with 1.3 and found that although clunky, I *get* the wp interface, though it is very typical of open source, and I do program now and then...
Mike P. (http://www.fiftyfoureleven.com/sandbox/weblog/)
I think there is a reason WordPress uses a serif font for the logo. The WordPress name is likely a reference to the printing press. When I think of the printing press, I picture in my head, old style fonts, not modern style fonts. So in that vein, I think a serif font is the perfect choice.
Now, I am not going to disagree that the design leaves something to be desired. And I won't argue that the other elements of the page should not be sans-serif.
Jason G
Hey wouldn't it be nice if there would be a Version 2 (tm) contest to redesign the TxP admin interface? (and the Wordpress one too, though that's probably easier)
Dean (the guy building TxP) could use the help, as he's working on this (practically) on his own. Why not ask him and see what he thinks of it?
Heavens knows that there are a lot of Open Source interfaces out there that could do with a design, but if you try to help them, all they ask and expect is that you can code (and I'm not talking about xhtml/css/js). In fact, I even once asked the main dev of a certain file sharing program if he'd like me to take care of the documentation, as it was really lacking. Instead of thanking me, he bitched about the neccesity of it being in a certain docbook format and that if I din't code it in that, I'd be useless.
He did actually contact me a few days later that he'd had a row with his girlfriend, but I'd moved on and was in no mood to offer any assistance to him ever.
But don't let that scare you off, as Dean seems like a nice chap.
AkaXakA (http://akaxaka.gameover.com)
Paul, I love your new car, don't get me wrong, but I was just thinking that maybe you should have gotten it in red instead of black. I know it's your car, but don't you think red would have been a nicer color? Yeah, definitely red. It would have matched my friend's car down the street.
Mike (http://phark.typepad.com)
First thing I do when I put up a new wordpress install is set the admin header to display:none. I really don't need a link to wordpress in the admin interface. I know where it is. I went there to get the software I'm using. the admin layout never really bothered me... I really think the majority of the reason it looks bad is that it uses serif fonts and too-dark grey... kinda gives it an 'old newspaper' feel that doesn't work well.
I may try your css for it, though.
BTW, time to update your 404 page. The header is missing entirely (no HTML tag, no head, no title, no CSS, but the closing HTML tag is there) and you only link to *half* your sites. heh.
JC (http://www.thelionsweb.com/weblog)
Mike, I am laughing, but I really have no idea what I am laughing about. :-)
JC, ahh yes, the 404 page...hmmmm...*scurries off*
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
Paul,
Well, I haven't looked at the CSS yet. If I want to write CSS in order to achieve a similar look to your mockup and distribute it under the GPL then I can't. I appreciate the permission to use, but it reads like a permission for personal use.
Mind you, not that I am pressuring you to license it one way or another. Ones work is ones' own afterall.
Samir M. Nassar (http://steamedpenguin.com/)
Well like I said, let me talk to PhotoMatt as he has more experience in these matters than I do.
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
If I want to write CSS in order to achieve a similar look to your mockup and distribute it under the GPL then I can't.
I'm sorry, why can't you? If you create your CSS from scratch, then you can do whatever you want to with it. Paul's CSS doesn't factor into that.
*Taking* Paul's CSS, modifying it and then redistributing it is a different issue. But if you have the skills to modify someone else's CSS, then you have the skills to create your own.
Eris
I agree with Jason about keeping the serif typeface for the Wordpress logo -- but by God, there's so much more elegant serifs available to pursue instead on top of different ways to present it.
Also, while I agree with serif headings, maybe all the rest of the page should be sans-serif. That'll look more elegant.
Aesthetically speaking, without any usability sense, I think TxP wins hands down for the prettyness value, with MT trailing, and WP at the bottom.
Anyway, enough of my design musings...
Lea (http://xox.lealea.net/01/)
I wanted to comment that on WordPress, an app I use every day, I like how it is liquid and stretches to fit my screen. I even don't mind the layout. I'm there to concentrate on what I'm posting not on fancy looking application.
It's all subjective though.
Chris from Scottsdale (http://www.brainfuel.tv)
Eris,
Since Paul is talking to Matt this is more or less hypothetical but to answer your question.
If I am reverse engineering Paul's CSS then looking at it could bias me to doing things his way, or even unintentionally copying his methods. In good conscience I would like to be able to say that I wrote the CSS without being influenced by his CSS except by how it looks in my browser so that I don't have to deal with infringing on his work.
That said, I realize that this is CSS, and with a simple layout like this there isn't going to be that many ways to write CSS, but I want to be on the up and up as much as possible without having to hire a lawyer to explain what I can or can't do.
Samir M. Nassar (http://steamedpenguin.com/)
I definitely think WP could use some color in its admin area, which is why I changed mine to a blue/purple theme. I'd add tabs and images if I cared more and spent more time in it, but right now it's fine for a quick post and comment moderation. The use of Georgia in the post textarea is another annoyance I have for some reason, but that's a personal thing.
So, who's going to take it upon themselves to merge the best of all three interfaces in a nice and easy-to-use package? ;)
Vinnie Garcia (http://blog.vinniegarcia.com/)
Chris - You probably don't run at 3200x1200 or higher like paul does. Liquid layouts are fine on average screens, but when you go way above average resolution, they're difficult to work with.
Samir, I think you're forgetting that paul made some basic modifications to an already open-sourced file. Depending on what license WP is under (I don't recall at the moment) the modifications he made may be under that license already, regardless of what he wants to call them. At least, if I read it right, he started with the wordpress admin css file and modified it, rather than writing an entire new one.
JC (http://www.thelionsweb.com/weblog)
Having experimented with all three, I agree that MT is by some distance the easiest to use and the most aesthetically polished. Textpattern is pretty, but it's complicated (actually, that more-or-less sums up my feelings regarding TxP in general).
I've done a little bit of screwing around with the Wordpress interface -- listing options vertically rather than horizontally and such -- but I was too lazy to iron the bugs out, and I'm so used to the current layout I found it disorienting. That said, I now consider new admin stylesheets part of my site redesigns, and if I were an MT user I doubt I'd ever have been motivated to personalise my admin pages. Ugly defaults = spurs for creativity.
the absent student (http://not-that-ugly.co.uk)
Ahhh Come on man.. you cant review Movable type and then use an old version. I use daily both 2.x and 3.x versions of movable type and the 3.x version is MUCH better looking and almost a pleasure to work with. Good review other than the outdated screenshots ;-)
Brian Fox (http://www.californiafox.com)
Not sure if this site has been mentioned before, but the other day I stumbled upon http://www.opensourcecms.com. It lets you try out many different open source programs, including WordPress and TextPad. It doesn't have MovableType though.
It also lets you try out different Portals, like PHPNuke etc among others.
And no, it's not my site, just thought I'd share the resource with those that don't know about it, and since it has TextPad and WordPress, I figured it fit in with this post :)
Mike
Thanks for reminding me Mike. I should have noted that I used that website to test TxP and WP for this review.
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
Eh, I don't understand your criticism of the WP interface at all.
It has room for improvement, but it looks a lot nicer than that MT screen... and christ, if you want a fixed width entry editor, add a rule or two to your damn stylesheet!
And how do they not have a logo? They've stayed consistent with the font/color treatment they have now since I've known about it.
You're simply gonna have to do better than this to call it real criticism.
Seth Thomas Rasmussen (http://sethrasmussen.com/)
Seth - Try chilling out, man. You don't have any reason to attack Paul because he dared to not really like the way the admin interface on WP looks. There's plenty of room for civil discourse. There's a difference between critique and criticism, you know. There's nothing particularly negative about what Paul said, so I don't see why you're getting bent out of shape about it.
Personally, I find MT's interface less useful/usable than wordpress. Wordpress is pretty intuitive... the only part that really needs some serious work is all the crap about date and time formatting... no one should have to look through php's documentation just to decide how their date is formatted. A simple dropdown list with common date options, with a textbox for people who want more control, would be a plus.
JC (http://www.thelionsweb.com/weblog)
"...I find it surprising that no one has made a logo for WordPress yet that would help to build a strong brand. It doesn't even take a logo designer to go into their favorite graphics program, pick a font, and create a logo..."
-----
"...And how do they not have a logo? They've stayed consistent with the font/color treatment they have now since I've known about it..."
That is an interesting point that Seth brings up. The only difference between the official wordmark (logo) and yours is the color scheme and case - yet you refer to yours as a logo.
I know this isn't essential to the subject at hand, but it would no less be interesting to know what you determine the difference as being?
Why is one a logo and the other not?
Mark (http://www.lightpierce.com/ltshdw)
There's a thread going on:
http://wordpress.org/support/4/14647
I suggest having a WP 1.3 feature that would let you switch admin themes, just like the new 1.3 feature that'll let you choose presentation themes.
Trevor (http://www.qpalzm.org)
In TXP the reason for the dropdowns is that you CAN have multiple categories and sections, so radio buttons could not work.
TXP is very simple to learn. After trying MT and WordPress for a couple of hours each, I gave up and immediately found TXP simple and straightforward. If you weren't already tuned into the MT interface, you might have taken TXP for what it is rather than what it isn't as compared to MT. Then you would find it easy, imho.
I agree about the tabs although it only takes 2 minutes to figure them out.
Peter (http://www.01010.org/)
Well I never called my version a logo either, but I guess any type treatment can be considered a logo. I stand corrected.
Seth, you sound like the other open source zealots who go bonkers when anyone has something non-positive to say about their baby. I mean hell, I even whipped up something of my own to contribute to the cause. If you wish I will call this article an opinion piece instead of a critique or criticism. Would that work?
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
I agree with most of the points made. They could all use a bit of work, though opinions will vary.
I do have to disagree with some of the TXP comments though. When I first began messing around with TXP (after using MT a lot, and WP somewhat) I found it to be daunting and confusing. But this is because I was used to MT and WP, which TXP is nothing like. TXP has a completely different conceptual design behind it. Once I understood what the parts meant, I found it extremely easy and powerful to use, and that the interface was good. TXP isn't really a blog software, it's more of a simple site CMS. I think this is a major issue for more new users though (at least ones switching from MT and WP).
Eby
I love the WordPress revision, and it shows that an interface can really create a mood when writing your posts.
Rad Smith (http://yayforgecko.net/)
Samir: CSS can't be licenced. Neither can html. JS is a grey area, but generally it can't be licenced either. As the code from all three languages can be viewed once they've been used online, it was decided (long long ago :P) that html couldn't be licenced, patented, etc. This right extended to css. The theory behind it is that it's only markup anyway, not the actual creation of something unique. The design however that these two create can however be copyrighted.
Bottomline: you can use anyones html, css and js and they can't do anything about it. (nor do they have any right to do something about it)
AkaXakA (http://akaxaka.gameover.com)
Hahaha, wtf???
JC,
Nothing in my comment was at all riled up, and certainly wasn't a personal attack. And, yet another point for the readers in the group: I never said Paul was being unfairly negative, I simply said I didn't understand his criticism and explained my point of view to help illustrate that. You, sir, are the one in need of the chill pill here. Moving on... :\
Paul,
WTF, you too? How is WordPress my baby? How am I an open source zealot because I said I don't understand your criticism of WP? If anybody's coming across as zealous, it's you making blanket statements about open source works. Don't get snippy at me because your critique of WP isn't very strong, and that's all I was saying: that you don't come across as making a very strong point about the supposed deficiency of WP at all.
***
I'm rather confused how both of you reacted the way you did. Coincidentally bad days I guess?
Off topic: I like the bread and butter headings better than the sIFR variety. Looks nice.
Seth Thomas Rasmussen (http://sethrasmussen.com/)
I just reread the word "bonkers" being applied to my initial reaction.
...
Haha!
Silliness...
Seth Thomas Rasmussen (http://sethrasmussen.com/)
Hmm, what would you consider a strong criticism of WP? Can any criticism be considered strong for WP? I explained the problem with the tabs and showed how I would do them. I explained the problem with the color scheme and I showed how I would do it. I explained my problem with the fonts and I showed how I would do them.
Let's just skip the logo issue as that is mostly a personal preference.
I don't throw compliments to myself, but if someone were to criticize my work I think they would have done a good job if they explained what they saw wrong and provided examples of how they would do something. That's what I did.
I called it a critique because that is what it was. You tell me I have to do a better job if I wish to call it a criticism. That's like me telling you that you must do a better job with your website if you wish to call it a website.
If you look in the TxP thread you will see reasonable responses in contrast to the WP thread where you find people getting defensive about it. Maybe I read your comment after I got done reading that thread and you came across the same way. I could see if I ran around telling everyone that they should use X over Y, but I didn't do that. I just gave my opinion.
I see the WP interface as being unpolished. People might see this site as being unpolished. To each his own, but I certainly won't tell someone they need to do a better job of something if they simply wish to state their opinion. That is why you got my reply.
I really don't know what else to say about the WP interface that would make this critique "strong" in your opinion. It just looks generic to me.
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
And let it be known (since I know people will take the above comment the wrong way) that you can disagree with me and I will listen. That is why I write these things. Tell me why you do see the WP interface as being as polished compared to the other two interfaces.
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
I never said it was polished nor perfect. In fact, when I first started using WordPress, I contacted Matt offering to help with WP. He asked what I was good at. Well, not being especially proficient with PHP, I commented on what I felt were deficiencies with... the interface!
Interestingly enough, he never responded after that. I don't claim to be an interface master either, I just wanted to help out somehow, and I thought I had some relevant insight regarding the interface. Clearly, I am not alone. *shrug* I guess they only want *certain* people in their open source enclave? I dunno.
I called it a critique because that is what it was. You tell me I have to do a better job if I wish to call it a criticism. That's like me telling you that you must do a better job with your website if you wish to call it a website.
I think that's very subjective, but I will agree with this much: I should have worded that comment more carefully. You're obviously entitled to say whatever you want about whatever you want with no qualifications. Again, it just felt like you were saying next to nothing with a lot of fluff padding it. That's just my opinion, and thus why I said I was confused: because I would have expected a more solid statement from you.
Do you follow at all? I'm not mad at you or anybody(except JC for being a sycophant wanker), and if you've been paying attention to my comments on your site at all, you'll know that I respect your work here.
I never intended to square off with you, I think I just made a point rather poorly. (No, I don't think all my points are solid and sharp, and yes, the irony is rich, I know. Such is the cyclical nature of life...)
Seth Thomas Rasmussen (http://sethrasmussen.com/)
Like I said before Seth (and many times) I could care less when people disagree, but I think there are ways you can go about it and maybe I am touchy today and took your comments completely the wrong way. I am sure someone like Andrei or hell even my partners at B-Logs could do a better critique of interface design than I could, but in the end it's still a critique...I just won't call it a "professional" critique :-)
And JC was just reacting to what he read so I can see where he is coming from. It's Wednesday people, be happy!
Anyways, I have heard rumors myself of how the WP crew is kind of "closed" with regards to who they let in...
Scrivs (http://9rules.com/)
I used MT 2.6x and then switched to WP. I also use TXP on my web design site.
You are correct that you should be comfortable with your software's interface because that's what you'll be staring at more often than your own web site (that's what others will be looking at).
But the thing that I didn't like about MT was that it seemed "clunky" to me. I like something that is lean and mean and that loads fast. The faster it loads, the faster I can type my post or fiddle with the side and get out and move onto other things.
And I'm just now learning TxP. I like it, but it's not something I can get in, post and go, like I can with WP. I have to sit there and think a bit. I do like the popup context-sensitive help that TxP offers.
Oh, and it's WordPress, from what I gather, not wordpress or Wordpress. FWIW.
Joni (http://www.babygotblog.com)
I am a new WordPress user (had to replace my homegrown CMS with something that would run on my new host) and though I do like your layout better, I don't see anything wrong with WP's current logo. The mock logo you made means nothing to me when I look at it while the current logo does. It has weight and meaning to my eyes and tells me something whereas your logo seems completely disconnected with anything that WordPress is.
I like your mockup of the admin page because of the way it seperates the functionality of the tabs vs. the buttons by making the tabs look like tabs and the buttons look like buttons, which seems like something that should always be done if possible.
sirshannon (http://www.sirshannon.com)
Having used MT and WP I made the move to Textpattern and was initially somewhat confused. It takes a very different approach but with a little experimentation you can soon be using it purely for the pleasure of using it! While I agree that it is often used for just blogging, the interface of this CMS becomes a joy to use when you start using all the capabilities on offer.
Please also remember that both MT and WP in their various forms have been around for quite some time while Textpattern is not even at a release stage quite yet. Many of the fetures criticised are not yet fully implemented, but are coming very soon.
All 3 systems are very capable in their own ways, the prospective user must decide what they want to achieve and pick the right system for them. My better half uses WP and prefers it to MT but every now and then she needs help and I can't find my way around it for the first few minutes! If you have become used to any of these 3, moving to one of the others will always be confusing. If you are starting out for the first time, I don't think that there is that much difference in the initial learning curves, with nothing to compare to, any of them is great compared to doing it manually!
Adrian Rinehart-Balfe (http://www.boogenstein.com/)
"be happy!"
Word, Scrivs, word. I know I'm cranky today... dang poetry slam went on longer than I'd anticipated last nite. :)
P.S. I like your styles for the WP admin much better, all things considered! I've been wanting to dig into that interface and style it to my liking, but just haven't bothered. Function over form and all that. ;)
Seth Thomas Rasmussen (http://sethrasmussen.com/)
WP looks like a pile of crap, I'v really been tempted to move to MT as it seems like a more professional choice.
In the design stakes WP is like a poormans version. Don't get me wrong its good at what it does, but I think it has a lot of growing up left to do.
As for TextPatten, I tried a few demo's of that. What can I say? you either get it or you dont.
Tom
MT 2.661 is aight but MT 3.x looks way better and is easier to navigate. I know you use MT 2.661 but since you covered a CMS you don't use (WP and TxP) then venturing out to 3.x wouldn't have been a stretch? Maybe I'm just being picky, but even both 2.6 and 3.0 would have been an interesting critique for the MT leg of the race.
Ethel (http://luscious-and-uppity.com)
Surprisingly, B2 (Wordpress' predecessor) has an interface that is quite good (taking into consideration it hasn't been updated in years).
t (http://www.roseability.com/)
I have tested many many blog system and CMS. You forgot to mention Expression Engine which is one of the prominent (and nice) solution out there. Of course, EE is commercial license... but it uses tags not unlike TXP and you can fully customize your website with CSS.
Otherwise I agree with your post on the diffent CMS. Nice read.
David (http://www.d2points.net)
3 points:
1. Sorry I took so long to get to this article.
2. The devs for WP are finally starting to think a bit like you Scrivs - first they realised that the default template for the blog proper SUCKED and they are doing something about it.
3. Photomatt (Matt Mullenweg) - lead dev for WP opened a competition to "enhance" the current admin console for WP (http://photomatt.net/2004/07/28/color-schemes/) but then never followed through on it...
seriocomic (http://www.seriocomic.com)
Paul, thanks for the great review. Would you be interested in looking at a test install of MT 3.1 to see if its interface does any better than MT 2.661. I think we've made a massive amount of improvements over that version, which is quite long in the tooth. (MT2's interface is almost 2 years old.)
Either way, this is a really useful overview; Thanks for taking the time.
Anil (http://www.anildash.com/)
Nice redesign, but it doesn't really add much to the existing design.. just is a different "style".
I agree there needs to be more colour demarkation in the WP interface tho, thats a very good call. They do have a logo though.. a very obvious one. Not the most attractive one perhaps, but its there.
However... MT winning? The interface was one of the prime reasons I didn't choose MT to work with.. its clunky, ugly, organised badly, and its icons are really poor.
Visually it looks like Win 3.1 colliding with OS9. I'd have voted MT as the bottom of this pile for sure.
*shrugs* Each to their own I guess.
DarkCryst (http://twilightuniverse.com)
I used MT 2.x for a while, and am now using 3.11. I found the 2.x interface to be very usable and well thought-out, and I think 3.x's interface has improved on 2.x's shrotcomings.
I've tried WordPress a few times, and I just can't get past the interface. I think it's a good tool, but the interface needs help. Your redesign vastly improved that, and I think most new users would find an interface such as that much more usable.
Dan Wolfgang (http://www.danandsherree.com)
We are expecting heavy changes (including design wise) with the release of 1.3, so lets just keep our fingers crossed. Besides we must consider that WP is still in a baby stage compare to MT, so a little time should be given to it.
abhi (http://www.freepgs.com/abhishek)
Scrivs, as WordPress is open source software, you are also allowed (and most probably welcome) to contribute.
It bothers me (a little) that there have been a few writings for improving some open source software, but the author has not really his hands dirty with really doing something. Open source projects do not improve by commenting them, but by contributing to them.
Janne Kalliola (http://www.nomadig.com/)
Just a comment on the entire thread. Everyone is different and has different things that they look for in a CMS.
I started out with Blogger, moved to GM, then to MT. I used MT for a long time and then b2 arrived. After I decided that PHP and MySQL was what I wanted, I switched. I used b2 for over a year, until WP arrived.
One thing about MT is that it wasn't built from the ground up with PHP and MySQL, so everything inside of it at the time I stopped using it was what made it "clunky" and that's why it took so long for it to rebuild. I really got tired of it hanging there, watching my post disappear and the page would come back empty. I could use Blogger for that!
As far as resource use goes, having been a domain host in the past, resources of the domains that run MT are great from the host stand point. They use more bandwidth each month and some have overshot their allotment by day 21 only to put in a ticket and pay a fee to get bumped up to the next BW level. WP, b2, and the others that use MySQL and PHP don't do that, and our users really liked that part from the $$ aspect. As well as the quickness of posting and editing.
Personally, it doesn't really matter to me what the interface looks like, just so it works! I make skins for the blog as I care what that looks like and so do the people that read my blog.
Sara (http://www.floopie.com)
WordPress has made quite huge strides between v1 and v1.2 - they now have someone who is very focussed on UI (forget who), so it is not unreasonable to expect improvements to be made. I am (often) critical of open source projects for (often) having a lack of focus on UI. I don't believe WordPress is one of those projects.
One thing I have to disagree with is the criticism of liquid layouts. I like 'em for admin. Why? Because then I (the user) control the size. I control it by resizing my browser window. I don't have "maximised" browser windows. Not when I'm using 1600x1200 or 1280x1024, not even when using 1024x768.
Having said that, my public facing website(s) generally have fixed width layouts.
In a round about way, I don't think the web browser is the place to write posts, a desktop application does it a lot better. I (mainly) use MarsEdit for creating, editing posts.
[Sidenote: I'm also not a fan of MT's UI. Only ever used v3.something, and it just didn't gel. All those images? Ew. Make it hard to resize (using font sizes in the browser) the size of text, makes it hard for people to use at higher resolutions. Use of many images does not a professional UI make.]
Patrick Quinn-Graham (http://patrick.geek.nz/)
My only reason for moving from MT to WP was for technical reasons. MT 2.1 was starting to break for no obvious (ie, no logged) reason. I had something approaching 1500 entries, and it was starting to take too long to regenerate all the static pages when I would force a rebuild. So long, in fact, that the browser would time out, and the rebuild would cease somewhere around 700 entries.
I tried exporting, reinstalling, importing, but the export only spit out about 500 entries, stopping in the middle of a plain text word in the middle of an entry.
As I was going to be forced to do some manual exporting from MySQL anyhow, I decided that I needed to move to a completely dynamic display system as opposed to a static display system. The prebuilt pages make sense with heavily trafficked site like slashdot, but for my little journal, dynamic display isn't hitting the system that hard.
I'm a UI bigot, and I've found WP to be much more straight-forward than MT. It proved easier to find any number of setup options on initial use than MT. Let's not even think about modifying templates and layouts - while it's powerful in MT, it's unforgiveably obtuse for the beginner.
Richard (http://foo.ca/wp)
Keep track of comments to all entries with the Comments Feed
©2003-06 9rules, Inc. | Thoughts Feed | Notes Feed
Amazon Stores: Powertools | Jewelry | Books | Health | Landscaping | Kitchen | Movies
#1
Good post.
I use Wordpress and have done on and off for a year (I had my dalliance with MT but I broke it). I love the product, it does just what I want, but you are right, it is ugly.
Love the design mock-up of the new-entry page. Looks a ton better. Any chance of you offering it for use by WP users?
Pete J Lambert (http://pixelicious.co.uk)