lneisius
|
| Posted: 03/10/2003, 11:51 AM |
|
My Two Cents: Well a little more:
I have only been working with CCS for about 6 months now and believe it to be the strongest app on the market today for creating dynamic website applications. Before CCS I had absolutely no experience with dynamic driven apps only static html. So as I am a newbie at this some of my concerns and opinions may be that of somewhat questionable ideas to the advanced individual. I have downloaded and researched the code in hundreds of free apps available on the net.
1, the layout of the common files in the base structure of the created apps, Should the common.asp be used for so many functions? I believe the common.asp should be used only for its namesake(functions used on nearly all pages), ie. security functions should be moved to Security.asp so as to only call them as needed (login and pages with security). Same thing with the classes.asp, it should only be used for functions on most all pages (upload functions should be moved to upload.asp and only called on pages with upload in them).
2, listboxes should be dynamic in there content with the ability to add dependent and add multiselection capability directly in the dialogs structure (no need for custom code). I know this will require restucture of some code but it is both needed and asked for by multiple users!
3, the new upload componet used in asp should be a pure asp component not a
purchased add on from a third party. It would seem that you have accomplished this within the PHP framework and it should be done in the asp framework as well. My internet searches turnup a number of (FREE) pure asp upload components available and I would say one of these would be glad to see there component in CCS.
I understand the need to add something to the uploaded file so as to have distinction in the file structure but the current complaints about how CCS adds the date and time to the uploaded file are valid in that there needs to be a way to upload a new file to replace the current file without having to manualy delete the old file and update the pages to reflect the new file.
4, Added login capabilities to the login component. We should be able to add
sessions to the login within the security settings dialog. The login should include the ablity to add autologin (checkbox) as well as a check for banned users if we want to use it. It would be nice if we had updateable fields added to the login as well ie. last login, number of visits, etc...
5, The ability to create multilanguage apps. This should be in the settings dialog.
6, includeable files should be able to use connections to the database. Currently if a file is includeable, actions like dlookup will not work because the includable events page is placed at the end of the file and the connection is closed.
7, database errors should be trapped and the user should only see a generic error. This includes any error that would provide info to the user that could be used to hack the site. This would probably require some config params to send info to somone or somewhere for trouble shooting.
8, Encryption class for database's other than mysql with md5. Ability to turn
encryption on if wanted or leave off if not (including md5). Ability to use it with other items besides just usernames and passwords.
9, Record forms: Method of making fields (Table Rows) accessable by security, ie. if the record form is for registration or edit of users, the group access field should be a hidden field for level 1 (User), and a listbox for level 3 (Admin), where the level can not be increased beyond the level of the editor (Current User). There should also be a security setting for the level that can view record outside of the userid for the record, ie. if userid 3 is logged on and his access level is 1 then he can only view his record but if his user level is 3 then he can view all records but only change the user level on records below his user level and can't raise the user level higher than his current user level. What this boils down to is that we can use one form with field level securities instead of making multiple forms on the same page and setting form level securities. Maybe a form in a form where we could set securities individualy? This concept of a single form is one of the most asked for items in the forums!
10, Calendar form: Yes should develop a calendar form of its own or let the public know that it will not create one in the future so that someone will start the addons to do this. People do not want to create items that are intended to be implemented in the base product in the future. Again one of the most asked for items!
11, WYSIWYG Editor. YES should develop and implement its own WYSIWG editor. Bill Noble has done a fine job of implementing an editor from outside development but my opinion is that it needs to integrate with CCS where it can be configured via dialogs and make use of CCS functions. Again yet another most asked for item!
12, SDK. There are alot of hungry people wanting to create add ons for this
product. They need direction from YES before they begin in a direction intended for future use by the creators. No one knows what is in the minds of the people at YES.
13, Actions, Actions, Actions. We need more actions to preform operations that are in the current capabilities of the base product. We need a place to dump our own creations for other people to use.
14, The studio designer should work with frames, iframes, etc...
15, Its someone elses turn to ring in here!!!!!
I have tried software in its development stages before, many at much more than the cost of this product. None of them had the capabilities and forethought for the user that this product has. Most of which weren't even worth using before the third release. Keep up the good work and this product will be worth twice the cost before its third release!!!!
|
|
|
 |
DaveRexel
|
| Posted: 03/10/2003, 12:43 PM |
|
lneisius,
What a magnificent post.
You have detailed the main points which I would also like to see in this excellent product.
I hope the company will recognise the needs of it's users and implement the features you have detailed, it has very much to gain by this.
A suggestion, would you please consider sending your post directly to YesSoftware (not sure how often they browse this forum and the NG, and at what level)
Greetings
Dave
|
|
|
|
lneisius
|
| Posted: 03/10/2003, 7:33 PM |
|
Thanks Dave, I made YES aware of this post as they requested feedback when they made Beta 3 available. I was hoping for a lot of the strong and advanced users like yourself to post there opinons (complete and thorough), thanks for yours!
|
|
|
|
lneisius
|
| Posted: 03/10/2003, 7:33 PM |
|
Please read the post before you start to B**ch! This post was started for the purpose of seeing what people think of and want to see in CCS 2.0, not a place for complaints! It would seem that some of you guys think every post is for your own personal complaint session!
This post is for collection of wishes, problems, etc... with the application not the website!
|
|
|
|
Brett
|
| Posted: 03/10/2003, 8:43 PM |
|
I share you views, although I don't have your depth of experience. I think the code behind the scenes is pretty well written, and I think the product is a pretty good value, but I never wanted to get into full-blown development to get my application running. I purchased CCS for the Portal application, and while I've had a number of compliments on my work which was based upon the standard Portal template (the newer version), I was disappointed with the portal design -- it turns out to be something slapped together (e.g. catagories don't match their sections, search "web site" only searches Articles, registration doesn't do anything, and doesn't port to the poorly-designed Forum template, fields aren't used when they should be, no WYSIWYG editor, etc.). I am tempted to use PostNuke and add-ons for my future work, but I'm waiting to see if Yes Software does something good with this product (I need a web services piece!). My recommendation -- the code generator is OK, but APPLICATIONS sell technology. You'll sell a hell of a lot more of these if you just bundle up a bunch of components that use an extensible database, and let your customers do more assembly than extending. You'll be going after the much broader FrontPage audience rather than the Visual Studio audience -- and will actually get both audiences to buy the product. Communication would be nice, too. I want to see CCS be wildly successful!!!!
|
|
|
|
Tony M
|
| Posted: 03/11/2003, 2:51 AM |
|
lneisius...You have written a powerful request for better things from YesSoftware BUT sadly this Forum has very few readers who are willing to support your initiative or any other that has been posted.
This Forum lacks any kind of punch that is needed to persuade YesSoftware to do ANYTHING...and until it does...you...me...and countless others...will continue to "Pxxx into the wind"
Many people..have repeated themselves on numerous occasions...trying to get support from the forum to persuade YesSoftware to do many things...
BUT sadly YesSoftware are VERY BAD at listening to their customers.
I congratulate all those who devote their time and energy to keep this Forum and others alive.
We need to get united to get YesSoftware to take any notice of us.
to drum up support for...amongst other things...
1 - CodeCharge Update or not...Answer the numerous questions YesSoftware
2 - Regular Updates to the "Studio's comprehensive Online Knowledge Base + FAQ + How-To system
3 - More Studio extensions
I doubt very much if this Forum will ever get united enough to get a response/reply from YesSoftware...
Like...Just how long does it take...to cut/paste...each week to the web...a few repeatedly re-solved questions...answered by the Support Team...for all to see etc
Regards
Tony M
|
|
|
|
RonB
|
| Posted: 03/12/2003, 4:51 AM |
|
Good points. I'm a bit torn between wanting some features and not wanting them. Sounds weird I no. Some of the stuff I'd like get into the realm of great tools like dreamweaver, wich I use extensively. I can imagine feature request can be a difficult thing for Yes. You run the risk of creating something that does a lot of stuff other tools do a lot better.
Take the wysiwyg editor request. This is almost asking for trouble for Yes. It doesn't matter what choice they would make there will always be people complaining it's the wrong editor that got included.
I recently switched from pd_editor(extension in dreamweaver) to htmlarea. The version I use of htmlarea isn't the original one. It has extended table support, news ticker, upload and image preview options. Wich one would I want included? And what if I need more features in the editor. I'd have to wait until yes came up with a better one or added features. Just look at some of the choices Yes made for the file upload... It's nice but I bet there are people already saying the want some things changed.
In general I think it's better to focus on the product idea you have as a company, build it to near perfection. Then think about the requests users have. Only include them if they don't undermine the robustnes of the product and fit in the concept you have for the product. CCS is a clever and advanced code generator. Some of the code, and the way it's implemented, could use some streamlining. I hope they focus on that and think about adding even more features after they took another good look at the code.
Ron
|
|
|
|
tonyk
|
| Posted: 03/14/2003, 10:44 AM |
|
I agree with the sentiments expressed here.
This has to be the most difficult support site from which to extract information; the responses are fragmented and threads seem to have no start or end to them.
I am on leave from Sunday but when I return I am going to set up a phpBb site and paste into it the authorative answers that I have found. That way we may get a useful resource - not as a replacement for this site but as a distillate of knowledge. I would welcome any assistance possible with this project, as an alternative we could have a yahoo group though you have to cope with the advertising which is a pain.
If you wish to help please send a message to me at 'buysell at forensicpages.com' but remember I am away for a week from Sunday.
Tony
ps there is a strong spam filter on that address and I report all spam.
|
|
|
|
Ziggetty
|
| Posted: 03/14/2003, 11:53 AM |
|
yes,
a long list of wanted things. I hope we will geta number of these things done.
for now i have modified the login in common.php
and i hate this forum, maybe it just dies and we all end up at codechargers.net
or it will be inproved.
further i hope to see something like 'simulated stored procedure' for guys like me (platform mysql php) as mysql does not handle stored procedures i have a frontend which to the user is as one grid, but at the backend stores date in 2 files. a custom insert only handles 1 insert. so for now i have broken it in 2 in the generated php file.
greetings to all didicated to this great product,
Bob Rijnbeek
|
|
|
|
Tonyk
|
| Posted: 03/15/2003, 6:15 AM |
|
Thanks for reminding me about Codechargers, I wont have to worry about setting up a board! :)
Tony
|
|
|
|
gmoore
|
| Posted: 03/20/2003, 4:18 PM |
|
I agree with the original message, especially number 2. The listbox scenario is draining. It should be a lot easier. Also, the tutorial on the Knowledgebase does not work.
|
|
|
|
bsiler
|
| Posted: 03/20/2003, 4:49 PM |
|
As a former worker of a software engineering company I have "two cents" to add.
I provide a quote that was posted outside Logan Internation Airport in Boston,
"If Rome was built in a day, we would hire their contractors". As with software it takes time and every feature can not be added in a release.
At my former employer we followed the xtreme programming methodology. We would release new features and funtions every 4-6 weeks. The features and funtion set were balanced with internal resources. So for example we would put out the minor tasks quickly and devote two senior engineers to the major tasks (this could take up to 16 weeks). The results, customers would get enhanced products to meet their needs on a regular basis. Did we satisfy everyone? No, but then again there are always thorns.
I do agree with everyone, better communication would go a long way in healing the community. Working with the open-source community over the past 7 years I understand the frustration. But, as a community, if we do not get the input/output from Yes Software, then we must be willing to make things happen without them.
I suggest as a community we (1)Organize, (2)Communicate the needs (3)DO IT!!!. Although we can not change the base product, we can create the bolt-on pieces, share our knowledge (thanks Dave Rexel http://www.rexdesign.com), collaborate on projects or useful code to be shared with the community, our own support site, etc...
Keep the thread going I will roll it up and deliver it to them when I go to Las Vegas in June.
|
|
|
|
|
