PHP NUKE Sites

b-girl · #1 (**permalink**) 07-08-2003, 12:48 PM

I would like to know how this community feels about PHP NUKE Content management sites? Do you think it's effective?

jamal · #2 (**permalink**) 07-09-2003, 02:59 PM

I personally have used phpNuke before and I liked it generally. It is pretty effective and useful to answer your question directly. It is great for controlling a database enabled php site, and it's much better than some other free cm systems like PHPSlash. I guess such a system is not appropriate for some sites though, but it all depends on your needs.

b-girl · #3 (**permalink**) 07-09-2003, 04:19 PM

I have found it really good for maintaining my music site. I know there are folks who do not like the php nuke OR the design layouts that come with PHP Nuke. I have managed to find a layout that fits my purpose.

Garrett · #4 (**permalink**) 07-09-2003, 04:37 PM

Hey, um... what's PHPNuke?

b-girl -- is that what runs your navigable, eye-pleasing site? If so, what exactly does it do?

Garrett

b-girl · #5 (**permalink**) 07-09-2003, 04:56 PM

http://www.phpnuke.org

Content Management built from php scripts put together by by Francisco Burzi.

It works perfectly for me to organize all the musical content I provide to my audience every month.

Wedohosting · #6 (**permalink**) 07-15-2003, 11:59 PM

The problem with NUKE is the tinkering ... It takes a mindless number of hours to get one setup, modified and tweaked.. then there's the templates...#$#$#)(

Each template needs to be modified to remove the PHPNUKE banners etc and some of the templates are horrible.

We used PHP nuke for a developer site and tweaked and modified the site until it works, looks good, has all the toys we needed

b-girl · #7 (**permalink**) 07-16-2003, 09:23 AM

Your not allowed to take the php credit off the bottom. That's one of the rules of using the template. But it works perfectly for me.

I agree trying to tweak the php codes can be a bit fustrating. But it's worth it in the End.

Thanks for the feedback guys!

jhilgeman · #8 (**permalink**) 07-18-2003, 03:36 PM

Garrett, I'm shocked. :)

PHP-Nuke is simply a generic, pre-created web site written in PHP. The capabilities of the site can be expanded by installing (usually free) modules that the open source community writes. It comes with a few pre-installed modules so you can start posting news articles right away. It can also look different based on templates that you can create, download, or even buy (yes, some people actually sell their templates).

Most people download and install the script/site and then just change the default template so that it looks more unique. Most sites have a 3-column look to them, a la www.phpnuke.org, but with some tweaking, you can create any type of template, a la www.euclidgroup.com.

Frankly, I'm not a fan of PHP-Nuke. I've customized so many installations of it - some so heavily to the point of almost being re-written, so I know the code inside and out, and it's not very pretty. Since it -is- generic but tries to do everything, the code is just... kind of sloppy.

Furthermore, most people can't write modules very well, and the half-decent modules written for Nuke version X won't work in the new version Y. So by the time a module is rewritten for version Y, version Z is already out. So it makes it difficult to find lots of good, compatible modules that can stay that way. There's one or two out there, though.

Bottom line, it might have the capacity to look organized and maybe even attractive (if the webmaster has any sense of color mixing), but it's definitely a nightmare inside. If you can code in PHP, you can probably do a heckuva lot better starting from scratch, even if it's a slower development process.

- Jonathan

b-girl · #9 (**permalink**) 07-18-2003, 03:39 PM

I will agree it's a nightmare. And you do need some php experience if you want to make it run the way you want it to run.

I guess for different people it works and others it may be a nightmare. I am glad I stared this thread. It's interesting to see what others have to say about it.

But for the most part I love it because it helps me upload my content and keep on going.

jhilgeman · #10 (**permalink**) 07-18-2003, 04:03 PM

True, it does work for some people. I just tend to run into clients that think PHP-Nuke is better than sliced bread and so should be bent and twisted to fit their needs rather than finding a more suitable program for the starting point. As such, I know that it's really not a very appropriate solution for most business sites.

- Jonathan

b-girl · #11 (**permalink**) 07-18-2003, 04:34 PM

Now that I agree with.

If you have a company and offering services, It doen't look too good when you have a footer at the bottom that says: PHPNUKE

Esp when you have a theme that is by far professional.

If I had a company website I would recommend a site that is built from the ground up. That way it can be built around your professional needs.

I started using php nuke as an experiment. Folks at the job were joking about it and I wanted to see how it worked. Then I just started a little magazine type website and took it from there. This is of course a side hobby thing.

I totally agree with you jhilgeman. With a business site, it should be professional and not one of a template.

cyanide · #12 (**permalink**) 07-26-2003, 03:49 PM

then there's postnuke www.postnuke.com

it's a fork of phpnuke.
supposed to be a little better scripted.
has a few better modules for customizing.

jhilgeman · #13 (**permalink**) 07-28-2003, 12:21 PM

Yes, that's also a popular alternate version. I believe the main reason for its existence was because earlier versions of PHP-Nuke had a lot of security issues - some of them easy enough for any beginning skiddie to exploit.

The version that I tested last year wasn't all that great, though. I may have been a tad biased because I'm always nervous about using software that hasn't reached a stable 1.0 version yet. I understand that people that are concerned with security have a tendency to be careful when releasing versions, but it's still unnerving.

In any case, I just checked the site again, and while they still haven't reached 1.0 yet, it looks like they've made some dramatic improvements.

There are some other CMS programs out there written in PHP that are decent, too. I've been hearing more and more about one called Mambo, and I've taken a basic look at it, and while it's graphically impressive and slick, the functionality feels like it tried to escape the ring at a feather-weight competition. Again, I could be wrong - maybe I just didn't investigate it fully.

cyanide · #14 (**permalink**) 07-28-2003, 01:49 PM

Quote:

I believe the main reason for its existence was because earlier versions of PHP-Nuke had a lot of security issues - some of them easy enough for any beginning skiddie to exploit.

that would be correct.

they have made some improvements.

I did have a chance to view Mambo.
Perfect for a smaller site. A nice feature is the ability to dynamically create Sections and sub-sections (sub-lnks)

I was actually going to use it for a client, but found out it had trouble being indexed by search engines. There was talk of it in the forums and the answer was a complete re-write -the authors had no interest in doing that. That was enough for me.

One of the problems was the title tag. What ever title you chose, would be the title for every single page. I suppose if I had the time I could've hacked a way. The one thing i really liked was its super-fast loading time, unlike the nukes.

Quote:

I just tend to run into clients that think PHP-Nuke is better than sliced bread and so should be bent and twisted to fit their needs rather than finding a more suitable program for the starting point.

... with its 100 table database and umpteen pre-installed modules. Tries to be all things to all people.

blair.henry · #15 (**permalink**) 07-30-2003, 01:58 PM

It is important that people manage thier expectations . PHP Nuke as well as PostNuke are both nice options to have in your arsenal of tools.

Yes agreed designing your own code from the ground up would often be better. However if time is a concern the Nuke's are quick dirty and fairly effective Content Management Systems.

Once you set them up a few times, it becomes very simple to replicate.

Anyway that is my 2cents on the topic.

Rabies · #16 (**permalink**) 07-31-2003, 11:39 AM

What about "MyPhpNuke"? It supposedly improved on PhPNuke...

jgoddard · #17 (**permalink**) 08-01-2003, 12:06 PM

I don't know if it's just that I've only seen 5 or so sites that use PHPNuke, but I think it is really bad... it may be easy to use, etc.. but every site is the same that I've seen, except the colors are different and the designer makes a unique header. Also there seems to be a lot of random, unneeded features with it... it seems good for an online community/portal but not much else.

Unless I'm wrong and all I've seen is the bad end of PHPNuke

javier · #18 (**permalink**) 08-01-2003, 03:24 PM

I'm currently playing with it and as something to do quick and easy sites (portals for small communities, tests, etc) works quite well and once you mount it you can do quite nice things.

I would not recommend it for professional sites, or at least not yet.

Regards
Javier

Rabies · #19 (**permalink**) 08-04-2003, 12:34 AM

Jgoddard: Look at it this way... Every proper and GOOD implementation of PHPNUKE will NOT be noticable. Right? You noticed the ones where the webmasters didn't bother customizing it well.

In theory, you wouldn't notice the sites that properly set up the features and makes good custom template designs for it...Cuz when done right, they WOULDN'T look like every other PHPNUKE site...

;-) RB

mpnev · #20 (**permalink**) 08-14-2003, 05:45 AM

Good point Rabies... I haven't tried it myself, but this topic has made me want to play with it =)

netman4ttm · #21 (**permalink**) 08-20-2003, 05:52 PM

Thanks for the link.

I always find that looking at someone else's code is a good way to learn how they see a problem and how they solve it.

itwebsolution · #22 (**permalink**) 09-18-2003, 09:01 PM

I like using phpWebSitewhich started as a PHP Nuke fork, but has matured into its own CMS with original code. The nice thing about this application is that it is supported and developed by a state university!

There are a number of excellent features that make it my choice over NUKE - primarily the sports teams modules that have been developed and the simple, easy to use template system. In fact, I have built my business around providing cheap and some free templates for this CMS. It is worth a quick look.

bhopkins · #23 (**permalink**) 10-25-2003, 11:52 AM

Now that we are talking aobut alternatives to PHPNuke another good option is DotNetNuke (http://www.dotnetnuke.com ) it is a similar CMS system built using ASP.Net as someone who as used PHP and Asp.NEt I can say that DotNetNuke is a lot easier to get installed and functioning than any of these PHP systems. While it is not as mature as the PHP versions it is making a lot of progress and has a dedicated group of programmers working on moving the system forward. As I type this the new version 2.0 which is completely object orientated and while provide the ability to use multiple data stores along with the ability to skin your portals using basic HTML is in the works.

So how does this beat the PHP versions. Can any of them give you multiple websites( including domain names) from one codebase? THis feature alone counting the cost of hosting should be enough to convince you to take a look.

By the way if you haven't figured it out yet. I'm one of the core team members so I'm a little biased. ;-)

Electronic Perceptions · #24 (**permalink**) 10-27-2003, 06:37 PM

Actually yes, PostNuke has a multisites feature :) I can't say much about it though, because I don't use that particular feature myself.

I can say though, that I looked over a lot of those mentioned in this thread a couple of years ago, and settled on PostNuke at the time because it seemed to be the most feature rich and the most secure back then.

I was creating my own portal system from scratch and had gotten quite a ways with it when I ran into all the Nuke-like stuff. I stopped my development and installed that one because I figured why do all this work myself when others are already on the way there? And it was free too :)

In any case, I did have to (and want to) tweak really hard with the first site I made using PostNuke. I ended up though, with a very large content rich portal that even had paid membership features integrated.

It was a lot of work, but probably not nearly as much as it would have been had I continued my own solo-development.

The site has new owners now and though they kept a design I created, they put a different back-end in. I have recently put PN in for a blog site though, and for an article archive site. I like it for those purposes.

BTW: Most of the code is not nearly as ugly as it was a year or two ago... that really helps :)

- Kathy