>
>
>Anyone use Slashcode and PHPNuke and have comments on which is
>better/worse and why?
>
PHPNuke is easier/faster to set up and get running for a low or
mid-volume site.
Slash is more configurable (it's modular now; you don't need to have
moderation and all that unless you want to), has more (optional)
features, and can stand up to much higher usage levels. I know one Slash
site that has maintained loads of over 200,000 pageviews per hour many
times, and once peaked at over 400,000 in a single hour -- and kept
running. (http://slashdot.org)
Both are themable. How hard the themes are to install between the two is
a matter of debate.
If you're looking for a weblog-format content management system for a
site that is going to only have a light comment load (under 1000 reader
posts per day), PHPNuke will do the job. If you are going for a really
big site or want to have journals and reader-generated "private"
discussions and all kinds of other stuff -- even a pay-for-subscriptions
plugin -- Slash is the way to go.
Another one to check is Scoop, the PHP-based system that drives K5.
Rusty Foster (who wrote it) is a very accurate, careful coder.
But the site I'm getting ready to put up, BuildProfitsOnline.com, will
use flat HTML. I'll modify/create pages offline using OpenOffice and ftp
them to the server. Cheaper, faster, easier, simpler. I'm only going to
publish selected reader email or email excerpts anyway, not have open
comment posting, and I'm only going to update the site once a week. If
people want to yack more frequently, I'll give them an email list. I
expect this to be a low volume site, probably fewer than 10,000
pageviews per day, so there's no reason to get carried away with it.
- Robin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:07:38 EDT