I’d be a bit cautious in dismissing RW. I’ve used it for 10 years and also have blocs. The systems are similar in that they allow you to create websites. Both apps recognise that you’ll need further functionality to create feature rich websites. Blocs uses the blocs store and RW uses Stacks.
My experience is that RW is a more mature product. There are multiple frameworks available. Foundation is closest to Blocs in terms of CSSesque editing. It really depends on your needs and how much your willing to spend. RW has far more features available. Alloy for Foundry allows you to run a fully functioning blog that looks good also and allows you to create sections on your website that allows you to edit content in the browser not RW.
I like the direction of Blocs, but find development of more complex sites harder simply because RW has stacks that do just about anything.
In terms of frameworks both Bootstrap and Foundation are good. Some have questioned Foundations development. All I can say is that Joe Workman has done an amazing job. Bootstrap is great but carries a lot of bloat depending on your usage.
In the end there are pros and cons to all systems. I believe that knowing a system well is what’s important. Both RW and Blocs can built great websites. At the moment I think RW is more mature and offers more features. Blocs is developing at a rapid rate of knots. A final aspect is how much your willing to invest. It’s expensive to invest in more than one system.
Just to make sure you or a another reader later on will know this:
here is the store with the 3rd party universe
And since you’re coming from Rapidweaver you may want to report Will Woodgate someday about your Blocs experiences. I think he was pondering about doing 3rd party extensions for Blocs which would be really great IMHO
regarding those errors: I have no idea what this is all about.
ARE any of those errors a possible source for SEO problems that would be „invisible“ to see? (meaning when the site as such is NOT broken)
Same here - I’ve run through the checks on some of the biggest website designs & loads from top agency’s using all various builders etc and all full of these errors.
To me - if the website is fast, clean, smooth to use - great on the eye - has the information & design the owner/client is happy with then BOOM it’s a winner!
I was a huge rapidweaver user too - and I will say I do love Joe Workmans work with foundation. But I did find RW tiresome to use and to design something simple would mean hunting for stacks all the time to do basic things and this would massively slow down the design process etc.
I am not bashing RW here at all, but one thing we must also remember is how long RW has been out vs Blocs. The rate @Norm is developing changes to Blocs is stunning. Yes there are more things I want see out of the box, but this will all come in time - the good thing is, at the moment anything is possible, if not out of the box, then with some simple code and assistance from people here then its a remarkable platform.
The bric developers are creating some amazing brics and I started a post in the wish list as I am hoping people can contribute and bric developers including @Norm could take some notes from users and bring this into a bric or the builder.
Joe, Norm, Dan and many others are all brilliant at what they do…all i can say is the future in Blocs is looking very very very good !
One thing I would like say is, when I look at websites from the big companies - the one thing I notice is simplicity and tidy design…nothing complex to confuse the user…nothing crazy! just nice simple design, great images, the point text. All this is possible in Blocs (and much more of course!) so its up to us as designers I think to work in the boundaries we have been given at times and not to over complicate things…
I used to build every single website using WordPress and Divi, only to end up with sites that were sluggish and loading a lot of bloat in the form of javascripts and icons I wasn’t using at all (due to using Divi).
Hi @Norm - just jumping in this thread too as I talk to a lot of RW users still, I think it’s mainly stacks that is the feedback I’m getting - RW users have invested a lot in stacks that they use so much.
They are all possible in blocs 100% but to have it in a bric would be so much better for them - I’d love to see more features being brought into blocs like a more depth SEO helper, .
Nesting pages is one thing mentioned & some of the top stacks from JW.
But the big pull here is how blocs works out the box & iPad ! The future is great!
Ps, don’t forget the menu problem!!! Still need it sorting. Cheers!
Creates a blog page and its summary (Recent, Latest, etc.) automatically and without any plugin. The editor is right in RW, meaning the website does not need any backend to add/edit the content. Posts are embedded in a file uploaded on export
Additional Code (RW)
Similar to Blocs, RW provides the ability to add manual code, but it provides access to add code to almost every section, using both global css, js, before ‘body’ and almost the same for each page. You can also call a js function you added in a page from a button, but it’s really a hack not an expected behavior. It would be great if we had some js functionality, e.g. write a function, function to run after page loads and function to embed to a button
Formsnap (Yabdab)
Creates complex forms, supporting all fields you can think of, validation, posting formData json to webhook, post formData to Google Sheets, post formData to Microsoft SQL Server.
Datatably (J. Barth Navigio)
Live database data in your website
RWML (Will Woodgate)
Support for multi language websites
Sitelok (Joe Workman)
A handy little tool that locks a page with a password
IMO Blocs just needs more developers building add-ons, that’s the only thing that lacks and it makes total sense considering how much time each app is around
One of the main dissadvantages of RW is that RW doesn’t build anything beyond an iWeb template website without choosing a framework, Stacks and the stacks to go with it (at great cost). The great majority of RW users get these choices very wrong, chosing the weekly discounted 6 year old stack, and then adding to their site using the Framework supplied by their favoured Developer. This approach leads to often conflicting multiple versions of script files, multiple downloads of FA icons, etc. and the resulting site can be an almighty mess. There are no standards within the RW eco system so there is plenty of opportunity to upset things.
One of the advantages that Blocs has over RW/Stacks is that it is very difficuly to get into this mess with Blocs. Blocs is an integrated building tool whereas RW can be like building with non standard knock off Lego blocks, if you make the wrong choices.
@webdeersign I am largely out of touch with RW these days. Are there any specific stacks with features that you would like to see included in Blocs?
I also wonder if there are any areas where you think Blocs is behind at present in terms of workflow usability or features? Blocs has been making much faster progress, but this is a process and feedback helps with direction.
Number 1 would be CSS Grid which for me has revolutionised how I build sites. Once you go CSS Grid, you can’t go back. This is built into the Skeleton based framework called Source and it made all other frameworks redundant. It is a micro framework and it is very easy to get a 100% PageSpeed site with little effort.
Other than that I would say Poster2 from Jannis and Splider2 slider also from the Source developer.
I can’t really think of any other way where Blocs isn’t ahead of RW.
I just had a look at the website of a rather prolific stacks developer and some of the pricing has definitely increased since I was using RW. It was quite sobering to see a single animation stack on sale at $90. I am starting to think I discovered the primary cause of rising inflation around the world.
I never did get to try Source, though I heard good things about it.
