• I am a web developer and have been building sites on WordPress for years now. I love the platform, but this is truly a disappointment and I am very surprised this was something actually released. There was extremely poor responses to your gutenberg plugin people tested before you pushed it out as a core feature… wish you would have listened. Your ‘block’ approach seems to make since when you talk about it, but in practice it is a disaster. It is built very poorly and does not work well with robust page builders such as Beaver Builder, which is much, much, much better than this shabby attempt at using a block builder in place of your very popular wysiwyg. It also does not pull in the theme styles via the customizer and does not allow you to easily edit the html. Please read these reviews and you can clearly see that no one actually likes this change. You can try to argue that it is because the feature is new and something the people have to get used to, but you will be wrong. I have worked on many platforms and the old wysiwyg was such an integral piece of WP that made life easy for both the novice and advanced developers to work with. Now you have ruined it for both sides. Just take it as a very bad choice and go back to the drawing board. Otherwise, people will be looking for better alternatives.

Viewing 8 replies - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • 100% on point, thanx!

    Gutenberg is not a builder, TinyMCE never was WYSIWYG.

    And isn’t enough for you to disable Gutenberg and use the old editor? there are like a hundred different ways to do so now. Disable Gutenberg plugin comes to mind as the best right now for this task.

    Thread Starter tdcribb

    (@tdcribb)

    @ogalinski
    You are talking semantics. I am well aware what gutenberg is and if you read carefully my comments and understood my points, it is that the “block” approach is similar to a builder and if you want to go that route, it is better to use a page builder that works well. Gutenberg is just a terrible approach to creating the block content. Also, a point I was making is that it does not work well with builders.

    Regarding your comments about disabling gutenberg, is not addressing the issues I am raising with gutenberg being a core part of WordPress now. Adding additional plugins to disable something in the core of WP that most people do not like is not really a fix but a bandaid. Wouldn’t it be much better to solve problems at the route causes and frustrations?

    So, while you make valid points about what gutenberg is defined as, you don’t actually make any valid points to why this feature is actually good. I go back to the overwhelmingly negative response to this feature and that fact that it is not a step forward like the WP team intended it to be, in my opinion.

    • This reply was modified 5 years, 4 months ago by tdcribb.

    @tdcribb

    It’s not semantics; there is a very distinct set of features that separate a builder from Gutenberg; in the future it will be a builder, but right now it isn’t. As for not playing well with other builders, well, it plays great with Elementor.

    As for Gutenberg now in core, and this is strictly personal preference, as long as is not forced to be the only way to edit content, is ok by me. But like I said, this is strictly personal. I like this option specially for those who make a living out of WordPress, in a way that they *have* an option to keep their business as always.

    As for why Gutenberg is good, this is why: for me the old way to edit content was never comfortable; I believe that we got used to compose content by way of a mashup of the editor, shortcodes, plugins and some magic incantations to edit the content the way we wanted. I believe its easier with Gutenberg. And I’m talking 5000-8000 word, images and media posts, not the typical (no offense) 300 word all-text post.

    Then again, I will concede that there are many use cases that could be outside of what Gutenberg offers.

    Cheers

    Thread Starter tdcribb

    (@tdcribb)

    @ogalinski
    I appreciate your comments and thank you for elaborating on your thoughts. I think we disagree with some items regarding Gutenberg, but I can understand where you are coming from. Thanks.

    Thank you for your cogent analysis, @tdcribb. You are expressing a rational and common response to the Gutenberg mess.

    Unfortunately, I think your plea to “Please read these reviews and you can clearly see that no one actually likes this change” is falling on deaf ears.

    > there is a very distinct set of features that separate a builder from Gutenberg; in the future it will be a builder, but right now it isn’t.

    Is this really happening? Is Gutenberg destined to be a full-blown page builder? That’s exactly what we want to avoid at all costs! When working with corporate clients, maintaining consistency with layout and brand are paramount to the success of those sites, and the LAST thing we want to do is give site editors tools to go make their own content layouts on a whim. If the future of WordPress involves more fully resembling Wix or SquareSpace, and if WordPress cannot commit to indefinitely supporting the classic editor, that’s going to eliminate our ability to use WordPress with roughly 75% of our clients.

    Our second CMS of choice is Craft; this may need to replace WordPress for our builds going forward.

    @studio1337

    Craft is ok, but a) is not free (for professional use), and b) doesn’t have the ecosystem WordPress has.

    On support of classic editor, they have commited to support it until 2021, then well see what happens.

    Check Matt Mullenweg State of the Word at WCUS 2018 (is on YouTube), you’ll see what the future holds for WordPress.

Viewing 8 replies - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • The topic ‘Very Disappointing’ is closed to new replies.