I am usual software developer (not Usability specialist); so it is interesting for me to know opinion of usability professionals about the following question.
I would like to know: how often usability specialists recommend using feature AutoComplete (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autocomplete) in modern GUIs? Has presence of the AutoComplete in GUI become a 'standard' to the moment?
This depends a lot on the overall design. Autocomplete increases usability only in some cases, in other it may be inappropriate or distracting. The only way to know in your particular case is to conduct usability testing.
I've implemented autocomplete on several different projects with user base ranging from 200 to 500 and have collected feedback on this feature. From my experience, users love it as long as it's fast.
My favorite control to do autocomplete is jQuery's: http://docs.jquery.com/Plugins/autocomplete
It doesn't start filtering until shortly after the user is done typing. This is important because you don't want to flood the server w/ too many ajax requests.
With Microsoft SharePoint 2007 I replaced the out-of-the-box search with a live search that does autocomplete. This is probably the most used feature in the site
I created a few "portlets" with large amounts of grid data and I use a built in quick find that filters the data for the user. These are also used quite a bit
One other thing to mention is I'm not too certain how 508 compliant it is so you may want to provide an alternative so the page w/ autocomplete can fail gracefully without sacraficing the user experience
Look at discussion on http://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=79272&type=member&item=49087267&qid=3ed96f17-25c4-4cac-b92d-69c37925f5bc&goback=%2Egna_79272; it is devoted to the Auto-Complete feature too. Some exampkles and ideas were written there.
Related
Hopefully this is an acceptable subjective question. We are interested in your specific and recent experiences.
For years, we used the “hidden field” trick to confuse spambots into not being able to deliver spam via an online form. In particular, this solution from Nfriendly worked perfectly.
Over time, though, spambots got smarter, and it no longer stopped much. We removed the previous solution during a site redesign because it didn’t work well with the new setup. Spam continued, albeit not at a noticeably higher rate.
We would like a new solution that blocks at least most spam without having to resort to a captcha that could discourage user interaction.
There are lots of good posts on StackOverflow about various methods to try and stop, or at least reduce, spam via an online form without using a captcha, but most of them are rather old and tend to be discussing techniques that probably also have been defeated by now like the hidden field solution.
In your recent experience, have basic math problems in lieu of a captcha been defeated already? Has it discouraged user interaction? How about this clever idea of displaying a photo of Mario on a video game site and asking the user to identify him? In your experience, are spambots smart enough to defeat that method?
It seems like the most recent ideas to avoid a captcha are trying to detect human-like activity, but these may add quite a bit of overhead.
Before attempting to implement one of the most recent ideas or try to roll our own, some community feedback would be helpful.
Based on your recent experience, what do you think is the current, best, lightweight solution for reducing spam submitted via an online form without using a captcha? Why? Thank you.
CAPTCHAs now require increasing amounts of third party data to be loaded. Sometimes they require increasing amounts of click-n-wait interaction. The only consolation has been the thought that we're providing useful evaluation for a distant process.
The depressing result of this is that the old 'evaluate a written puzzle' approach is now, comparatively, less annoying! So choosing a topic appropriate to your audience, all you need to do is refresh your question database occasionally to balance the spam against the complaints.
Unless of course you already have a dataset that could do with some crowd-evaluation.
Which is better for web content management purposed only?
The website requirements include a user discussion forum and a poll survey with a good search facility and also needs a good SEO tool. The site should also load faster and should be easy to edit contents.
I can't speak to Jahia, but dotCMS can do everything you're asking for. Below are some links that should help you self evaluate dotCMS. I also would point out that dotCMS is more of a platform (makes a great user experience platform UXP) than an off-the-shelf solution and because of this your requirements might take a little work to setup and get running. With that being said, your finished product should meet your exact needs.
Site Search (uses ElasticSearch)
http://dotcms.com/docs/latest/SiteSearch
Performance Report
http://dotcms.com/aw/performance-report
I hope this helps.
Jahia should be able to handle these request. I am the opposite if Fish and have experience with jahia. Jahia does have a forum and poll component's both available as open source so you can modify the code when you require to.
What I like about jahia (among many other things) is that editing content is straight forward and very easy to for non technical persons. ofcourse it has all the permissions in place for all content so you can set it up in such a way that you don't have to be afraid that the non technical persons will mess-up a website.
Performance of Jahia, even without fancy caching proxies is very good and it can run on low resource VM's, just if you want to start small. I am using them on small Linode machines without any issues
I have not worked with Dotcms, but basic forums, polls, search, and SEO are all freely available as Jahia modules. The forums are certainly not as good as a standalone like Vanilla, but they are simple to add and administrate. Search is good and requires little configuration, and anything more than basic SEO is going to be custom work.
I am looking to make a small website that will be used regularly by only 80 odd people. It would contain a home page with a few widget like parts (calendar, upcoming events, chat, news). It might have a forum, but that would be low key. It would also (if it is possible) have a link to google groups mail. I would also liketo include a jainrain style openid/google account login for the site as well as local login. The site would be in part multilingual, if only the back end in english and the front another language.
Now to the "please dont shoot me" part. I am not looking for a specific solution (drupal, plone, wordpress) - well not as much as a general direction. Hopefully this will be of use to others in the same situation in the future.
I know python (as well as other non web orientated languages) and have past experience with two several month projects using web2py. I have yet to use a CMS, but have installed and played around with wordpress and plone over the last couple of days.
To the question. Is a CMS the right choice for something of this style. From what i have seen of them i really like the bits that are done for you out of the box, and i can tolerate the learning curve - but wordpress for example seems a bit to article/post orientated, and CMS's look to be aimed to provide the average non-coding admin the ability to change the site. Which is not needed here. I have done quite a bit of googling and comparison shopping of the various CMS's out there, and get that you can use it for static pages also. But should i be looking in an entirely different direction altogether?
I imagine that a framework like django or web2py are beyond overkill (and would take way too long for the effort i want to invest). And that anything can be done with wordpress etc given enough effort. But is something of this size with these features suited for a CMS, or should i be looking to do manually or otherwise?
I get the impression that this is not the type of question that is liked here - if so at least writing it helped clarify the problem for me a bit.
Thanks - and don't shoot!
I understand your website will be very small, but never say "never". You should plan with taking into account the possibility that your site will get bigger, even if you and your clients are sure that the site will not get bigger. In other words: it's better to have a solution which works for your small site even if it will increase than having a solution which will not support larger traffic.
Also, there is absolutely no point in reinventing the wheel. It's better to use a CMS (especially because you can get pretty nice CMSs for free), because they already have nice features and their new versions will be even better.
"Thanks - and don't shoot!"
You're welcome... BANG :D
I'm searching for a shopping cart or web store framework that supports multiple vendors.
There are many, many shopping cart frameworks out there: that page lists couple of hundred. In spite of the comparisons on that page, supporting multiple vendors isn't a comparison item, probably because it's a rare requirement. Separate to that page I have evaluated a few of what appear to be the top frameworks, and none that I evaluated supported this feature. Which carts would you recommend?
Commercial is okay, although I would prefer open source.
Platform (Windows, Linux, ASP.Net, PHP, Ruby... Minix, Fortran... :)) doesn't matter.
A system
where I manually add vendors who request it (instead of them freely
being able to sign up) is also okay, if there's a store where that's
possible but freely joining up isn't built in yet.
Rationale: I'd like to create an app-store like website. "App store" is a close analogy: it won't sell apps, but it will sell digital goods and I'd like anyone to be able to sell their item on the store. It's this second requirement, multiple vendors selling through the store, that I'm finding hard to satisfy.
I've used multiple shopping cart frameworks (a lot of them broken), and my favorite (which just so happens to support multiple vendors) is PrestaShop. It's free, open source, and suppports all that you asked for. Is this the framework you were looking for?
-JXP
The Wikipedia page you cited lists multiple vendor support as a column in Other Features, along with features that are pertinent to your search.
This question otherwise requires domain knowledge and likely requires multiple answers. The best I can do is offer the bounded set of software that competes directly within this space, at least according to Wikipedia.
The easiest solution for achieving your stated goal of allowing multiple people to sell on your site while exercising fine-grained control of who can and cannot do so is perhaps using WPMU's MarketPress in tandem with BuddyPress or WordPress Multisite. I'm not a die-hard fan of WordPress, per se, but that might be an expedient way for you to get to a minimal viable product and to validate your idea before shelling out the time and/or cash to custom build it from the ground up, and/or labor ad nauseam with tweaking an existing framework. MarketPress is a good plug-in that'll give you many of the features of a full-fledged e-commerce framework... BuddyPress, of course, will allow you to set up individual vendor's with their own sites under your brand. The two work together. More on MarketPress at:
http://premium.wpmudev.org/project/e-commerce/installation/
Another alternative is Jimdo's PagePartners. I haven't used it, but it looks intriguing. I like their design sensibilities, and their stated business ethos. This might be a viable option, too. The caveat being: it's not white label. More info about Jimdo's PagePartners here:
http://www.jimdo.com/pagepartner/faq/
Finally, another interesting CMS to explore is SetSeed. I think it'll allow you to launch multiple sites for each vendor via a central hub you control, and will allow you to maintain your branding within each. How, the,n any sort of renumeration would flow back to you for setting up an individual vendor's store would be up to you to figure out... This is a fairly new CMS and it looks like it's evolving smartly and rapidly. If you require some customization of it, to approach more specifically what you ask for, now might be a good time to reach out to the developer...but you might be able to think of an effective way to adapt it for your use right out of the box.
http://setseed.com/multi-site-cms/setseed-hub/
Unfortunately, none of the above is open-source--but, again, the ease by which you could get to a functional site approximating your idea may off-set that drawback. Jimdo is an open-source contributor, however. So, maybe even an e-mail to them might be a fruitful dialogue to begin. If anything, check out each of the above, and it may influence how you search for other solutions, and will at least provide some models in your own thinking or with other developers. The shopping cart is an integrated feature, I believe, in all of the above cases. With regard to giving your vendors the capacity to deliver digital goods (e-books, mp3s, etc.), check out Fetchapp.com. Very cool app. Very easy to set-up...could probably be rolled into one of the above frameworks. The frameworks would handle the issue of individual vendor profiles and/or sub-domains.
Increasingly, I have noticed the number of Content Management Systems in use. I have some familiarity with SiteCore. I have read some literature on Umbraco. I only just got wind of Orchard the other day. I have only heard positive feedback about EPiServer. I am soon to move into a role that uses it.
Do these differ vastly in features and price? What has led you to choose one (or several) over the others?
EDIT
I did a brief review of so-called free CMSs here: On Free Microsoft Compatible Content Management Systems
Reasons I ditched Orchard when developing a 50k page website:
The Orchard CMS import tool is simply too slow. It would only accept
small batches at a time. Initially, it took eight minutes to import
1000 records. So, working on that principle I expected that it could
take seven hours to import all the records. Unfortunately, I started
to receive performance issues as more records were inserted into the
database. I even started to reduce the batch size, which helped only
temporarily in the early stages. (See Saying no to Orchard)
I can only comment mainly on Sitecore and a bit on Umbraco from my knowledge of others using it:
Sitecore is an enterprise level web CMS with an "enterprise price tag." It's very extensible, has a lot of developer/community support, and is very developer friendly. The structure of content is based on a tree of nodes with parent-children relationships. Sitecore is well known in the WCM community as a leader in content management and is rated very well by companies sch as Forrester Research, etc.
Based on my previous research and conversations with friends, Umbraco is very similar to Sitecore. It has a lower price compared to Sitecore but its not a complete rip off. Umbraco is also built on ASP.NET like Sitecore.
Here's a three-part series on Sitecore vs. Umbraco from a developer.
Of the ones you mention above, I have only used Umbraco and Sitecore to build with and am certified in both. I like the way they allow me to build systems that really work well for my customers. They both have a feel that they simply give you building blocks to create your masterpiece instead of "modules" of functionality plugged in that give you a blog, forum, etc. They make it really easy to share content throughout the site and create really nice admin experiences.
Umbraco's community is really great. They both struggle a little on the documentation side IMO, but Umbraco's videos really help and the community is quick to help. Also, if you're talking cost then its free (Umbraco) vs. quite expensive (Sitecore).
But the reality is that each developer has their own taste and the style of CMS they like to work with. Ultimately, its the team that has to build the site that really matters most when it comes to how each CMS performs for the end user.
In addition to the links above, here are a couple blog posts that may help you get a feel for the different systems:
Orchard & Umbraco - Introduction (part 1 of 4) - Aaron Powell
Sitecore vs. Umbraco Terminology
Good luck!
I mostly work with EPiServer and Sitecore, and I can tell you the difference in short:
Sitecore has broader architecture and more powerfull UI. CMS is deeply configurable and highly extensible, it has clever publishing and caching system, powerful search and page editor. But it doesn't provide much out of box and UI is pretty old, slow and hard to learn. So this will be a long journey until you understand it good and make a good support of all its features for editors.
EPiServer is easy, friendly to users and developers. It provides an essential bunch of features out of box, has easy UI and page editor, good drag-and-drop experience, easy personalization. It is code-first, distributed with NuGet, provides dependency injection for its services, out of box MVC support. But it's not so extensible and configurable, has pure search (without expensive EPiFind module) and generally lower-featured comparing to Sitecore. So it's good for small/middle websites, but can be an obstacle in complex solutions.
Both have similar tree-item concept, rich documentation, pure public module system and hard UI customization. Both expensive and not open source.
As I know, Umbraco is pretty similar to EPiServer and Sitecore, but free and open source. Of course you get less features, more bugs, not much docs and no free support.
Orchard is really different comparing to other three CMS. It is module-based like Wordpress: you use standard or public modules and themes, instead of writing the whole website from scratch. You create your own themes and modules to customize the website and CMS. So entire CMS is highly extensible and provides a lot of free community modules. But in the same time you lose control and learning curve is much longer. Orchard is free and open-source, entirely MVC-based, UI and API are well done, but it can be hard for both developers and editors to understand it.
Wordpress vs Episerver:
http://tedgustaf.com/blog/2011/2/comparison-of-episerver-and-wordpress/
OK so the guy who wrote that is an Episerver consultant but it's interesting and balanced.
All the different web content management systems have different strengths. So which one is best for you depends a lot on what kind of sites you create, what kind of budget you have and what you think matters the most in a CMS.
For example, Orchard and SiteCore are VERY different systems.
I'm a bit biased as I work there, but I believe that Webnodes CMS have several important advantages over the systems you mention.
Keywords: Relations between content, actual classes for the different content types, custom LINQ provider for all data access, expose all content as an OData endpoint etc.
Microsoft used our CMS to demonstrate OData at Mix11. Video from Mix 11