 |
AnimeBlogger.net Forums
Anime/Manga Blogging Forums
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
akurashy
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 37
Location: Melon bread factory!
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:52 pm Post subject: Movable Type now free |
 |
|
Just to let everybody know, movable type is now open sources under a MIT license.
They also started a plug-ins repository and you'll find interesting plugins like akistmet, polls, forums and so on 
I really like MT ^^ makes wordpress looks useless in some parts[/url]
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Erinyes
Joined: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 123
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 4:17 pm Post subject: Re: Movable Type now free |
|
|
| Like what? Sorry to lazy to load it in a testing environment ATM. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
akurashy
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 37
Location: Melon bread factory!
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
silly, now I got lazy to say the pros and cons...
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erinyes
Joined: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 123
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| akurashy wrote: | | silly, now I got lazy to say the pros and cons... |
I'll try to name one I know then.
Pro Wp: Easy to install
Con Mt: Tricky install... actually never got completing a install, I think it was all the cgi madness.
I'm a little confused as to why it would require the privileges of a cgi script. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
akurashy
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 37
Location: Melon bread factory!
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 7:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Erinyes wrote: |
I'm a little confused as to why it would require the privileges of a cgi script. |
MT is written under Perl and of course and CGI excutes whatever the heck the software wants.
It's tricky, once you set it up it's probably easy and you can just lay down in bed sleeping peacefully.
MT builds static files meaning that it won't raise CPU like wordpress does (because everything is dynamic) meaning that even with wp-cache and supercache it just can't beat the way MT does it.
MT lets you set up multiple blogs using different paths and urls and the core stays in the same folder.
Well, if you are installing it in a localhost, be sure to have perl installed. and if you are using a shared hosting, then put everything in cgi-bin folder except the folder mt-static (upload it in your root folder or somewhere public)
then all that's left is http://mysite.com/cgi-bin/mt.cgi which will automatically activate the installer.
Once installed you probably can check it out(the features and stuff), it's not bad. probably worth it if all you do is actualy blogging (with images and zips, or just text)
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erinyes
Joined: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 123
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 5:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| akurashy wrote: | MT is written under Perl and of course and CGI excutes whatever the heck the software wants.
It's tricky, once you set it up it's probably easy and you can just lay down in bed sleeping peacefully.
MT builds static files meaning that it won't raise CPU like wordpress does (because everything is dynamic) meaning that even with wp-cache and supercache it just can't beat the way MT does it. |
No you misunderstood, I know what it's doing. But I'm questioning why of all things it must do it in perl? I don't know a scripting language out there that wouldn't allow you to create folders and files so the server can serve them with no hassle. I researched a little and I suppose it was really just a matter of timing. MT came to be sometime around 2000 - 2001 so I suppose perl was pretty hot back then.
Thanks for the info though, I'll try to set it up and see what it's got. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
akurashy
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 37
Location: Melon bread factory!
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 6:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
That's a good question which of course I must threaten someone to answer because I wouldn't know why they chose Perl. I investigated a bit and it's probably because Perl have been on the play for a long time so they didn't know PHP or other language that would come as good as perl (at that time)
PHP was probably premature, (i don't know why they didn't think of python, then again they still would be using cgi to execute it, and ruby wasn't even popular)
well, good luck checking it out, (remember to make the .cgis executable) off i go to crash my partition -_-
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Maestro4k
Site Admin
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
Posts: 1598
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 12:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| akurashy wrote: | | MT is written under Perl and of course and CGI excutes whatever the heck the software wants. |
So do PHP scripts.
| akurashy wrote: | | It's tricky, once you set it up it's probably easy and you can just lay down in bed sleeping peacefully. |
Hardly, no software's invulnerable to exploits.
| akurashy wrote: | | MT builds static files meaning that it won't raise CPU like wordpress does (because everything is dynamic) meaning that even with wp-cache and supercache it just can't beat the way MT does it. |
You don't seem to understand how the wp-super-cache portion works. It builds static files and serves static files entirely when a page that's in the super-cache is served, no dynamic call at all for that part. Also MT's semi-static, it uses a lot of resources building those static files when you make changes, so overall... WP might use less CPU than MT, especially for a large site.
| akurashy wrote: | | MT lets you set up multiple blogs using different paths and urls and the core stays in the same folder. |
So does Wordpress, look at WPMU.
| akurashy wrote: | | Once installed you probably can check it out(the features and stuff), it's not bad. probably worth it if all you do is actualy blogging (with images and zips, or just text) |
MT decided to open source too late and let Wordpress gain too much traction, I'm afraid it's doomed to remain a niche piece of blogging software now. 
| akurashy wrote: | | That's a good question which of course I must threaten someone to answer because I wouldn't know why they chose Perl. I investigated a bit and it's probably because Perl have been on the play for a long time so they didn't know PHP or other language that would come as good as perl (at that time) |
Or they simply preferred Perl, it could be that as well.
| akurashy wrote: | | PHP was probably premature, (i don't know why they didn't think of python, then again they still would be using cgi to execute it, and ruby wasn't even popular) |
Python's still not that widely used for web apps, PHP has taken over, Perl used to be the top scripting language used for web apps prior to PHP coming along. And most scripting languages have been premature in many ways, that's why they change so much between major revisions. Popularity has a tendency to discover all the nasty bugs in your language for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
akurashy
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 37
Location: Melon bread factory!
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 8:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Hardly, no software's invulnerable to exploits. |
Duh?
| Quote: | You don't seem to understand how the wp-super-cache portion works. It builds static files and serves static files entirely when a page that's in the super-cache is served, no dynamic call at all for that part. Also MT's semi-static, it uses a lot of resources building those static files when you make changes, so overall... WP might use less CPU than MT, especially for a large site.
|
Uhh, WP using less CPU than MT is debatable to the point that MT only uses the CPU when users are commenting and using the Search feature. After that pretty much all the files are static.
I use wp cache in other blog and of course I know how it works.
you do know that WP still reaches high cpu even when both wp-cache or wp-super cache are activated (it's been happening quite a lot in some forums i go to) so in terms of longrun MT might be slightly better.
| Quote: | | So does Wordpress, look at WPMU. |
I know about WPMU, sadly I haven't had the time to use it myself
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiamat's Reviews
Joined: 21 May 2007
Posts: 148
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The recent 2.5 is the death knell for WP i think. They're at the cross roads, either they listen to the disgruntled users (and there's a hell of a lot of them) and in the next release fix things, or they don't and more people will leave.
If they ignore the end user, this would be a good chance for MT to gain some ground on WP and claim some users. However they're going to be upagainst Microsofts new blogging platform, aswell as a few other open source ones that are starting to crop up.
Edit: WPMU is gawd awful. It has all the crap of WP and none of the good stuff. The theory behind it is good, and for people who don';t really care about customising then it's a good place to start. But if you want to make your blog more your own, then it's a nightmare, to restrictive.
_________________
Tiamat's Anime and Manga Reviews |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Maestro4k
Site Admin
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
Posts: 1598
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| akurashy wrote: | Uhh, WP using less CPU than MT is debatable to the point that MT only uses the CPU when users are commenting and using the Search feature. After that pretty much all the files are static.
I use wp cache in other blog and of course I know how it works. |
I didn't say wp-cache, I said wp-super-cache.  Super cached pages work the same way, only uses CPU when people comment or search, or it's the first hit since the super cached page expired or the first hit to the page at all. The super cache lasts a lot longer too, and all the most popular pages end up in it quickly. Basically it builds an entirely static cache but only for the pages actually requested, not for the entire site. And I can confirm that it really does do it entirely static, pages are served up as the apache user instead of the user that owns the files. All dynamic pages are served as the user who owns them.
| akurashy wrote: | | you do know that WP still reaches high cpu even when both wp-cache or wp-super cache are activated (it's been happening quite a lot in some forums i go to) so in terms of longrun MT might be slightly better. |
It doesn't for us at least, maybe there are some bugs in the wp-cache part that the author of wp-super-cache has fixed. We see significant reduction in CPU usage, and it also greatly reduces database accesses as well. (For blogs that have lots of plugins I've seen database accesses drop by up to 75%, that makes a big difference alone.)
That said, WP 2.5 seems to use more CPU for any dynamic pages, even when they're served from the wp-cache portion. It's like they're making it more inefficient as they go along. *sigh*
| akurashy wrote: | | I know about WPMU, sadly I haven't had the time to use it myself |
I'm going to be testing it out before long for some other projects. It's a bit of a pain having to have the wildcard DNS and hosting setup, kinda locks you into one IP per WPMU instance.
| Tiamat's Reviews wrote: | | The recent 2.5 is the death knell for WP i think. They're at the cross roads, either they listen to the disgruntled users (and there's a hell of a lot of them) and in the next release fix things, or they don't and more people will leave. |
Some of the more common complaints aren't serious enough that it'll run people off when it comes down to it. People will grumble and complain loudly but they'll stick with it because the pain of whatever they dislike is less than the pain of switching to another blogging software. There are some changes that are more significant and could very well run people off though, I'm not entirely sure how much of the complaints fall into each category at the moment.
I think a bigger issue is their insanely unrealistic and rushed version roadmap. 2.5 came out 3/29, 2.6 is due out 8/7. That's only about 4 months! They seem to be in a horrible rush to get to new major releases and it seems like maintenance releases are suffering. The only apparent reason 2.5.1 came out so quickly is because of that horrific security hole it patched, otherwise we'd probably be still waiting on it. 2.5.2's not got any set release date, is only 11% completed, and has already patched one major bug that causes the feed files to show a blank feed when called directly (see this ticket). And... I'm seeing that same bug occur on blogs that are installed into the root directory as well but I don't see any tickets about it. It's a different bug apparently as the patch for the other one doesn't fix it.  And of the remaining 111 (!!) tickets for 2.5.2 there's one that causes HTML formatted posts to not display (see here). That's an insanely serious bug because the people most likely to run into it are the ones most likely to be doing their own HTML formatting in the first place.
So I think if Wordpress dies off in popularity it's going to be because the devs have lost touch with the reality of the project, trying to meet some idealistic roadmap instead of trying to make a good product. I have no idea what happened there, they used to be really good about fixing major bugs in a timely fashion. 
| Tiamat's Reviews wrote: | | If they ignore the end user, this would be a good chance for MT to gain some ground on WP and claim some users. However they're going to be upagainst Microsofts new blogging platform, aswell as a few other open source ones that are starting to crop up. |
I think MT would have a decent chance, but they really need to aggressively target WP users to make it happen. They should spend some time making it super easy to import an existing Wordpress blog into MT and keep all the links and everything working properly. That'd tempt more people to try it out. I don't think Microsoft will really be a threat, they seem to be better at bungling stuff here lately. They have a nasty tendency to try to make everything very Windows/Internet Explorer centric and that hurts them. If Google started paying attention to Blogger again they'd be a serious threat to Wordpress, but they seem to be content to let Blogger just stay the same.
| Tiamat's Reviews wrote: | | Edit: WPMU is gawd awful. It has all the crap of WP and none of the good stuff. The theory behind it is good, and for people who don';t really care about customising then it's a good place to start. But if you want to make your blog more your own, then it's a nightmare, to restrictive. |
That's the whole idea of it actually, it's not meant for single site installs at all, and it's not meant to be as user-customizable as stand-alone Wordpress. For what it's meant for it's not too bad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
akurashy
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 37
Location: Melon bread factory!
|
| Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Another fact is that well, WordPress needs wp-super-cache in order to survive in the game, at least for big sites.
Meh, I haven't done much research after Typo/Serependity (blog softwares), been doing other things. About blogger... I don't know... I always liked typepad (hosted services) although it's paying but oh well.
I think Blogger eventually will pick up (once) again. I just wonder what do they have up their sleeve...
The only thing I hate about MT is that their documentation is just not easy to navigate with, and becomes a hassle sometimes. 4.1 added the option to only import from wordpress... I don't know what the hell happened to the other blog softwares  , it's either wordpress or MT content  (not really surprising)
Ah well, Wordpress has stayed on the top for quite a while, everything that goes up needs to go down. I wouldn't be shocked if it suddenly stopped losing the share to other blog software competitors.
P.S I searched about "cache" to see if there was an ongoing request to feature a cache system to run 'natively' in wordpress instead of using user-contributed plugins. Then again running accross http://trac.wordpress.org/search?ticket=on&changeset=on&wiki=on&q=cache&noquickjump=1&page=1 about 50+ pages is kinda insane D:
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Page created in 0.076 seconds with 20 SQL queries |
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
