![]() ![]() Incidentally, those BWD stacks are still the very best available, eg Limelight, PopDrop, etc. Some of the Foundation projects used just the Topbar and Foundation Control stack and everyting else was BWD. I also created about 40 Foundation and Foundry 1 & 2 in both projcts and templates (all retired now) and they ended up being full of the very best free alternative stacks from BWD. ![]() The reality is that you end up using other developers stacks to replace the crude or basic stacks from the Framework. The worst offender was the Clearing Gallery and I am sure even Joe would agree on that now. In my experieneceof building at least 100+ sites in Foundation, Foundry 1 & 2, the included stacks aften fall short of being the stacks yo would want to use. You often end up with a compromise that you learn through experience, to regret. It is a flawed concept that is similar to a One Size Fits All hat or car that can drive on road, off-road and on water. That perception also includes a degree of comfort by buying from one developer, in the expectation that it will work, all the included stacks will work together, and become fully documented and keep pace with new developments. ![]() The concept that a Framework is a best solution, is IMHO reduandant and for Weavers, usually means a one stop purchase from their favourite developer on the expectation that they will be able to build anything. The real question is what stacks should I get to build web sites in 2023, if you are a new user, a seasoned expert or just someone wanting to explore what Stacks can do. With the proliferation of frameworks and stacks it is helpful to know if any frameworks can cover the majority of general Rapidweaver website requirements. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |