A good idea for typesetting not production articles

  • If I was typesetting on a Gutenberg press about 600 years ago this block crap would be a good idea. What a concept take modern day wordprocessing work flow and make it take 3 times as long to write the same article. Just to switch between code view and visual takes 2 extra clicks from the classic word processing view.

    This abortion had to have been invented by millennial gamers with a 3 second attention span that love the process of switching between 3 or 4 screens to do the job of one screen. I have no good words for programmers who take a 2 click process and make it a 4 click or more process to get the same job done. Life is short and spending it trying to write an article with Gutenberg is not my idea of fun.

    I will never get off the classic editor for this piece of crap. If it becomes impossible to use the classic editor I am gone off the internet. Who needs the migraine headache from composing a simple text article.

    Keep it as a plugin for the gear heads who love the broken reality mode of functionality.

    • This topic was modified 6 years, 3 months ago by flyfisher842. Reason: added more comments
Viewing 9 replies - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

  • What interested me in Gutenber is the new player that it offers, much more beautiful than the classic square. I also found it interesting to upload the files (it already works before uploading, I did not quite understand that). Friend, do you have any way to change the audio and video player without using Gutenberg?

    Tanks.

    Thread Starter flyfisher842

    (@flyfisher842)

    From looking at the review summary it is evident that you either loathe or love Gutenberg. Those of us who actually have to get production out or have clients to help pretty much don’t like the shattered reality view of gutenberg. I bet most of the 5 star are people under 25 years of age

    Andrew Nevins

    (@anevins)

    WCLDN 2018 Contributor | Volunteer support

    @flyfisher842, Let’s keep this on topic. We’ve seen personal comments can lead to arguments and reviews being derailed.

    Thread Starter flyfisher842

    (@flyfisher842)

    how about this. Why would anyone take a one process master screen like the classic editor and carve it up into 20 chunks of hard to find and hard to use gateways. UMMMM????? No concept of work process flow.

    A lot of the same problem in windows 10, office 365 and quicken prompts my reply.

    The classic editor in WordPress was one of the few remaining easy to use softwares. If Gutenberg does actually go in as core, my prediction is a large group of professional WP developers are going to lose client business and Matt will regret pushing Gutenbereg out so fast.

    Also for the record I have been developeing websites since 1999 when it was HTML3 and aol furnished the only html editor available so I do have some experience in using different editors over the years and the classic editor as modified with additional functions came close to true easy of word processor use for production posting.

    • This reply was modified 6 years, 3 months ago by flyfisher842.
    • This reply was modified 6 years, 3 months ago by flyfisher842. Reason: added comments
    • This reply was modified 6 years, 3 months ago by flyfisher842.
    Thread Starter flyfisher842

    (@flyfisher842)

    from reading some of the 1 star reviews most of the comments I saw related to the difficulty of using the editor interface which I would agree with. Far to chopped up into too many screens and controls in weird places scattered out into the editing area and in sort of a control panel on the right.

    In sales you learn not to offer the customer more than 2 choices because most people have trouble dealing with more than 2 or 3 choices at one time. I found the gutenberg control interface anything but intuitive which the classic editor is very intuitive designed similar to work processors which most of us are familar with. Maybe if the Gutenberg main control interface was not scattered out over the screen, it would be easier to understand. UMMM!!

    This is one the best comments i’ve read in the review section. I could not agree more that this will bring a huge mess for many clients and developers if it will be merged into he core.
    And one of the best arguments that you have given was that this was probably developed for millennials.
    I cant even imagine doing so many actions for a simple article, yet to work and code with it. Ive been developing with WP for over 8 years now and now this comes out? Please, leave it as a plugin. I dont want to face the incompability for every client we have

    @ItzCookie can’t you just install the classic editor plugin and call it a day if you don’t want Gutenberg when it comes out?

    I agree with having it as an optional plugin, but regardless of whether they do this or not, you can opt out & keep the classic editor now. I’ve done this for all the sites I manage while I evaluate if we want to use Gutenberg for future sites, seemed the most prudent course.

    Thread Starter flyfisher842

    (@flyfisher842)

    I spent 10 years of my work career making broke companies profitable. The one constant I found was they just could not avoid the desire to fix what was not broken just to make it look new and exciting. WordPress has been exceptionally successful since it started despite the many security holes that keep cropping up. It is right now better than ever. IMO adding this broken chopped up Gutenberg to the mix as core will be the biggest mistake Matt has made. Just IMHO.

    I also have done some testing of the same post done in classic and done in Gutenberg and classic is faster by a slight amount in all cases. This was only a 157kb file with 4 requests. Imagine a big page of 1 or 2 megs with all that WP— paragraph and other WP html comments in it. UMMM!

Viewing 9 replies - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • The topic ‘A good idea for typesetting not production articles’ is closed to new replies.