Picked up a license for MojoMotor http://mojomotor.com/ to see what
it’s about and so far I like it a lot. I think this is going to give
WebYep some very stiff competition, especially when you consider that
it can be easily upgraded to Expression Engine. Plus it’s made by
Ellis Lab and those Cats do nice work.
Todd
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
I’ve yet to test MojoMotor, so I’m not sure how much it will do.
One issue for us, apparently you can’t White label MojoMotor. Where you can brand and style WebYeb as your own product, or style it to fit the clients branding. This has proved useful.
David
On 4 Aug 2010, at 21:18, Todd email@hidden wrote:
Picked up a license for MojoMotor http://mojomotor.com/ to see what it’s about and so far I like it a lot. I think this is going to give WebYep some very stiff competition, especially when you consider that it can be easily upgraded to Expression Engine. Plus it’s made by Ellis Lab and those Cats do nice work.
Todd
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
On Aug 4, 2010, at 4:19 PM, David Owen wrote:
One issue for us, apparently you can’t White label MojoMotor. Where
you can brand and style WebYeb as your own product, or style it to
fit the clients branding. This has proved useful.
Perhaps it will at some point, but then it’s only been in the wild for
a few days. For me it’s not a deal-breaker. There’s a lot to like so
far and Ellis Lab is not one for lounging around so this has a good
chance of maturing nicely. Love havin’ options.
Todd
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Did you pick it up Todd?
It seemed to me like an online RapidWeaver and since there wasn’t a demo I wasn’t sure how it would fair.
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
I do wish there was a demo, but I’m not surprised given that they took away the “free” version of EE when they shipped 2.0 of that. I’m guessing it was too hard for them to control and many may have abused it.
It looks promising, and has a nice way about it where you “import” your templates into it, so you can even pull an existing site into it and use that as your starting point.
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
On Aug 5, 2010, at 2:41 AM, Dan J wrote:
Did you pick it up Todd?
It seemed to me like an online RapidWeaver and since there wasn’t a
demo I wasn’t sure how it would fair.
I did. I haven’t spent a lot of time with it yet but so far I’m
impressed. Despite the fact there’s no control panel (like WY) the UI
feels very polished and well put together, like a much scaled down
version of EE. Kind of a cross between the MODx Revolution and EE UI.
Waaaayy different from WY. Kind of like the difference between closing
the door of an Audi 6 Series compared to a Ford Taurus; a satisfying
sense of design and engineering.
You can easily add/delete and rearrange pages and it has a Layout
feature that gives you code access to edit the layout. It may be
lightweight but and at about the price of WY with more practical
features I think it’s going to win a lot of people over. Plus the
ability to import/transfer to EE is the cherry on top. Of course it
runs on a db, no flat-files. Has a simple and very nice installer too.
I’m diggin’ it. Big time.
Todd
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
The page editing features appear to be similar to CKE or TinyMCE. Is that a fair statement? How much limitation is there in the template format they are using, or in other words, how much of Freeway generated code will not be usable?
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
On Aug 5, 2010, at 10:50 AM, chuckamuck wrote:
The page editing features appear to be similar to CKE or TinyMCE. Is
that a fair statement? How much limitation is there in the template
format they are using, or in other words, how much of Freeway
generated code will not be usable?
Hi Chuck,
Yes, the editor is similar to the ones you mentioned though more
streamlined. As for how it would work with FW I can’t say as I haven’t
tried it.
And for those who may not know, Ellis Lab offers a 30-day refund so
while their “demo” process is not of the typical online variety at
least it gives you time to test it. I don’t particularly like the pay/
refund routine just to see if I like something but it is what it is.
Todd
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Yes, the editor is similar to the ones you mentioned though more
streamlined.
This in my opinion is why something like WebYep is more suitable to use to keep the HTML out of the hands of those updating web sites. Still, if the client wants, the client gets.
As for how it would work with FW I can’t say as I haven’t
tried it.
Although this is off topic section, would appreciate an eye being kept on the FW angle
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
On Aug 5, 2010, at 12:27 PM, chuckamuck wrote:
This in my opinion is why something like WebYep is more suitable to
use to keep the HTML out of the hands of those updating web sites.
Still, if the client wants, the client gets.
Yeah, I was considering that aspect too. An Admin has access to the
HTML via the Layout feature, an Editor can’t mess around with the
structure so that helps control things a little. Of course that
doesn’t mean the Admin won’t screw things up. On the other hand the
same potential problem exists with a more robust CMS too, an admin can
poke around with a template. Considering what’s offered feature-wise
compared to WY I think it’s a fair trade. In my experience if I tell a
client this area is a “no fly zone” they’re happy to stay away from
anything code. I’ve probably been fortunate in that regard.
Todd
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
You’ve trained them well. You are to be commended!
Walter
On Aug 5, 2010, at 3:06 PM, Todd wrote:
In my experience if I tell a client this area is a “no fly zone”
they’re happy to stay away from anything code. I’ve probably been
fortunate in that regard.
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
On Aug 5, 2010, at 2:21 PM, Walter Lee Davis wrote:
You’ve trained them well. You are to be commended!
[Laughs] Yeah, well, it’s not they’re trained so much as they’re
simply afraid of code. Either way works, eh?
Todd
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
I think it looks pretty good - according to the demo video - you can import your own site.
Has anyone tried integrating a full blown Freeway site into this?
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
On Aug 5, 2010, at 12:27 PM, chuckamuck wrote:
Although this is off topic section, would appreciate an eye being
kept on the FW angle
OK, I did a quick test with a basic layout and it seems to work fine
with FW because all you’re doing is importing (FW generated) html
files. Of course you need to add the appropriate MM tags before
importing but it’s pretty much as the video tut shows <http://mojomotor.com/blog/entry/importing_a_site_into_mojomotor/
.
The one thing to be aware of is, once imported, it’s possible for the
admin to edit the html files independent of FW via the MM Layout
editor so it’s possible to overwrite any changes the admin may have
made, unless there’s a way to disable the MM Layout function. In any
case, this is easily preventable if you have the ability to import/
open html files. From what I’ve seen so far MM and FW will work but
there are caveats.
Also, the WYSIWYG editor is extremely customizable. It’s in one of the
video tuts.
Todd
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Hey guys, I know this is a bit late, but I’ve put up a demo so you can give MojoMotor a try before purchasing a license. You can see it at over at The Motorist.
Hopefully someone will find this useful! 
Jesse
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Thanks for doing this Jesse. MM is really quite nice and makes other
in-page CMSs look rather clunky.
Todd
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
I know this forum is over a year old, but I’m just seeing this. I have a question. I noticed that Todd did a test with a basic layout, and he said that MojoMotor works just fine with Freeway-generated HTML files. The question is this: Is it possible to add the appropriate MM tags (such as Page Regions, Page Titles, etc.) in a series of HTML Markup boxes in the Freeway-generated file, and have MM recognize this? If this is possible, this could save on the time of having to import the file into MM, and then insert the MM tags later…
Has anyone actually done that? I am still contemplating using MM as an add-on for current & prospective clients. Any feedback would be GREATLY appreciated.
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
I noticed that Todd did a test with a basic layout, and he said that MojoMotor works just fine with Freeway-generated HTML files. The question is this: Is it possible to add the appropriate MM tags (such as Page Regions, Page Titles, etc.) in a series of HTML Markup boxes in the Freeway-generated file, and have MM recognize this?
I don’t see any reason why this wouldn’t work.
Todd
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Okay, then. If this works, is MM required to have all the tags associated with it within the Freeway generated layout for MM to recognize it? I think I saw like over a dozen different tags in MM that could be placed in there. Do all of them have to be placed in a FW-generated template for MM to recognize it, or just a few of them?
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Okay, then. If this works, is MM required to have all the tags associated with it within the Freeway generated layout for MM to recognize it? I think I saw like over a dozen different tags in MM that could be placed in there. Do all of them have to be placed in a FW-generated template for MM to recognize it, or just a few of them?
You can use only the tags you need to achieve the desired result. They don’t all have to go in there.
Todd
offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options