The drop is always movingYou know that saying about standing on the shoulders of giants? Drupal is standing on a huge pile of midgetsAll content management systems suck, Drupal just happens to suck less.Popular open source software is more secure than unpopular open source software, because insecure software becomes unpopular fast. [That doesn't happen for proprietary software.]Drupal makes sandwiches happen.There is a module for that

What Drupal is not for?

Submitted by on Sat, 2005-12-24 01:36

Yesterday I decided to continue an old pet project of mine. I started a blog to tell all about it on which is like or whatever. This was before I ever heard of Drupal. Now, I am happy that all this happened so -- I left that blog untouched for 1.5 years. Do you think it's safe to live any web application 1.5 years untouced? No. Also, they offer tons of skins, free. Primitive skins, aye, but still.

Drupal is not for these scribble-something-on-the-wall sites. It's able to do it, just does not worth the bothering.

Commenting on this Story is closed.

Submitted by on Wed, 2006-01-11 14:03.

I agree that it's not safe to leave a application, wide open for 1.5 years. But I surely disagree that Drupal isn't suited for a type usage.

Why isn't it worth the bothering ? I think if you had used for the 1.5 years, you would have a different perspective. Care to give us reasons why it's not worth it ?

Submitted by nk on Thu, 2006-04-27 21:49.

What I meant is that for a simple blog it's much simpler to let someone else turn the wheels.

When you have fancier needs, it's first WordPress anyways, it's friendlier for blogging (but IMO inadequate for anything else). And when all these run out, then comes Drupal which is capable of all these, just -- as said -- does not worth the bothering, the learning of the system etc.