Comment Information

Straus
Jun 8, 2008
8:10pm

Absolutely...

Infact, I'm quite convinced the only reason they went with five Z's compared to Joomla's 4 J's is because it'd leave an Iron Cross in the middle of the logo. It's an utter shambles and a terrible advertisement for the kind of service offered by the so called brand consultancy firm.

I'd post this on the Ziknuke website, but their outgoing mail has been broken since the rebrand so I can't recover my password, register a new user or use the contact form on the site to let them know about it... Utter shambles.

Comment Information

david
Jun 8, 2008
8:21pm

That's what the name reminds me of! Caligula!

I really don't think they're going to get the same kind of influx of participation that Joomla did when they forked off of Mambo. In fact, they'll (the Z people) will probably fall flat on their face for this.

Seriously, what were they thinking?

Comment Information

Herr Voß
Jun 9, 2008
4:34am

What do you care what a project is called, if it does what you want? IMHO it's at least an okay name and a not too ugly logo. Actually I like both. And I don't see a problem if the logo looks a bit like Joomla, Ubuntu, Mercedes and so on.

We get rid of the *nuke image and we can't please everybody with a new name. Sorry that you are one of the displeased people. Case of bad luck.

Comment Information

Drak
Jun 9, 2008
5:20am

While walking down the road last year in Nepal, I saw a rather well established Bank with the same logo as Joomla. The bank started long before Joomla existed, back when it was Mambo. The Zikula logo is not based on Joomla as even a reference point. The logo and name was designed by a very reputable company who have been responsible for many popular brand names. However, this particular interlinking style is quite a popular concept and if you look around you'll see lot and lots of designed based around interlinking glifs.

Comment Information

david
Jun 9, 2008
12:19pm

I'll agree that there are a commonalities among logos in the world. But, seriously, two open source content management system logos that just happen to look a lot alike? Coincidence? I don't think so. Theft? Perhaps, in a way.

However, I still feel that it's stupid name and an ugly logo and my respect for PostNuke has done down the proverbial toilet.

And they should get their money back and people should think twice about using Strategic Name Development.

Comment Information

Straus
Jun 9, 2008
8:21pm

What do you care what a project is called, if it does what you want?

People care, for all kinds of reasons, about the brands they use. Think about it, if no-one cared then why even bother with the name change in the first place? The garbage blurb on the Strategic Name Development site says enough. If nothing else, it's an opinion, we're perfectly entitled to it.

And I don't see a problem if the logo looks a bit like Joomla, Ubuntu, Mercedes and so on.

Except it doesn't particularly look like the Mercedes or Ubuntu logos, aside from a vague similarity. It does, however, look extremely similar to the Joomla logo, far too similar for it to be a coincidence. I mean seriously, first letter of the name, circular pattern, same colours in the exact same order... adding an extra repetition of the letter in an extra colour isn't a "bit like Joomla", it's a blatant rip off. I'm still convinced the only reason the fifth letter was added was to stop the logo featuring an Iron Cross in the center.

I couldn't have cared less about what the new name was tbh, I expected it to grate on my nerves through unfamiliarity. I wasn't even aware of what the Joomla logo looked like until someone mentioned the similarity and I looked it up. Personally, I'd be embarrassed to admit involvement if it were anything to do with me.

But hey, congratulations on the launch and step forward, at the end of the day I'm still a dedicated user of the product (I think I'll just keep calling it Postnuke though).

Comment Information

david
Jun 9, 2008
8:35pm

What do you care what a project is called, if it does what you want?

Missed that comment this morning.

But really, I don't care. I don't use PostNuke (I did use it a while ago - back when 0.72 was just out) so what happens there doesn't really bother me personally.

But I do care about open source projects and I fell that changing the name - especially to that (whatever it is... Zikula? Zigula? I'm not looking, just trying to remember) isn't a good move.

And was the PostNuke community consulted on this change? Did the People In Charge come to them and give them naming options?

Comment Information

Herr Voß
Jun 10, 2008
2:47am

1. We had to change the name to get rid of the PHPNuke legacy. As long as the new name doesn't insult anybody and doesn't have a reference to PHPNuke it's a better name.

2. No we were sadly not able to consult the community. Nexto the *Nuke-legacy there was another strong reason for the name change: The German community is on of the most active in Postnuke and it suffered from the fact that somebody completely unrelated held the domain and the trademark. The same applied for some smaller communities.

Imagine now a public naming process: As soon as we ask for suggestions these will be taken by domain grabbers. We were forced by circumstance into a secret process - not even all core developers were involvd in the process.

We now have the trademark and most major national domains to be given by the Foundation to the national communities. For the first time in our history we have all the rights in the hands of the community.

Do you have a better solution?

And BTW: I also wasn't asked if "PHP" or "Apache" was a good name, if I like the name "Linux" or if I have a better ideas than "OpenOffice". Developers name their project - not communities.

3. AFAIK all developers - core- and module developers - are happy with the change. And that is most important. These are the people who actively contribute to the project. And IMHO the name cannot be so awful if those most involved are happy with it.

Comment Information

david
Jun 10, 2008
1:17pm

For the first time in our history we have all the rights in the hands of the community.

For that I applaud you. I'm all for putting the community back into open source.

In fact, we actually agree on a lot of things. I do understand the move away from the *nuke legacy. (Although PostNuke always seemed to be the most secure *nuke.) I'm glad you (community/association) now control the name. And I'm glad that as a community you can go forward with the development of the project.

I just don't like the name.

What I would have done differently is have those Strategic Name People give four name/logo options and simply have the community do a blind poll. That way you could bring the community into one of the largest non-coding decisions that will be made for the project. (And if there were only four, you could have someone spend the $40-$80 to register the names and transfer the ownership to a developer.)

I don't want PostNuke to fail. And from the sound of it, it'll keep on going.

Good Luck.

Comment Information

Bad_Dude
Jun 19, 2008
6:15pm

I have been involved as member in the postnuke community for about 4 years. Today, I am very proud of this name change and the community is steering towards its own direction. Postnuke broke away from php-nuke long time ago and no longer looks like php-nuke so it shouldn't have that relation at all. The members did not know anything about the name-change of the CMS, I somewhat minded and did not like it at the very beginning but I am used to it now it is very simple to remember.

Joomla looks a good CMS as well enriched with any module that is needed. I have been using both interchangeably but still love the core usability of postnuke with strong security support.

Go the Z-community.

Comment Information

david
Jun 19, 2008
8:35pm

Yeah, i still don't care for the name. But as long as the community is behind the project, that's what really matters.

(I should say that my gripe isn't with the Zikula code or community. I've never said anything negative about the community or the project itself; just the new name.)

Comment Information

Satan
Jul 9, 2008
6:29am

PostNuke was such a great system, it was groundbreaking when it was first released.

But it's stagnated. Look at where Drupal is now, or Wordpress. I don't think many people would be installing PostNuke as their new CMS, I think it's just legacy installs that they're supporting.

Which is a shame, because it was a great system. But I've just had a play with the Demo system on their website and it still isn't anywhere near the ease of use that Drupal/Wordpress has. There's no new features that make it compelling.

It's great to have diversity in the market, but I can't help but feel it'd be better if PN folded up and added their knowledge to Drupal/Wordpress etc.

Comment Information

atom bomb
Sep 11, 2008
1:50am

yeah, thanks postnuke for all the memories. in the end, drupal became better supported and more powerful/flexible so i had to move on. best of luck to your new life as zikula.

Comment Information

RS
Sep 16, 2008
8:24pm

Just tried installing the new "Zikula" and it sucks in comparison to the old PN. I'm glad for Zikula that they have such a great German community...guess what, you lost all the rest of module and theme creators over the years with your major code redesigns, and the fact that every time we upgraded our site, our shit got broken. Zikula may look great under the hood, but there's no available modules for it because you have NO COMMUNITY.

Comment Information

david
Sep 17, 2008
12:49am

Way back when (around version .72 or so) I thought that PostNuke had a decent community back then. Now it seem that as PostNuke/Zikula started heading in a more business direction, so have many of the community members. (Same thing with Joomla right now.)

Seems they have changed their focus. Which is a shame.

Comment Information

nicoduka
Oct 1, 2008
3:45pm

Hi! I know a little more than enough to be dangerous. That said, in the ExtraLite theme, in what would be the header, it seems to me it is composed of essentially a table with eithet two tables or cells inside. The larger internal cell would typically hold an image or logo, which I have been able to get to show up. I have also changed the color of the table background and even increased the boder size. For three days, 8 hours a day and countless web-sites later, I cannot get the "header table" centered to the overall table containing the whiole site, by which I mean the l column, center column and right.

_________________________
Submited by : Bebe

Comment Information

Dox
Nov 6, 2008
10:19pm

I admit that I don't much care for the name either but what really sucks about Zikula/Postnuke is that the developers dont seem much interested in what thier users want.
I know that they are the develpers and as such do all the coding and work. I have appreciated all the hard work, but they only see what they want to see and will not entertain any other views. They have chased away many of good module makers and forum contributors. Their stubborness about supporting any other forum besides pnforum (which does not have a good feature set IMHO), providing support for things they deem stupid (like captcha which is so common on other forums/etc that I cannot understand Zikulas reluctance to use it (To be honest though, I'm not sure if they have included it into Zikula yet because I am much more familiar with postnuke & have just recently made a Zikula site which I am just experimenting with)). I am being tremendously longwinded but to sum things up: I am dissapointed that they have taken what was once a vibrant community and ostracized a bunch of us by ignoring our wants and needs. Take a look for yourself. There seem to be only 8 or so active community members anymore. Dox

Comment Information

david
Nov 7, 2008
12:54am

Doesn't PostZikula (sounds like a bad horror movie!) have a paid support that's part of the PostZikula site? It seems that money has turned all the positives of the program into negatives. (Though it may have started before then.)