Talk:RedDot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Someone made this point about the heading criticism

"Like any CMS, the product is as good as the developers who built and designed it. The following points are specific criticisms of one implementation and do not necessarily represent the performance of the software across all implementations."

I believe at least 2 separate people have made additions to this list (myself and at least one other). It is not just issues for one implementation. The software has inherit flaws e.g. bundled text editor accepting non-compliant tags. These would be clear to anyone who uses the product. Yes some comments are based on lack of understanding or training in the product but others are to do with ongoing issues that have been outstanding for many versions of the product.

[edit] Software Limitations and Criticisms chapters

Those two chapters of this article are not neutral point of view and should be removed (Criticisms by definition). This is supposed to be a encyclopaedic article and weather the criticisms are valid or not they have no place here. --Sindri 00:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

As far as i can tell critiquing technology and ideas was okay given the wording and use of references. Would it be more appropriate to reword and source these criticisms instead of removing them?

see the following articles: java critisms http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_%28programming_language%29#Criticism

here is a whole article on criticisms of java http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Java

criticisms of the .net framework http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.net_framework#Criticism

You must agree that the Criticisms chapter in this article is quite different from your examples. This looks to me like a listing of things about the software that have annoyed the individual users that put them there. None of them have any external references and some of them are plain silly "publishing is slow on slow hardware" for example. In my opinion that list is POV beyond repair and should be deleted. It's quite possible someone can write a NPOV chapter about the same topic, but this is not it. --Sindri 11:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)