4 ms·
Gutenberg, and the Full Site Editing features that are built in now, are unbelievably bad. With great examples of page editors like Elementor, Beaver, Divi and
by greggh 5y ago
Gutenberg, and the Full Site Editing features that are built in now, are unbelievably bad. With great examples of page editors like Elementor, Beaver, Divi and others, I just don't understand how something as badly engineered as Gutenberg came to be. There is literally nothing intuitive about Gutenberg, not one thing.
- coldtea 5y ago>Gutenberg, and the Full Site Editing features that are built in now, are unbelievably bad. Not in my experience. I prefer them to the messy and hacky third party alternatives.. >There is literally nothing intuitive about Gutenberg, not one thing. As a user, I had absolutely no problem with Gutenberg regarding intuitiveness...
- greggh 5y agoYour experience and mine (plus thousands of others in the reviews) are vastly different. One thing that interests me is how much someone has to actually care about a problem before they are willing to take the time to go post a review. I think its an interesting metric to use when looking at stuff like this. Thousands of bad reviews is a pretty large number when you take into account just how many people won't go and post a review.
- marc_io 5y agoBad reviews are pretty much expected for a project that are built in public like the Block Editor, and lots of them actually help to build a better product in the end. A final version was never meant to be released at once.