| Popular sites built on CI |
[eluser]gullah[/eluser]
Not super popular but gets pretty decent traffic and is very large. You can find the source code and link in this thread. http://ellislab.com/forums/viewthread/129017/
[eluser]Farhan S. Basyaiban[/eluser]
www.kompas.com this is the biggest portal in indonesia. note that kompas.com and all of the group of kompas using codeigniter as their portal site
[eluser]m40[/eluser]
Thank you! gullah, the source code is very helpful. I was hoping to see more posts here, though.
[eluser]BrianDHall[/eluser]
One of the tricky things is CodeIgniter in no ways announces its presence, so people have to either say what framework they used or use open source. For every site that says they use X, there are surely hundreds that do too and just don't say so.
[eluser]m40[/eluser]
Sure, but yet somehow we all know of a few quite popular sites built on Cake and Rails.
[eluser]BrianDHall[/eluser]
No deep offense to rails folks, but Rails users are like Java programmers were about 5 years ago - if someone used Java, they were going to tell you ALL about it, whether you want to hear about it or not. We'll call them..."evangelical" by nature. CI isn't really very 'buzzy', in contrast to Cake and Rails. My boss hasn't heard of it, and the programmer I replaced thought I was still using Joomla "because it looks just like it". CI is really just to get things done, for people who just want...well, to get things done. CI, by design and philosophy, is to help you where it can and to otherwise stay out of your way. At times you can forget you are using a framework, its very lightweight and doesn't insist on much. Meanwhile when you use Rails or Cake, you _know_ you are using them. You will never think you are just in Ruby or PHP, you must be constantly aware of their presence and nuances. They are, in a way, a "bigger deal" because they are responsible for everything. Meanwhile I still use phpMyAdmin for my initial database structure and management, never touch the command line, etc. CI intentionally eschews being heavily 'magic', where its one of Rails chief principles. Magic is shinier, more bold, more untraditional, gives you more to talk about. CI meanwhile still supports PHP4, politely recommends a certain way of doing things, but allows you to do pretty much whatever you want. Its perhaps the 'zen' of frameworks, with Rails being...oh, well, lets just say more 'evangelical'. More people are members of evangelical groups, but that doesn't make them necessarily better or happier - but it certainly makes them louder. On the sites I've built you won't even find a passing mention or hint of CodeIgniter - not because I want to hide it, but I know my users don't care so I don't bother to mention it.
[eluser]m40[/eluser]
Very well put. Thanks for sharing your thoughts! If I have to add to the arguments in support of using CI I'd say that it seems to be quite fast. I hear it's significantly faster than Cake and Rails and their magic. I wish there were more popular CI based sites that we know of to demonstrate CI's great potential.
[eluser]renownedmedia[/eluser]
1. ocb.renownedmedia.com (WIP) 2. ppp.renownedmedia.com (WIP) 3. renownedmedia.com 4. http://www.martialartbilling.com/xtracto...index.html (online demo of intranet app) 5. squirrelify.renownedmedia.com Those are all the sites I've built with CI, only the first one is huge, only the fourth and fifth are live but they are smaller. |
| Welcome Guest, Not a member yet? Register Sign In |
