On Reviews [post split from Getting Ones Kit Off For The Weavers]

I think, with respect, having made a negative statement against Platform, that you should explain what exactly is “lacking”? This could potentially impact on the Developer of Platform.

Please note, I have no relationship whatsoever with the developer and I do not want to have an argument, but please explain what is “lacking”? By so doing, you will inform me and others and the Developer, so he can improve what is “lacking”.

Platform is based on Bulma - a CSS Framework built with Flexbox, modular and 100% responsive. It is one of the best free frameworks in the world of web design!

Rather than “lacking”, Platform has a learning curve, just like any other Framework. I am working through one of the Developer’s examples.

Please, please describe what is lacking, else I have wasted my money.

Thanking you in advance.

I’II be the first to admit that my comment ‘lacking’ was unhelpful.
However, I deleted Platform after a cursory evaluation so I’m not in a position to give any further comments – that would result in a review and I already stated that I shan’t be writing a Platform review.
I don’t review stacks/themes/frameworks unless I can write a positive review.

1 Like

Something that’s sorely lacking in the RW world is some warts and all reviews. I would have saved a fortune.

Anyone that dares to mention something remotely negative is instantly censored or thrown out of the club.


Constructive feedback should be always welcome.

1 Like

I agree 100% with @Neil. All the reviews on anything RapidWeaver is all fluff and goodness. I think that’s why I and many others don’t bother reading them.

I haven’t tried in a few years but the realmac community reviews didn’t let you say anything negative.

1 Like

If you deleted it after a ‘cursory evaluation’, I submit that you may not explored all of its features sufficiently. To call something “lacking” after only a cursory evaluation and without further clarification does a disservice to the community IMO.

I am in agreement with @Neil - we need fair and balanced reviews.

It’s all very well having these opinions but no one gets paid to write these reviews, most of the developers don’t like them and no longer supply review copies. They are written purely as a service to RapidWeavers and generate no income. And as someone has already mentioned, if you dare write an unfavourable review, you’ll definitely never get a review copy again.

Some people are driven by their passion for Rapidweaver to spend their own time giving something back to the community that has enabled them to achieve so much more than they ever imagined.

Both Rob Hall and Rob Beattie have been writing their reviews for many years now, and Rob Beattie’s written software reviews for MacWorld and other professional ‘magazines’ for years. When writing them for Rapidweaver Central, at my behest (and like Rob Hall) he only writes reviews of software he likes. Why? So we can remain positive and offer only constructive criticism about software we actually use.

Rob Hall is perfectly entitled to write a review, find the product lacking, say so, and then delete the product. He owes you nothing.

Any of you guys want to take on the thankless task and write ‘fair and balanced’ reviews? Or even damning negative ones? If so, step right forward — I’ll give you the platform.


I personally like the reviews from the Robs because (as has been mentioned already) the fact that there is a review at all suggests it is a stack worth at least having a look at.

I do think a genuine, user-led discussion on newly released stacks would be really valuable too. E.g. if someone started a thread on here with details of a new stack that they have seen (e.g. ‘I got an email about ILD’s latest stack this morning…’) then it would be valuable to read from real people who say…‘that looks like it does the same thing as stack X’, or ‘I think it looks like it would be useful for Y types of site’ or ‘I bought it instantly and it is amazing because…’ or even ‘that looks awful because…’ etc etc.

1 Like

Thanks @Marten for your supportive post.

It’s a fact that I am a passionate Weaver and wish to give something back to the community.
It’s also a fact that a couple of developers have stopped supplying me with evaluation software because I was too critical in the past.
In cases where I feel the need to criticise (constructively) a product, I always contact the developer with my views before I publish a review. Often enough a developer will accept the criticism and act upon it. In other cases, they will inform me that “that’s the way the product works” and don’t supply further evaluation products.
In other words: “If you don’t like my products, you can take a running jump and don’t expect anything in the future”.
In such cases, my review doesn’t get any further than the draft version.

This leads me to @habitualshaker 's comment — As Stuart states — If I’ve reviewed a product, it’s worth taking a look at – especially as a non-professional Weaver. You may find some mild criticism in my reviews, but if you don’t see a product review at all, it’s due to one of two reasons:
Either the developer doesn’t want me to review his products, or I have decided that I can’t write a positive review for said product.
Please feel free to take a look at the products that I review and decide for yourself if it’s a product that you wish to have in your library.

As in @tav’s case, I pay monthly fees for my website. It is self financed with no ads and no requests for donations, purely as a service to the Weaver community.
It takes time to test a new product, to write a review and to publish said review on the various platforms that you might find reference to it. My personal time.
Please allow me the freedom to decide for myself which products I do or do not review. My service includes a monthly newsletter and is free of charge. You may feel free to subscribe.

If you don’t appreciate my reviews or the fact that I only review the products that I can see in a positive light, please feel free to ignore them.
If you appreciate them, then take a look at the reviewed product and make your own decision about it.

If you have discovered a product that, in your opinion, is ‘crap’, then feel free to mention the fact here. This is the one forum that won’t banish you for negative criticism.
If you feel that I have wrongly given a product a positive review, then contact me directly. If you point out something that can be corrected, I can contact the developer with constructive suggestions – that’s the cool thing about my situation — I’m more or less in regular contact with the developers that I review and, to be perfectly honest, they DO listen to constructive criticism!

Footnote: The fact that I haven’t reviewed a product for some time and haven’t published a newsletter for the last three months is due to my personal situation.
NinjaNews should be up and running again very soon!


Can I say I feel a little sorry for @juergenbarth with regards to Platform - he is getting a lot of flac! . Nobody seems able to/happy to offer the reasons why is it not a good product. Maybe any constructive criticism would be helpful!! And also to any purchasers of the framework…who might be thinking negative thoughts!


Not true, read the review by Larry Ford on this page:

Not so negative that it hurts the product, but not the fluff and goodness either.

@rob , If you could be so kind as to provide at least a few words why you think Platform is “lacking” and a “sad affair”, that would be greatly appreciated.

It does not have to be a review, just a few bullet-points are sufficient and would help me to improve the product.

On the other hand, since you deleted Platform, you did not participate in the updates which have shipped since the initial launch. These updates have not only fixed bugs but also added a lot of new functionality.

The video below contains an overview of everything which is included in Platform. If you don’t want to watch the entire 30 minutes (understandable), just watch the first minutes which cover the highlights.

1 Like