15
You are comparing apples and oranges.
Xoops is, from it's name on down, a "programmers content management system". Who else but programmers would put Object Oriented in the name of software intended to eliminate programming for the actual users of it? Programmers drive the team. Programmers have written all the code. Programmers have had all the arguments and version hassles that have fundamentally put XOOPS on semi-permanent hold now for over a year.
Xoops requires a LOT of tweaking (it didn't used to, but that's another diatribe for another day) to get it working, and even more hassles to locate documentation, modules, blocks, and all the little widgets to make it happen. It takes me a week to get a XOOPS site fundamentally operational. It takes me a day to get a Joomla site in the same state. (Spoken as an integrator for both).
The end result can be very rewarding though. XOOPS modules, when you can get them to work with the version of the day, usually offer more, and better done than Joomla equivalents.
I disagree with the comments made earlier with regard to there being more available with Joomla. I have collected everything there is to collect (both legally and not-so-legally) for both XOOPS and Joomla, and have found that you have to eliminate a LOT of the Joomla offerings because they are proprietary (cost you money), and usually VERY pricey. You have to eliminate some more for the same reasons as XOOPS - the VERSION problems (Joomla now has it's own version of XOOPS 2.0.x versus 2.2.x zoo in their 1.1.x and 1.5.x versions, which are COMPLETELY incompatible module wise and even to a great extent in template/themes!). What you are left with is a pale comparison to what is available with Xoops.
Joomla is administrator and end-user focused, and is attempting to bury as much of the programming as it can, hiding it from the people who will actually have to work with the interface. It is also (as you have discovered) highly graphical and end-user functionality oriented. They "get" what a content management system is about - Ease of administration, ease of authorship, workflow creation and maintenance, and flexibility.
Joomla has more of a business focus, but with the Community version (look it up on the Joomla.org site) they have an off-shoot version that blows XOOPS away at building city, county, church, organization, fraternal or whatever communities all in one package right out of the zip file.
In the best of all possible worlds, I could put both XOOPS and Joomla in a bag... shake it up, and pour out.... Xoomla... a hybrid with the best of both CMSs in it. The fact of the matter is that all CMSs by the nature of what they do are compromises. In some places each compromises too much, and too little.
As to the communities and support. I'd have to say that at the moment, Joomla is kicking the slats out of Xoops. Their .org site is neat looking, well organized, easy to find things on, current (for the most part), pretty well documented, and all of it is very tidy and graphically superior to Xoops.org.
Their forums suck. It takes forever for anyone to come back to you on questions. Very few people will stick their two cents in (like I am doing here). The "businesslike" manner is not to most hobbiest mentalities either necessary or welcome. You'll see for yourself.
My personal complaint with Joomla is that is violates "the code" of Open Source so often it's not funny. Everyone over there thinks they are going to write 50 lines of PHP code, encrypt it with Zend, and get rich. As Mr. Bush says, "Isn't going to happen!". They condone way too much advertising in their site, and let modules be sold that are basic core modules in my opinion.
Xoops is flawed. It's had some hard knocks (hacked .org site, hardware failures, rapid team dropouts and replacements, and lack of focus recently), but it "persists", and overall, it is for the most part reliable once installed and running. The variety and quality of modules cannot be questioned. The validity of them with current versions unfortunately can.
Both Joomla and XOOPS have their problems. Both have thier strengths. Kind of reminds me of the Monty Python bit "Peoples Judean Front" versus the "Peoples Front of Judea".
I use XOOPS when the site I am building is going to be more customized, and more technical (code wise, not graphically). I use Joomla when a site needs to be more graphical, and more community oriented.
They BOTH frustrate me. XOOPS frustrates me a little more because in my opinion, with shaping up, it has far greater potential than Joomla. But it's falling so far behind because of this 2.0.x versus 2.2.x thing, and the squabbling and behind the scenes changes that may ultimately force those of us who love the thing to just abandon it.
What the XOOPS Team needs to do IMHO... sit down with some administrators, AND end user/author types who are currently using Xoops, and ASK THEM what's screwed up and what's brilliant (I know I have MY list). Then form a list, then form a plan, then start implementing it, then honor the plan to completion... REPEAT. The .org site needs an enema. There has to be someplace really really soon where ALL of the available modules, blocks, hacks, hints, tips, etc. are cataloged and available without having to go to 500 sites and register on every one of them to get at it. There needs to be ONE documentation site just like Joomla already has in both cases. When all of that is done, then I can clearly say "Go with XOOPS every time". Till then I'm leaning towards Joomla.
Just my opinion of course, your mileage may vary...
