57 Responses

  1. Michael
    Michael January 7, 2013 at 07:23 | | Reply

    Nothing against this product, but I always think it’s funny designers will go through all the trouble of learning applications and systems like this, but won’t bother to just go ahead and learn to code. By the time they have a handle on avoiding coding at all costs, they could have mastered the basics, at least. Pretty valuable skills to have in the www business, not terribly difficult, and comparatively future-proof and well-supported.
    Totally off-topic I realize, but I’ll never get it.

  2. John
    John January 7, 2013 at 13:46 | | Reply

    Unfortunately, Views doesn’t work with “any theme”. I know of at least one theme that causes Views to display things incorrectly. I have a client using the Made theme from Industrial Themes. The theme has been customized to a degree, so I’ll grant that’s a possible cause of the issues, but switching to Twenty Eleven fixes the problems so it’s definitely a conflict with the theme.

    That’s not a knock on Views, just a caveat that there’s always the possibility for conflicts with themes and other plugins.

    1. Bruce Pearson
      Bruce Pearson January 8, 2013 at 01:06 | | Reply

      Hi John,

      We’re continually improving Views so it can work with any theme. What conflict are you having with your theme?

      Can you open a support issue here – https://wp-types.com/forums/forum/support-2/

      Best regards,
      Bruce Pearson
      ToolSet project manager

      1. John
        John January 8, 2013 at 05:22 | | Reply

        Hi, Bruce,

        Thanks for the response. I will have to see if I still have the Views in question on the test site. If not, I’ll have to try to duplicate the issue.

        In a nutshell, I was trying to create a page with a parent type and a couple of child types. The parent could have multiple children of each type so there were two custom loops, essentially. With the theme in question, the wrong child data was being displayed. When I switched to Twenty Eleven, it worked as expected.

        As I said, I will try to duplicate the issue and contact support when I’m able to do so.

        Thanks,

        John

      2. John
        John February 1, 2013 at 18:47 | | Reply

        Hi, Bruce,

        I just wanted to follow up on this. I was able to duplicate the issue and opened a support ticket for it. A tech responded quickly and found the problem. The theme has some code in it that modifies the loop for a specific post type (Reviews). That was causing “No posts found” to be returned when there were actually posts in existence. Commenting out that code fixed the problem. Fortunately, we don’t use Reviews with the theme, so it’s a viable fix in our case.

        In any case, I just wanted to say that the response was quick and accurate.

        John

  3. Jake Styles
    Jake Styles January 8, 2013 at 11:13 | | Reply

    I’ve been using Views for a while now, the devs have done some amazing steps forward in response to what we users were demanding, and this new Toolset package is looking even more useful with the access control and CRED plugins. Thanks!

  4. Mike Zielonka
    Mike Zielonka January 9, 2013 at 06:38 | | Reply

    Jean-

    What’s your opinion? Your run down the features but don’t say if u like or dislike and why? 🙂

    Personally I am a fan!

  5. Chris
    Chris January 9, 2013 at 11:08 | | Reply

    Any comments on how the Pods framework compares to Types/Views?

    1. Amir
      Amir January 14, 2013 at 05:02 | | Reply

      Pods is a good plugin and I have a lot of respect towards its Scott, who builds it. From the beginning, pods took the ‘free product’ route, while Toolset plugins cost money.

      For sure, just slapping a pricetag doesn’t really make something valuable. However, knowing that we depend on our plugins for a living makes all the difference.

      When a free plugin has a bug, the author will do his best to handle it, when he can. When our plugins fail, we don’t sell. You probably see how this motivates us to develop, support and maintain our plugins.

      We don’t have such a thing as ‘holiday’, or ‘vacation’, or just ‘busy with my day job’. We always keep someone on duty to manage support and we always make sure that everything is up and running.

      Sure, we have bugs and problems and make mistakes, but if we don’t respond quickly, we might as well look for another job.

      Right now, we employ six people working 100% on Toolset plugins (and we’re hiring more). There’s no way to maintain this level of development on a plugin that has no revenue.

      This isn’t a side-by-side features comparison, but I hope it still helps.

      1. Mag
        Mag February 14, 2013 at 10:14 | | Reply

        I like to get paid for my work, and extend the same courtesy to others, however your business model is a little awkward in my eyes. I understand the need for revenu to support staff and simply to make good profit, after all, that’s what we’re all after, but the way it’s presented is somewhat misleading. We do not buy a product, we purchase the right to use it, which is fine as well, but making it obvious, that this is a sub based service rather then a product that can be bought for a fixed price, would be nice. This is a long term commitment that’s not evident by the way pricing is presented. WP easily releases few updates per year, the Toolset will be obsolete without updates in no time, unless you are a coder, though then, chances are you do not need it to start with. It comes with a dev price tag, somewhat forgetting that there are quite a few individual users that would happily pay for the functionality if it was somewhat more rational. As it is now, it’s simply not worth it for one site, especially considering various other plugins and tools that are emerging rather quickly, and offer similar, even if not as complex, functionality, Best of luck any how.

        1. Amir Helzer
          Amir Helzer February 15, 2013 at 17:48 | | Reply

          You have a good point. You might be interested to learn that we’ve added more purchasing options for Toolset plugins. If you prefer, you can buy a lifetime account. This will entitle you to upgrades and support without having to renew your wp-types.com account ever. So, if you’re unhappy with renewals, there’s an option for you to choose.

          All purchase options are shown in our ‘buy’ page:
          https://wp-types.com/buy/

    2. Scott Kingsley Clark
      Scott Kingsley Clark January 14, 2013 at 07:27 | | Reply

      For a comparison of Types vs Pods, check out this multi-plugin comparison at http://pods.io/compare/

      While Amir is right, a plugin with paid support is definitely something worth investing in if you need someone who will be there 24/7, but I’m thinking he may be misleading some about how much can really go into a free plugin.

      We’re also a team of 6, we aren’t all working on Pods 24/7 (although a case could be made that I do!) but we’re all professional developers building large and innovative sites at our day jobs. We depend on very specific functionality to save time and grow with our projects ever demanding needs. And based on our shared experiences, we roll numerous improvements into each release of Pods. We are also sponsored by Automattic, and are working on getting Pods to be one of the very few approved plugins on the WordPress VIP platform used by some of the biggest sites using WordPress.

      With that said, yes Pods is free, but we’re not just doing this for fun. Pods makes our work lives sane, we directly depend on it to make a living, and we want to give WordPress something it dearly needs: a platform that makes it easier to define content types and fields, for apps, websites, and more.

      There’s still a lot coming ahead, we even have premium components coming out for Pods which each come with dedicated support. So comparing Pods to Types, both are free, but Pods is truly open, community driven, and something thousands of hours of development and planning has gone into. It’s anything but a basic free plugin, it’s feature set speaks for itself.

      1. Scott Kingsley Clark
        Scott Kingsley Clark February 15, 2013 at 17:55 | | Reply

        I wanted to follow up on my previous reply. In the coming month(s) we’ll be launching a premium support service which you can opt-in if you want priority support or need the extra piece of mind. We’ll also have premium components bundled with the support plan so you can enjoy them along with other benefits of the support subscription. More details coming soon.

  6. Heikki H.
    Heikki H. January 9, 2013 at 12:09 | | Reply

    I’ve done WordPress sites for a couple of years, but I’m a newcomer to the Toolset. First project with it, and I’ve already done some pretty nice listings, custom content templates, and front-end forms. It’s kind of like another layer of template code, which might be totally unnecessary in a trivial project, but that’s not what I’m talking about here…

    The free Types plugin seems pretty basic compared to, say, Advanced Custom Fields. If I didn’t have the whole package, I wouldn’t bother with Types.

    I’ve ran into one quite major bug (front-end permissions), and several annoyances. But nothing is perfect.

    Verdict: Very promising and quite solid piece. Worth a try (it’s free).

  7. Valerie Adler
    Valerie Adler February 2, 2013 at 09:59 | | Reply

    Hi Jean,

    What’s your view on Toolset as compared to Headway? I actually found your first blog on Toolset, discovered the free, online trial and – lo! – discovered that one of the available themes in the trial was Headway Base. I realise that Headway is a theme and Toolset is a plugin, but there seems to be a lot of overlap to me.

    Interested to know your take on this. Thanks.

    Valerie

  8. Valerie Adler
    Valerie Adler February 3, 2013 at 13:44 | | Reply

    Thanks so much, Jean. I was hoping for an answer like that…I think I’ll give it a try!

  9. DJ
    DJ May 2, 2013 at 21:28 | | Reply

    There’s one major failing with the Types plugin which gives me doubts regarding aspects of the others: You can’t attach a custom fields group to a specific page ID/name, or to a post category. So basically, I may have a specific page that needs specific custom fields, or a particular post category likewise, and you cannot do this with Types. Where as it is very simple to do with Advanced Custom Fields, for example. This is a major failing in my opinion.

    1. Amir Helzer
      Amir Helzer May 2, 2013 at 23:53 | | Reply

      DJ, you are absolutely right in this observation. There will always be more flexibility when creating everything from scratch and always, some plugins will have certain features and other plugins not have them.

      We are working to make Types, Views, CRED and Access as feature-rich as possible, while avoiding feature bloat which makes the GUI difficult to understand.

      Our approach to displaying fields on specific pages was via Views plugin’s “View Templates”. We assumed that you would want to both enter the fields for the specific post and also display them on the front-end. So, when you assign a specific View Template to a page, you can also tell Types to display the custom fields when displaying with that View Template.

      I realize that this makes it usable only when displaying with Views.

      Anyway, we are always reviewing and adding new features and it’s great to receive this kind of feedback.

      1. DJ
        DJ May 3, 2013 at 00:02 | | Reply

        So basically Types is not a plugin for developers, but more for hobbyists or non tech folk running their own site (and needing to use Views), while Advanced Custom Fields is more for developers?

        1. Amir Helzer
          Amir Helzer May 3, 2013 at 00:11 | | Reply

          If you feel that ACF is more suited for your needs, then it’s fine. The great thing about WordPress is that there are so many good plugins and themes. Eventually, everyone finds the extensions that he likes and are best for his workflow. Right?

          I agree that ACF is better for people who prefer to code everything from scratch. We’re trying to optimize Toolset plugins for those who want to build sites without coding.

          These are not necessarily hobby developers. Many great developers enjoy this workflow to save time and produce sites on short schedules. On the other hand, if you have years of experience developing in PHP, I can easily see how it would be more convenient for you to use a minimal environment and code everything yourself.

          Sounds fair?

          1. Rickard
            Rickard May 24, 2013 at 00:26 | | Reply

            We use Toolset when speed is needed. And it most often is since our clients have a limited budget. If you are a 1337 designer/developer with customers with big pockets and no limit budgets then maby this is not the tool for you but then again wordpress would not be the tool of choice either.

            1. DJ
              DJ May 24, 2013 at 02:23 | | Reply

              “Big pockets”, “no limit budgets”?? I hardly think so, don’t know of many small businesses that match that description. A well coded site doesn’t need to be an expensive site.

  10. Mark
    Mark June 30, 2013 at 01:46 | | Reply

    After several months of hemming and hawing over options, I was set on using ExpressionEngine and Pixel&Tonic’s Playa to achieve my multi-relational needs (which are extreme). Is anyone familiar enough with Playa to compare it to Types?

    1. Mark
      Mark January 9, 2014 at 16:49 | | Reply

      Thanks, Dave, Jean and nettiapinafi. I was aware of ACF before, but I’m not sure how well everything will work together. What I want to do is so many-to-many related that to get this thing off the ground would either require a complicated combination of multiple add-ons or a totally custom solution ($!). I’m probably just going to have to can the concept, or at the very least castrate it. 🙁

      1. Dave R
        Dave R January 9, 2014 at 22:47 | | Reply

        If you’re coming from EE then in all seriousness I wouldn’t even consider Types. If you’ve used EE then you’re a coder. Types and the related family is for users who are not coders, that’s what it’s for. If you want advanced functionality with a comparable level of coding and quality of code base, then the main three plugins you’ll want to look at are:
        – Advanced Custom Fields
        – Gravity Forms
        – Custom Post Type UI

        All these three have very high quality code behind them (I can’t say the same about Types) and while easy to get a hang of at a basic level, also offer a very high level of advanced features and customisation that delivers features that are comparable with EE.

        You will still need to decide if WP is the best platform for your project – anyone who says it’s fine for any site is either lying or not a very experienced developer – but if it is, then these three plugins are the best starting point for more advanced functionality with a good quality code base behind them.

        Feel free to drop me an email if you want some advice on choosing the best platform for your project. I’ve been working with WP to a high level of customisation for a number of years, and with custom developed CMSs and online applications for over a decade, so have a pretty solid knowledge of “the best tool for the job” for most projects.

        Cheers.

        1. Mark
          Mark January 10, 2014 at 12:55 | | Reply

          Thanks, Dave!! Post of the year, for me!

          I’m not married to EE, in fact we’ve hardly even had a date, but I’ve been researching options for far to long that I will soon have to make a committment one way or the other. I have come back to reviewing WordPress after discounting it a couple of years ago, and boy has it changed for the better. I am not a coder, and I can’t afford the costs my project would incur.

          I would love to discuss things further with you in the future. I’ll keep this aside for future reference. Thank you.

          I am still interested in what the Types/Toolkit might have to offer and will look into it further. Thanks to everyone who’s commented so far.

  11. illferris
    illferris January 2, 2014 at 11:08 | | Reply

    Joomla+Flexicontent = all of this (and much more) for free. Case closed.

    1. Dave R
      Dave R January 2, 2014 at 19:01 | | Reply

      And who with any sense would want to do that?

    2. Mark
      Mark January 9, 2014 at 16:45 | | Reply

      I followed FlexiContent when it was starting out, and continued for a long time after that. It’s a great piece of kit, but it does not have the detailed relational structure or freedom that I’m looking for. From what I can see, Types seems to allow a lot more freedom. I’m still going to consider it if I go the WP route, but I still think P&T’s Playa w/EE is the most powerful option.

      1. Ed
        Ed October 18, 2014 at 13:59 | | Reply

        Joomla + Fabrik

  12. Robkhoo
    Robkhoo August 12, 2014 at 02:15 | | Reply

    Fantastic! Just got myself views for $65!

  13. Atom
    Atom September 2, 2014 at 19:51 | | Reply

    Dave R is coming across as a bit of a dick.

    1. Dave R
      Dave R September 2, 2014 at 21:50 | | Reply

      Nope, you take that title, for choosing to troll an old post simply to personally abuse someone just because you don’t agree with their opinion.

  14. Michael
    Michael December 26, 2014 at 08:38 | | Reply

    Anyone have any thoughts on the general nature of solutions like Toolset or Pods that (usually) require the plugin to be active on the site, in order for you to use the tools that you built with it? What I mean is, I’ve read in other forums (and agree) that there doesn’t seem to be a solution (yet) that allows users to export a final stand alone “plugin” that can be used independent of the tool used to build it.

    I’ve been reading through the Toolset documentation, and it seems like this might be somewhat possible.

    Mind you, I’m coming from a perspective of being mostly a designer and/or web “assembler” and only a fledgling coder.

    Ideally though, I’d love something that allowed me to “build a plugin” then export it for stand alone use. Is there a solution out there like that, that already exists that I’ve missed?

    Great post, and interesting comments. Thanx all.

    1. WPML (@wpml)
      WPML (@wpml) December 26, 2014 at 08:42 | | Reply

      This is Amir. I’m responsible for WPML and Toolset plugins.

      We’re actually working on embedded versions for all Toolset plugins, which will allow you to export entire designs without the full plugins. These embedded versions will allow redistribution and we are in contact with a number of theme developers who will use them as basis for their themes.

      Does this help?

  15. bogdansusala
    bogdansusala January 2, 2015 at 05:55 | | Reply

    @Amir, that would definitely help. I personally would prefer to have a final, “compiled” “application”. Optimized, with stripped down libraries etc.

  16. rodpascoe
    rodpascoe May 12, 2015 at 16:33 | | Reply

    Clicking the coupon doesn’t work for me, the price stays at $149

  17. Roberto
    Roberto June 13, 2015 at 17:25 | | Reply

    I use intensively the Toolset plugins for most if not all my clients sites. I am hearing quite offending opinions in this blog posts to the “non coders” who deploy Toolset for web development been classified as “non great developers”. My choice to use Toolset was deeply pondered. So far I never had a client who asked me what solutions I have deployed for his/her site, what really matter to them is to get the “functionalities” they need and so far Toolset plugins did the job fantastically. Also that “non coder” definition is very misleading, to use Views you need a strong background on HTML and CSS… is this coding or not? For sure it’s easier than PHP but still it is coding and with Views you have to do it by hand. So, am I a hobbyist or a developer? I own ACF as well, I have used it a bit and I have to admit that looks really amazing but so far all features requested by clients where satisfied just using Toolset plugins but I am ready to deploy ACF the day I will be asked a functionality that Toolset cannot accomplish.

  18. Kavleen Kaur
    Kavleen Kaur March 22, 2019 at 01:03 | | Reply

    This is an interesting article to read. I am glad I found this blog.
    Enjoyed learning this information !! Thanks for posting !!
    Keep Blogging !! Have a nice Day !!

  19. Haseeb Ahmad
    Haseeb Ahmad March 22, 2019 at 18:58 | | Reply

    This is an interesting article to read. I am glad I found this blog and learnt much knowledge. Keep blogging keep helping people.

  20. Deva
    Deva March 23, 2019 at 02:12 | | Reply

    Nice post thanks for sharing

  21. vyga v
    vyga v March 25, 2019 at 22:50 | | Reply

    Hi, thanks for the article. Found this helpful.

Leave a Reply