WordPress.com

1. davidchuhayes
   Member
   Feb 20, 2006, 1:17 AM

   Am I right in assuming that hosting elsewhere (like w/Yahoo or by setting up your own server) basically gives you more control--but it's also more complicated and more time-consuming? Is that the main difference?

   It seems like there are a lot of posts on here by people who've "changed their mind" and decides to host elsewhere or on their own... And that it's a slight pain.

   I kind of wanted to start my blog w/the right decision already made--so why would someone change their mind? Does hosting w/WordPress eventually become too "simple" for most people, or limited?

   Doesn't WordPress.com get the newest features first--and the .org desktop version last?

   Thanks for any input,
   David

2. victoriacarolina
   Member
   Feb 20, 2006, 1:39 AM

   I would tend to doubt it. .com will always need to be "idiot-proof". .org doesn't have that problem. People can always download the latest nightlies.

   I have a .com blog. It's a test-platform for various reasons. That's all it is. My REAL blogs are on my own webspaces.

   *shrug* Basically, .com is blogs for the masses. If that's what you want, it's got you covered. If you want the real fun stuff, you want your own space and software install.

3. wank
   Member
   Feb 20, 2006, 1:49 AM

   What seems to be happening is that people set up here, get frustrated with being unable to edit their templates (and it's not just about theme choice -- people may be perfectly happy with their theme but want to add flickr badges and such to their sidebars), and realise they can only do what they want by paying for hosting themselves. It isn't necessarily difficult or complicated, especially if you go with a host that offers automatic installation, but it does require slightly more time. And money, of course.

   If you think you're going to get attached to your blog and spend time tweaking it, adding new features, promoting it elsewhere... wordpress.com is not the solution for you. If on the other hand you want a hassle-free place to post the occasional article or photo, it's perfectly adequate.

4. marc
   Member
   Feb 20, 2006, 2:09 AM

   I would second wank's thoughts. The majority of those that have decided to pay for hosting or will do it on there own box are people that desire more control over the design and functions their blog can accomodate.

   There are over 400 different themes available for WP and probably a like number of plugins available.

   With a WP.org blog they are all available to you to choose from.

5. davidchuhayes
   Member
   Feb 20, 2006, 5:44 AM

   Interesting... Thank you for the input, guys.

   My next question is then: The WP 2.0 download I have is basically a "desktop" version of what the .com site is--it's like my own "copy" of WP, right?

   So once I get a host, I am essentially throwing "David's WP" up there to host, but b/c it's mine, I can fiddle w/it to the nth degree.

   Does this mean that I can still use desktop blogging clients, such as ecto, which I've found quite fun to play around w/, and still log in and blog on the .com from work?

   Can the .com, the downloaded .org and software such as ecto all be used together--is that how most people do it?

   Thanks again,
   David

6. carlbanks
   Member
   Feb 20, 2006, 2:10 PM

   The .org version is your own version of WordPress. The .com is the hosted version of the .org version. You can use ecto with it and also you may use .com for your API key for Akismet - http://askimet.com

7. drmike
   Member
   Feb 24, 2006, 8:14 PM

   We actually running a multiuser install of WP called MU. The *.org version is very stripped down to what we have compared here but you can add themes and plug ins and whatnot to it.

   As to ecto, I remember a coule of threads here saying people were using it although there may be an issue with trackbacks that are getting passed packed and forth between ecto and WP.

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.