Thanks, Mitchel. I appreciate the quick response.
i agree with the tenor of the article. if dnn is to survive it must become more seo sensitive and faster. these days seo = speed. the technology of dnn platform is long in the tooth. even microsoft had to re-architect .net framework with the onslaught of node.js. so a large company would need tangible and palpable assurances and evidences that evoq or platform will update with the times. (as an aside, i heard that there was a .net core version of dnn platform in the works - is that still the case, and is there an eta? the release of dnn 9 was important technically and psychologically. and even .net core is passe with .net 5) as a small time operator, i find dnn platform attractive and viable for the reasons stated - there is a lot of out of the box functionality. however, i struggle with speed even though in some respects it is decent to good - and i believe that my systems are properly configured and tuned. Developers need to visit page speed insights from time to time. I think that the area of biggest decline has been has been in module variety. consolidation is inevitable, but the numbers and richness of modules has declined. some have improved. some of this is offset by multi-purpose or expressive modules. i hope the best for the platform - i would hate to change. i do think that 2021 is a critical year for dnn.
regarding .net core/.net 5/6, that would be an addition for which i would pay. in other words, if you could produce a dnn platform version ported to .net 5, i would be able and willing to pay a modest amount. i could not afford the 8,000+ usd price tag of evoq, and even 1000usd would keep me on the fence, but 300-500 usd is very palatable.
my interest in .net x is the performance from the updated threading (and maybe process management) models. that is seo you can believe in :-o
i do get 95-98 on my desktop page speed score, but 80-82 is a good run on mobile - although i got a couple of flukes at 85-87.
it is definitely a rabbit hole to contemplate what a dnn 5/6 (forget 3.1) application would be and look like. there are probably two modalities of cms systems aimed at two audiences - 1. website operators 2. intranet operators where the former is aimed at broad online experiences, the latter at in-house captive experiences. add core web vitals and progressive web apps to the mix and you are talking a lot of spice and jalapeno indigestion. it could beg two products or at least 2 versions of the new one. nevertheless, technology wise, and for the sake of the children and future, the dnn technology has to advance beyond its current state, regardless of its current constituency's investment. a two product strategy is the only way to handle it given the very credible argument in favor of serving the legacy base. and it is imperative if for no other reasons than microsoft calling deprecation and eol on it all. however, a newly imagined cms with new architecture would breathe fresh life into dnn platform world. there is a storm to weather, but sunshine will out.
These Forums are dedicated to the discussion of DNN Platform.
For the benefit of the community and to protect the integrity of the ecosystem, please observe the following posting guidelines:
Awesome! Simply post in the forums using the link below and we'll get you started.