Jump to content
14steve14

Would you upgrade your store to the latest Phoenix

Recommended Posts

This is just a simple sort of question. If you are using oscommerce in any form from 2.2 or 2.3.1 up to latest Edge or Frozen version, would you upgrade to the latest Phoenix version?  If not why not? Be honest. I am not here to push one version over another, just trying to find out store owners reasons for either upgrading or not upgrading.

If you would not upgrade why not?


REMEMBER BACKUP, BACKUP AND BACKUP

Get the latest Responsive osCommerce CE (community edition) here

It's very easy to over complicate what are simple things in life

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will answer my own question first. This is my thoughts on why I wan to upgrade my store.

I have Phoenix as a test site that I am working on when time and finances allows. Over the years I have adapted and altered a version of Edge that is currently my live site.  My current live site runs happily on php5.6 and apart from the odd blip every now and again it works faultlessly and does what it is supposed to do. It has many addons added, and some are currently not available to work on Phoenix, but I am looking for others. My biggest worry when finally updating the site is that the database update may have to carried out by someone that knows more than I do and that may cost a few pounds.

My reasons for wanting to upgrade the current site is because the software used to run the site have moved on. PHP versions are faster and more secure. Some are not going to be supported for much longer. Bootstrap4 is so much better than BS3 and it is easier to make small changes to the site. Phoenix gives me more options to make the site as I want it. Its modular so its really easy to add features with only one click and change a few settings. There is no cut and paste coding for now.

I am also a monthly paid up supporter of Phoenix because I want to see the project move forward and as a business I understand that code time costs money and it should not be expected that someone gives their time for free so I can earn money. Some of my profits should go back to help the coders improve what I am using for free. In the few months since Phoenix was released so much has been done and lots of new features are available.

If I had a bricks and mortar store I would need to pay to keep the structure of the store clean, tidy and updated and its the same with my website. It needs to be up to date and it needs to make the whole shopping experience good for my customers.


REMEMBER BACKUP, BACKUP AND BACKUP

Get the latest Responsive osCommerce CE (community edition) here

It's very easy to over complicate what are simple things in life

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 14steve14 said:

My biggest worry when finally updating the site is that the database update may have to carried out by someone that knows more than I do and that may cost a few pounds.

Don't worry - we did worry needlessly before doing it ourselves - you can do it! 👍


Download the latest CE Phoenix version here:
https://github.com/gburton/CE-Phoenix/archive/master.zip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be upgrading but my current site has not yet officially launched. Once it is live I will start work on converting it to Phoenix but as it is not primarily a shop it will take a little time to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 14steve14 said:

This is just a simple sort of question. If you are using oscommerce in any form from 2.2 or 2.3.1 up to latest Edge or Frozen version, would you upgrade to the latest Phoenix version?  If not why not? Be honest. I am not here to push one version over another, just trying to find out store owners reasons for either upgrading or not upgrading.

If you would not upgrade why not?

Hi Steve,

Like you I have a live shop based on 2.3.4BS which is heavily modified with altered modules, core and database modifications (Header Tags SEO, Qt Pro, Price Break per Qty, Newsdesk, Big Image, itemCondition, availability management, etc) and moving to Phoenix starting from scratch is too much work.
Before I had started from scratch with new v2.3.4BS and I had imported all my previous osc v2.2 modules and core changes but with Phoenix it seems there is less work to upgrade my current script to fit with it.

I made the transition to PHP 7.2 last week, the catalog part is done, I still have the admin part to do now.
Transition to Bootstrap 4.x dosen't seem to me a priority knowing that I already modified Bootstrap 3 to integrate the (missing) MS grid size.

If you need help to do the same, I can help you. 

Edited by milerwan

Osc v2.3.4 BS "custom"
PHP 7.3 compatible (710 modified files => o_O')

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 14steve14 said:

If you would not upgrade why not?

I started using osC over 18 years ago, paid a deloper to set up the sites and he did a wonderful job and I was very happy with results. He based the sites on 2.2a which at the time was the current version. Over the 15-16 years they ran all he ever did was a couple of security patches. He never once insisted i change to a newer version and as I had no problems with the sites I never did.

I only took the desision to move to edge a few years ago based on some poor advice from an old host. They insisted PHP5.6 would no longer be available. Moved to new host with edge and new host says you can use 5.6 as long as you like, it's up to you.

All sites now on Edge with BS3 and they will be staying on this as they are running fine are stabel and have been modified to give me all the functonality I had in my 2.2a sites.

Will i change again? not sure maybe if and when V3.O comes out but no rush.

 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, milerwan said:

moving to Phoenix starting from scratch is too much work.

Amen.  That's my first answer.

My website originated in 2005 with osC 2.2 MS2.  And if it weren't for some pesky emails from Google telling me:  Your pages are not mobile friendly

I'd still be on 2.2  The Google emails gave me something to think about...and worry about...but, it was the loss of a long-time job in 2018 that gave me the time and opportunity to seriously consider upgrading to a responsive version of osCommerce.  So, I did.  I think it's Edge, but I am not at all sure.  The package I installed simply references 2.3.4.1 CE and nothing else. 

And it was a nightmare!  I had ever done anything like it before.  But, I was up for the challenge and I pulled it off.

I also ended up going from PHP 5.6 to PHP 7.0 and the speed difference is very noticeable.  Glad that happened, too.

Having to lose a few older contribs along the way broke my heart.  Learning how to navigate the new file structure was a beast, in the beginning.  For the most part, I am very happy with what I have now.

My site is fast.  My site is responsive & mobile-friendly.  My site is modular.  Google loves me.  :)

So...what exactly is the selling point of Phoenix then?  I just don't see one.  Nothing compelling enough to get me to scrap what I have and start over again.

I do think new users should be steered to Phoenix.  But, as a longtime site owner with real customers and real things to pack and ship...

I'm not upgrading unless I absolutely have to.

- Andrea

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone

I don't have a business, I became an oscommerce fan a 3 years ago when I offered help to a family member to update their broken site of osc 2.2 due to an old version of PHP.
I do it as a hobby in my free time, on the way I learned a lot from SQL, PHP, BS3 and HTML. Much thanks to the help of community users. That is why I believe in the need to share and help each other.

With much effort and thanks to the help of all of you, last year I finished an EDGE site that works flawlessly in PHP 5.6 and 7.0. My hosting told me that it has no plans to remove version 5.6. That is why I am testing a new FROZEN site that is already mature and has several addons in the market.

Phoenix looks great, but I need more information to make a decision to see if I change to Phoenix or continue with Frozen.

Best regards

Valqui


:heart: Community Oscommerce fan :heart: You'll find the latest osC community version here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, milerwan said:

moving to Phoenix starting from scratch is too much work.

 

1 hour ago, puggybelle said:

Amen.  That's my first answer.

I do disagree with  these statements.  I have a site based on frozen, and it will do until my test environment using Phoenix is up and running.  Phoenix is easier to use in terms of its modular format.  The latest Product_info layout confirms this.  The sitewide hook system is also very flexible.  I've  just added custom text based upon the payment method selected by the customer, without modifying the core files.  Just two additional files define the hook, and the text inserted just where I need it. (I'm not a professional programmer)

I'm having to upgrade old addons which were based on BS3, but that is just necessary with any upgrade.

I don't expect to have a live Phoenix site running until mid-next year, but in the meantime I'll develop my knowledge of Phoenix and redesign my site and make it very flexible to meet the changing needs for the future.


osC CE live - developing osC Phoenix adding modules with no core changes(awesome and easy!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@14steve14  

I have been updating shop from own cart script ---> oscommerce 2.1---> 2.2 ( which is heavily modified with altered modules, core and database modifications)  ---> 2.3 --->  2.3 GOLD ---> 2.3 EDGE ---> 2.3 FROZEN .. and I am planning to go for latest Phoenix version ( already on server for testing and updating) when the sales season end  hopeful on April/May ...  
between the updating I lost some
modules because they are done by someone who have never be on the forum any more and are not needed at moment .. 
 

On 10/7/2019 at 3:22 PM, milerwan said:

moving to Phoenix starting from scratch is too much work.
 

it was the easiest thing I have done .. check this 

as @Mikepo said 

On 10/7/2019 at 9:13 PM, Mikepo said:

 

Phoenix is easier to use in terms of its modular format The latest Product_info layout confirms this.  The sitewide hook system is also very flexible.  

You need time on the begin and spend some money.. but after that  it will be so easy on the future. after more people making, updating add-ons to sitewide hook system.
Phoenix is the future.. @burt has done really good work and still doing and updating it  (so easy to update from A to Z)... when everyone know that oscommerce become slowly dead. 


Get the latest Responsive osCommerce CE (community edition) here .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mikepo, @Omar_one, @Heatherbell, @peterpil19,
 

On 10/7/2019 at 2:22 PM, milerwan said:

Like you I have a live shop based on 2.3.4BS which is heavily modified with altered modules, core and database modifications (Header Tags SEO, Qt Pro, Price Break per Qty, Newsdesk, Big Image, itemCondition, availability management, etc) and moving to Phoenix starting from scratch is too much work.

What I mean is too much work to take a new copy of Phoenix and add all my previous installed modules and modifications.

In my case (and maybe for some of us), it is faster to adapt the new features of Phoenix (new files) to old sites responsive (2.3.4BS or CE).
NB: It depends on the level of modification of the site of each member.

At no time did I say that we should not migrate to Phoenix code... :sleep:
 

8 hours ago, Omar_one said:

Phoenix is the future.. @burt has done really good work and still doing and updating it  (so easy to update from A to Z)... when everyone know that oscommerce become slowly dead. 

Sure Phoenix's code is the future and we are grateful to @burt for his immense work.
Without him Oscommerce CMS would be of the past.

Edited by milerwan

Osc v2.3.4 BS "custom"
PHP 7.3 compatible (710 modified files => o_O')

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JcMagpie Thanks.

@puggybelle Thanks.

@milerwan Thanks.

@Mikepo Thanks.

@Omar_one  Thanks.

This is what this thread is here for. Its good to see that others have the same sort of thought processes that I do.

I fully understand about the time and investment in the old sites we all have, and its hard to give up something that is working fine if it can be altered slightly to improve it. Do we all need to upgrade I am not sure. I use an upgrade as a time to install the latest version of addons if there is one, and a time for a bit of housekeeping. Change the look, add a few more bits and its ready to last a few more years.

What I dont want to do is to see oscommerce die. Its a great bit of software that in many ways is better and easier to use than many of the other offerings.


REMEMBER BACKUP, BACKUP AND BACKUP

Get the latest Responsive osCommerce CE (community edition) here

It's very easy to over complicate what are simple things in life

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm looking (not seriously) at Phoenix.
My store works the way I want it to, looks the way it needs to and I doubt that I'll be installing any more add-ons since my current store has a minimal amount of them.
Now, if I migrate to Phoenix and some of the add-ons don't work, like, for instance, Canada Post REST with dimensions shipping module, then what do I do?
Since the module was abandoned by the original author, GreaseMonkey and I have, pretty much, been keeping it going.
If any of the other add-ons don't or can't work in Phoenix, then I have a net loss and have, really, gained nothing.
I started back when MS2.2 first came out and there was always a way to upgrade to a higher version of OsC, whether it was a database upgrade script (hell, I'd settle for some detailed instructions) or someone who uses a given module and made the leap (and was programmer enough to modify and release it into the wild).
Phoenix has none of that. "You can do it too" isn't helpful at all.
The add-ons I have, I need, or I wouldn't have them, so why would I want to move to an environment where I wouldn't have them and why would I want to re-install them all (if possible) if I already have an environment where they ARE installed and they DO work? 
I've never been the type to require the "latest and greatest" merely because it's the "latest and greatest". If I have to give up things to use "the future", then, again, it's a net loss.
As long as I can migrate to a version of PHP that keeps me ahead of ones that have been discontinued, then I'm fine.
This isn't a hobby or part-time thing for me, I run my full-time business on the version I have (2.3.4 BS Gold) and I see no compelling argument put forward to move to Phoenix. It's just too much trouble for too little gain.


No Good Deed EVER Goes Unpunished

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We started back in 2005 with OsCommerce. Presently we have successfully upgraded all of our dozen or so osCommerce Online Merchant v2.3.4.1 sites to PHP 7.3.18. These are all domestic USA on-line stores which use PayPal as the payment gateway and FedEX, UPS and UPS  as the shippers.  The level of customization by broad metrics is that 900+ scripts match native v2.3.4.1 scripts, while 100+ scripts have been conservatively modified [up to ten lines of code each], 30+ have been extensively modified and about 300+ scripts have been added. The sites have been modified to full screen scalable format like Phoenix and appear well on mobile devices [iPhone customers included]. All additions and changes observe v2.3.4.1 standards of coding, naming, linking to MySQli, etc.. All of our customers are happy with their web sites. Without a Phoenix migration tool, there is little chance in our forward looking three year upgrade cycle that we would make the effort and investment to convert these sites to Phoenix. However, we are exploring putting new customers on the platform. In short, moving to new faster, easier to implement/maintain and useful new paradigms makes good business sense only when the cost to travel there can be justified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I have some clients using older osC versions that I upgrade to Phoenix. I'm fine with that, except that there are a number of silly errors in the code that I need to fix at each Phoenix release, and I'd really like to see GB incorporate the following changes into 1.0.7.6 (or soon after). They are in two attached files. One is 'fc' (file compare) format, which Linux tools may be be able to read, but each change should be manually examined anyway.

Phoenix_patches

 

1075patch

Edited by MrPhil
missing a couple entries in 1075patch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone who's curious, Linux patch files are not the recommended way to request updates to projects that are on GitHub.  It is much easier for both sides to fork the repo.  Make the changes.  Commit them in some reasonable fashion (meaning changes in a commit should have some relation with each other).  Then, in the case of Phoenix, open an issue requesting to merge the changes.  Then if the two sides agree, do a pull request following the instructions given in the issue. 

In general, there is no need to comment out code that is in source control.  That after all is what source control does:  track changes.  That just converts one change into two changes. 

I would also point out that if you make your living from Phoenix and do not support it, Burt is not going to be terribly interested in changing comments and language files to support you.  From his perspective, he is already doing work for free for you in providing the functionality in the releases.  Now you want him to do more work in an area where he really doesn't care.  And other than your pedantic corrections, you're not willing to contribute anything.  Not even the time to learn how to make coding contributions in a format convenient to him. 

I personally would oppose some of these changes, e.g. converting double spaces after periods to single spaces.  The only difference that makes is that it makes the underlying text match the display (because HTML eats multiple spaces).  And I'm not terribly excited at the idea of adding verbose comments to cover off-the-wall situations like Options -Indexes not working.  Nor do I favor adding cryptic comments like "(MINIMUM Tare Weight)" to the configuration description.  That may help you, after you've figured it out.  But it won't help the typical store owner understand it.  In part, because I'm not sure that most store owners know what "tare" is.  Which is probably why the current description doesn't say anything about tare weight. 

Adding comments to the sample data SQL to talk about files in the images/sample directory is not productive.  Because only developers would ever look there and it's not generally developers who need to keep the images directory clean.  And of course, by the time that someone would notice that the files are there, they've already deleted the install directory--including the comment.  So it's basically a reminder to the rare developer who happens to read the sample data SQL.  Which the same developer would then have to remember anyway, because most people don't read the sample data SQL (ever, much less every install).  Burt's suggestion, which Phoenix supporters do not seem to value, as they haven't voted for it, was to add a new "security" module (not for security but simply as a reminder) which would remind people that they had sample artifacts on the server and might want to delete that.  The same way it currently prompts people to remove the .github directory.  The contents of which you apparently haven't read, as it explains the process to make pull requests.  Which goes back again to my point about a comment in the sample data SQL being unlikely to reach its intended audience. 

I would agree with changing "setup" to "set up" and "checkout" to "check out" when used as a verb, but I really doubt that you can find a way to make that exciting to Burt.  I notice that you don't change login to log in.  Perhaps that means that I changed them all already.  But I wouldn't bet on it. 


Always back up before making changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Quote

For anyone who's curious, Linux patch files are not the recommended way to request updates to projects that are on GitHub.

They're Windows "fc" output, not Linux patch. I feel it would be a waste of time to set up a whole repository for this one set of changes, especially as GB is likely to ignore PRs (we've, ah, exchanged words in the past). Actually I'm hoping that the community here would be willing to push for changes.

Quote

In general, there is no need to comment out code that is in source control. 

If these were true patch files, that would be a legit complaint. But I want to provide some context, and these changes are going to have to be manually examined and OK'd anyway...

Quote

I would also point out that if you make your living from Phoenix and do not support it, Burt is not going to be terribly interested in changing comments and language files to support you.  From his perspective, he is already doing work for free for you in providing the functionality in the releases.  Now you want him to do more work in an area where he really doesn't care.  And other than your pedantic corrections, you're not willing to contribute anything.  Not even the time to learn how to make coding contributions in a format convenient to him. 

I am trying to help out here. I guess I should refrain from suggesting to my clients that they purchase some of GB's modules. I don't make much of my living from Phoenix, and if that's going to be the reaction from the community, I'll just leave and find a more profitable use of my time. Regarding "pedantic" corrections, these are high visibility glitches that tell non-computer types that the people who put out osCommerce just don't care about even trying to look competent. "Welcome on [my store]?" I won't blame GB for most of them -- they look like mistakes that non-native English speakers (or poorly educated Americans) would make. A polished, professional-looking product is a big selling point among business people (who are the majority of osC shop owners).

Quote

I personally would oppose some of these changes, e.g. converting double spaces after periods to single spaces.

OK, that's a debatable one, but I prefer to have the text file match as closely as possible. It's also confusing to non-computer savvy people (like shop owners) trying to find certain text strings by searching for a pattern with one space, when there are two in the file. Even I have had problems with that.

Quote

And I'm not terribly excited at the idea of adding verbose comments to cover off-the-wall situations like Options -Indexes not working. 

It's actually quite a common problem, terribly baffling to non-computer experts. The more help we can give these people, the better they'll feel about choosing osC. Or, we can make it a sadistic intelligence test. I don't care.

Quote

Nor do I favor adding cryptic comments like "(MINIMUM Tare Weight)" to the configuration description.

If a merchant shipping stuff doesn't know what a "tare weight" is,  they've got problems. The original text was positively misleading, giving a totally wrong idea about how total shipping weight was calculated. The tare is actually a fixed percentage of the total product weight, with a MINIMUM amount (applicable for small shipments). I'm just adding some information that I would hope would be useful for a shop owner to understand what's going on. I also added a fix so that purely virtual orders (no physical product shipped) wouldn't get tagged with the minimum shipping weight. (I carried that over from Frozen -- is it no longer necessary?)

Quote

Adding comments to the sample data SQL to talk about files in the images/sample directory is not productive.

Well, if you've got a better suggestion, I'm listening. If there are instructions anywhere on loading the sample data, perhaps that would be a better place. I put the comment in just in case someone would be wondering where and how they load the sample images if they want the store samples.

Quote

The same way it currently prompts people to remove the .github directory.  The contents of which you apparently haven't read, as it explains the process to make pull requests.

I've been wondering why the .github directory is shipped with the product. Totally useless. And I do know how to make a PR, but explained up top why I choose not to. Don't get snarky over this!

Quote

I would agree with changing "setup" to "set up" and "checkout" to "check out" when used as a verb, but I really doubt that you can find a way to make that exciting to Burt.  I notice that you don't change login to log in.  Perhaps that means that I changed them all already.  But I wouldn't bet on it. 

I looked for incorrect "login" and didn't see any, so maybe you already caught any. As for GB not finding it "exciting" to make such mundane corrections, well, I find a polished, professional-looking product to be more exciting (and appealing) that something crappy looking. Tastes vary, I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×