onclick="trackClickout('event', 'clickout', 'Visit User Reviews', 'google-sites', this, true, ReturnPopup );"
View 1 reply
%d件の返信を見る
“Upgrade” from previous to new Sites broke team wiki
I work for a large company that is also a Google Apps customer. I am on a 14-person highly technical team. We use Sites for our team wiki, and routinely update pages, often 2-3 of us making separate updates to different pages at any one. Since the rollout of the "new" sites, editing and publishing is only for the entire site, meaning one user cannot publish a page when done if someone else is also editing a page. Google touts this as a collaborative tool, but this one feature-failure is our greatest pain.
The new version dropped support for tables. Tables were introduced to HTML in the early-mid-90s, but Google decided to drop it from Sites in 2020. You can imagine we use(d) tables all over the place in our team wiki. They are a basic feature when laying out things like settings, selections that differ by environments, and so on. Tables are an everyday thing.
We routinely get page edit errors requiring a reload of the page, often losing content we created along the way. If you have any serious edits it is best to create the content in gDocs then copy over. This sort of works, but still requires finish editing for formatting mismatches from gDocs to Sites. This seems insane to us. Partly because gDocs does tables that do not paste into Sites...but that's just me banging on the tables again.
Sure, we could try to learn to embed gDocs and gSheets elements into a page...to recreate BASIC features that used to exist in Sites, but honestly we are simply too busy to try to solve Google's shortsitedness with kludgy workarounds...I mean "integrated features that only sorta work." All that for a wiki, which normally is a relatively simple thing to maintain.
Google is deaf to complaints, even from a Fortune 100 company. Someone thought the new Sites would be better, but it is, in the opinion of a technical team with a few centuries of collective experience, barely worth the effort to try.
Creates a site without bells & whistles, but do we really want them?
I made myself a 22 page Google site for a hobby project. I didn't use any templates so made it from scratch. Do I want flashing gifs or auto scrolling gizmo's, adverts popping up etc? No I just want to show the photo's and descriptions of my vintage lathe and it's numerous accessories. Some of the free website builders don't auto reduce the pages for iphone so pleased that Google does.
It's really easy & I have a drop down menu for all the pages. I wish there was an option to make photo's enlarge but apart from that I'm happy
Behind an interface that seems simplistic, Google Site actually lets you do what you want! You just need to be imaginative and creative. But it seems people are more used to choosing from a list. I concede that at first, it is a bit confusing, but after doing several minisites, I have realized that the possibilities are much greater than they seem. You can resize and organize everything as you like. And finally, it goes a lot faster and is a lot more fun.
If you want a simple interface that you can easily work with, Google Sites is perfect. It's modern-looking, clean and unencumbered. The only ones who don't like are web-techies and websites like this who can't earn income from it. The web isn't all about business and income, so website building should be judged against those criteria. But sites like this are driven by referrals and $, so they would never recommend a freebie like Google Sites. If you are service- or people-oriented, if you want to pass on information in a simple, clean way OR if you are your own web techie, then Google Sites is ideal.
Good insight, however, you have mentioned that on Google Sites it is easy to use Google Adsense. What I read on Google Sites terms and conditions that no advertising is allowed on their platform. Google Adsense can only be used for websites deployed on Google Cloud, which is a paid platform.
Google Sites does the job for a simple website without any features
Funny how you guys show the "Get a Wix website" pop-up. Seems biased to me :D and this is just the option that gives you the highest commission. As stated above, google Sites does the job for a simple website without many features. You can use it to write blogs, present your services and products (not sell them though) and have your virtual business card in place. Why spend money on more if you don't need more?
I use Google sites for fun, and it meets my needs... mostly. The problem is that there's no way to put a comment in there. Basically, I have to create a Google form, copy the link, and then create a button on my site and put the link in it! I have to check my email all the time for comment forms, and then manually put the comment on my website! It's exhausting, and unlike other websites, the comment won't be there immediately! But besides that, and no blogging tools, I like Google sites.
It’s very good IF you have the appropriate context
My business use Google Sites and I'm happy. To evaluate a product, you need criteria.
- Fast to build (imply less functionality)
- Secure for informative website (no vulnerable stuff to manage)
- Very easy to put in place (no server or infrastructure)
- Cost effective
I was ready to accept many constraints, like.
- Simple design
- No application (informative website)
Google sites respond to all my criteria.
Can I find a better solution? Yes, absolutely. But, it will require more efforts...
