And why?
I myself have always been partial to OpenWiki but that's because it's the only one I've ever used. What I'd like is one with nicer--ideally WYSIWYG--formatting, so we can make our internal docs look slicker.
« Consulting Gig | Main | Swiss Army Knives vs. Focused Products »
January 25, 2006
Comments
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Stuff I've Done
-
Got a minute? The first 3d Chrome Native Client game. 
A very, very co-op game for Xbox Live Arcade, developed with Richard Garfield and James Chao, among others.
Many say the best Spider-Man game ever. Even Zero Punctuation liked it.
My critically acclaimed, honorable-mention winning, self-published novel.
Stuff I'm Working On
- Prototypes
Various in-progress games, digital and not.
Recent Comments
- bram stolk on You can't not look at it!
- Karim Ahmed on Test Driven Development, Several Years Later - or, I'm a Big Liar
- TM on Test Driven Development, Several Years Later - or, I'm a Big Liar
- martin on Test-Driven Development, A Year Later
- snoopy on Smoother Trailer
- snoopy on Did I mention I'm teaching at DigiPen now?
- snoopy on Monsterhearts on IndieAGoGo
- Jay K. on D&D Next risks Grognard Capture or Tyranny of Choice or both
- Jay K. on My wife's more successful than I am
- Joe on My wife's more successful than I am
We use Atlassian's Confluence (in spite of it being commercial and thus costing more than the many other free wikis out there) for a few reasons:
1. We already use Jira as our bug system, and it integrates nicely
2. It's got good (very responsive) support
3. All the expected wiki functionality, plus lots of built-in macros for nice formatting of various things (including code, with syntax highlighting)
4. Very extensible -- Atlassian (the company) and community write plugins and encourage writing of plugins
It's got a WSIWYG editor, as well, as of the 2.0 release. Link is http://atlassian.com/software/confluence/ .
We've been pretty happy with it so far. The price wasn't too bad, either, ranging from $1200 to $4k depending on user count. (It's actually free for educational use and Free/Open Source projects, but I doubt that applies to you.)
Posted by: Austin | January 25, 2006 at 01:52 PM
We use Atlassian's Confluence (in spite of it being commercial and thus costing more than the many other free wikis out there) for a few reasons:
1. We already use Jira as our bug system, and it integrates nicely
2. It's got good (very responsive) support
3. All the expected wiki functionality, plus lots of built-in macros for nice formatting of various things (including code, with syntax highlighting)
4. Very extensible -- Atlassian (the company) and community write plugins and encourage writing of plugins
It's got a WSIWYG editor, as well, as of the 2.0 release. Link is http://atlassian.com/software/confluence/ .
We've been pretty happy with it so far. The price wasn't too bad, either, ranging from $1200 to $4k depending on user count. (It's actually free for educational use and Free/Open Source projects, but I doubt that applies to you.)
Posted by: Austin | January 25, 2006 at 01:52 PM
http://moinmoin.wikiwikiweb.de
A little rough around the edges but it gets the job done. Free and in Python. Easy to hack the code for your own needs.
Posted by: Some Guy | January 25, 2006 at 03:50 PM
I use wikimedia or whatever it is called that wikipedia uses.
Works great, people love it.
Posted by: zachary j gamedesigner | January 25, 2006 at 07:52 PM
PmWiki - especially cool as a "small wiki" (where for larger ones you'd use wikimedia or such). No database required, only php and a webserver. And it really works!
Posted by: NeARAZ | January 26, 2006 at 01:13 AM
Second MediaWiki. It makes for quite nice-looking documents, and is fairly easy to use.
Posted by: Robert 'Groby' Blum | January 26, 2006 at 06:44 AM
I'd recommend Dokuwiki simply because it's extremely lightweight:
http://wiki.splitbrain.org/wiki:dokuwiki
No database required, it uses plain text files and gzip to create archives of edited pages.
Posted by: Duncan Gough | January 26, 2006 at 08:33 AM
Wow, did anyone actually read his message? None of those wikis have a wysiwyg editor do they?
Posted by: Greggman | January 26, 2006 at 10:23 AM
I did indeed read the message, and lo and behold, he said "*ideally* WYSIWYG" (emphasis mine). So what's your recommendation?
Mediawiki, by the way, has experimental support for WYSIWYG and development is under way: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WYSIWYG_editor
And if you're looking for a personal wiki (what *are* you looking for, Jamie?), WikidPad for Windows or VoodooPad for OSX are nice.
Posted by: Robert 'Groby' Blum | January 26, 2006 at 10:52 AM
MoinMoin has a WYSIWYG editor in the latest version.
Posted by: Some Guy | January 26, 2006 at 12:58 PM
It's worth noting that it wouldn't be too hard to integrate FCKEditor (www.fckeditor.net) into most simple wikis to give you WYSIWYG editing.
We use Xwiki.com, which I wouldn't recommend.
Posted by: Hugh "Nomad" Hancock | January 26, 2006 at 02:39 PM
If you want something simple to install, fully featured, and really extensible, check out PmWiki. Much, much better than OpenWiki.
Posted by: Noel Llopis | January 28, 2006 at 05:29 PM