Select to view content in your preferred language

Experiance Builder: it is to cumbersome compared to the web applicaiton builder... or continue to support the web application builder

1578
1
12-01-2023 02:29 PM
Status: Open
Labels (3)
LyonMNGIS
Frequent Contributor

Hello,

I found that setting up applications in the experience builder is quite cumbersome compared to the web application builder. 

In the web application builder we can build a "typical" county web map by just 1) selecting a theme 2) select a map 3) add widgets...  I like how ESRI configures widget placement, and how we can change the theme in a click of a button.

The experience builder is much more cumbersome.  Setting up widgets is difficult because we must first select our map that we want to configure which is annoying when 95% of our apps only have one map.  Second, we need to place the widget yourself.  Third, we have tiny menus on the side that we need to navigate through to set up widget settings which may offer TO many options!

And prepare to start all over if we want to change our theme from the Billboard to Box theme.  The experience builder theme is more color related than widget related.

Please consider the following:

  • Experiance builder should default to the only map in the application or page.
  • Have ESRI place widgets based on our theme...  Then we can manually adjust them if desired.  I don't think I will ever need to adjust their theme position.
  • Make it easier to configure widgets.  The current settings are too complex and hard to configure with the tiny side menu.
  • Allow us to change the theme and not have to rebuild the entire application.

Summary:

The Experience Builder has the potential to create amazing applications.  However, current workflow is cumbersome and very frustrating.

The Web Application Builder is perfect for many county GIS websites.  We click on a theme, click on the widgets we want.  And configure the widgets in a very presentable format.

Instant Apps are great staging a small focused web applicaiton.  Unfortunately, they do not offer enough tools for county based applications.

Please consider making the experience builder easier to work with, continue to support the web application builder, or better yet both!

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 Comment
JeffShaw

As an admin of an organization with a few hundred content creators, and as an experienced ExB app developer, I definitely agree that ExB is NOT a replacement for WAB. It is too complicated, confusing and inefficient for use by the majority of our creators. And even after all this time it still lacks basic web mapping functionality.

We need a well-designed product like Web AppBuilder. I was recently reminded of just how much better WAB is in many respects when I needed to go back to WAB just to provide a customized scalebar. And Instant Apps are just as chaotic - it seems as if numerous dev teams are working in isolation to create redundant yet incomplete templates rather than integrating them into one useful product. Our organization, with over 1500 apps, has just a couple production Instant Apps because the templates rarely include the necessary functions. You find one function in one template, and another in a different template, but not both together. Esri needs to integrate these functions into one useful product as they have done in Web AppBuilder.