Virtual Mart install and nasty layout

[Nemesiss]

Hi,

I am reviewing some eCommerce components for Joomla and just installed the latest VM on a clean install of Joomla 2.5.  I installed also the sample data as well with the install package for VM just to see it in action.  However, after the install when I went to view the site front page, there were a bunch of modules that had been added in the left column.   Those modules had an accordion style menu to them but when I clicked to open them the items within (price, count, image, etc) were completely garbled.  It looks as though there was no cc applied, or layout of any kind. 

I then added the VM to the front page in a menu item as instruction by the install to see what it looked like.  the result was the same in an actual page, there were objects and elements scattered around and on top of each other like in the modules with no images showing but the add button.

Did I miss something on this install?  It was very straight forward to install but the outcome was unusable.  Like I said, that's the newest install of Joomla (clean install) and the latest stable version of VM.

thanks.

[jenkinhill]

Much of the styling comes from your Joomla template - certianly sounds like something not installed correctly.

VirtueMart 2 can look pretty good with some styling work. eg look at http://demos.virtueplanet.com/shiny/store-front/electronics-appliances/side-by-side-door-581-litres-refrigerator-detail  or http://jdemo.mowebso.com/25_templates/ecommerce/

[Nemesiss]

I would love it if I could get a site to look like your first demo just out of the box.  That's all I'm looking for, however, mine does not.   So, on a fresh install of joomla 2.5 using the default template that is setup with joomla I'm getting something completely different.

Maybe my steps for installing are wrong.  Here's what I did:

-  got the latest stable version of VM
-  unzipped the com_virtuemart.2.0.6_extract_first.zip file
-  two new compressed files were presented
-  installed the first one com_virtuemart.2.0.6.tar.gz
-  then installed the second one com_virtuemart.2.0.6_ext_aio.tar.gz

That's it.  upon viewing the joomla site right after the install it's all messed up.  You can see the example as I've attached images to display what I'm talking about.



[attachment cleanup by admin]

[jenkinhill]

Firsly I can see that you don't have the images correctly installed. Either they are missing or the filenames are corrupt (on some setups the filetype .jpg is not appended to the files). Product images should be in joomla_root/images/stories/virtuemart/product/

Second you should make a Joomla main menu item to the VirtueMart "Front page " on the Menu Item Type selector.

Third the Circular Saw is not a good product for demonstrating layout as it has many additional options, and requires additional styling.

Templating to fit with your Joomla template is relatively easy, it only requires a small knowledge of css and php, and of using template overrides. Or there are commercial templates to save the development time - I think that in the long run they can save so much time that they are a good option for those needing to set up a store quickly.

[Nemesiss]

hmm...  This should be simpler for a sample data install.  I can appreciate all the work that has gone into this component, i just wish it was easier to take advantage of that effort.  I think that's limiting your audience.  At any rate, i would gladly pay for a VM joomla template if I could find one that fit with the design I'm looking at.  however, there don't seem to be that many out there as far as I can find.

[Nemesiss]

I looked into the images that you posted as well, and there is not installed.  I even went through the admin tools and ran the "reset and install sample data" with no changes.   The content is still missing.

[Martin.]

I have exactly the same problem. The image file is not included in the installer package as the developer already said, but what he didnt say is how to get that file. That would have been nice.

[jenkinhill]

The images are present in the install package. If you unpack com_virtuemart.2.0.6.tar.gz locally and look in \administrator\components\com_virtuemart\assets\images\vmsampleimages\product  then you will see the product images. They have filenames like 578563851019e01264a9b40dcf1c4ab6.jpg  (that is the hammer). One suggestion for a failed install (where the .jpg is left off the filename) is because of a server limitation on filename length, something I have never come across. The image files can be uploaded by ftp into Joomla's image/stories directory - eg joomla_root/images/stories/virtuemart/product/

[Nemesiss]

That's exactly what's happened.  The files have been cut off for whatever reason.  The hammer image you spoke of is this on the server:

578563851019e01264a9b4

I've updated the files with the ones you indicated, cleared the cache and still they don't appear.  The files are correct and now located on the server as they should be.

So, this presents another question and comment from a beginner with VM.  Along with the other long file named images that are also cut off, are there any other files that will have a similar issue as a result of the long file names? 

And secondly, (now please take this as a suggestion for improvement) is why not just call the hammer, a hammer? 

There has been an immense amount of work and effort put into this product but the complexity is also introduced as a result and in some instances (file names) the complexity is unnecessary.  Should you have called the hammer.jpg just that, there would not be this issue with the product and confusion by new users.

Less is more in some cases, and this is a great example of that.   I know that in development many times there are so many things that drive an application (eg, latest technology, new trends, etc. etc) in an effort to improve it that in the end it becomes a hindrance.   Just judging by some of the comments and feedback about VM and the new version VM2.0 has become somewhat unstable and difficult to use from my understanding.  Would it not be more beneficial to improve the user experience from both the use of the product, but also from an implementation standpoint?  I'd like to just say some comments and feedback are also completely unfounded, not to mention unfair to the people who volunteer their precious time to create an open-source version for the rest of us.

Just my two cents.