Every CMS I try out soon shows it's true colours as a pile of junk and the most praised are the worst offenders. Why are all CMS such utter diabolical and unmitigated crud? Is it something innate to the idea of a CMS or just a common fault?
Clarification added June 23, 2007:
I tried Drupal and discovered it a coders hell and I tried XOOPS and found it an SEO hell. They are missing things like standards (web standards and coding). What I generally want a CMS to do is manage users, authentication and maybe comments and articles. After that I want to be able to hook into the core via an API and use those basics for the flavour of the site I want to bring.
I don't need developer bad attitude (naming no names this time) or "hard coded oddness" just some sort of adherence to some standards (at this stage any standards will do).
I ended up creating the Orbit42 base class (link: http://code.orbit42.com FYI) just so I didn't have to keep starting from scratch each time as some things you always have to do (data, API hooks, error processing, coupling etc). Eventually it will result in a CMS (I have no doubt) but if it sucks like all the rest I think I might have to shoot myself.
Good Answers (6)
Daniel T
Professional Web Developer
Best Answers in: Web Development (2), Blogging (1), E-Commerce (1)
I think it's something innate to the idea of a CMS, and also innate to the idea of a general purpose CMS.
First of all... the web is not easy. The simple act of making a content management system that keeps users adding content in a way that is consistent across all browsers is herculean. It's just difficult without some expertise about how web layout works.
Text is hard enough, but getting images optimized for the web and laid out is even harder. There's just no substitute for training. It's possible to build good tools, but honestly the problem is so difficult and the problem space so young that I think it will be awhile for something universally great.
Next, designing a CMS for a very specific set of content is hard enough, but making a CMS flexible enough to handle lots of different content types is even harder. Then, making it easy enough for people who don't understand how to organize content is even harder.
I agree that drupal, while great for some things, can be a totally steaming pile for other things, and module quality is spotty. I hear Joomla is pretty good but haven't tried it.
However, specifically for blogs and VERY simple content editing, Wordpress is a standout in the field. This is one of the best examples of WYSIWYG editing integrated with content management out there.
Also looking good these days is SilverStripe. They have a pretty flexible system that's also simple, but with a much different philosophy. They're suited to being a CMS for simpler, non-dynamic sites, but are better for standard in-page editing.
Which ones do you think are the worst offenders? I'm curious.
Links:
Jeremy S
at Fusenet, Inc.
Best Answers in: Web Development (2), Software Development (1), Wireless (1)
I find CMSs to be good at managing a specific set of functionality... but beyond that the value they deliver breaks down easily. Fortunately the functionality they deliver probably covers most of the needs of your average internet portal.
Beyond a CMS, you might try out a framework (like Cake, or RoR), but they also have their limits... you're still working within some other developer's world. After that you're looking at developing your own platform, which will be perfectly suited to whatever you build it for.
Find a good developer and hang onto them. :)
Deane B
Content Management Professional; Editor, Gadgetopia
Best Answers in: Web Development (7), Computers and Software (3), Blogging (2), E-Commerce (2), Customer Relationship Management (1), Enterprise Software (1), Information Storage (1)
After reading your post, I promise you will *love* the blog post (and the other post it links to) in the links below.
Links:
Marc A
General Manager at dē-ĕm 3
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (19), Starting Up (8), Mentoring (6), Ethics (6), Project Management (5), Advertising (4), Staffing and Recruiting (3), Business Development (3), Computers and Software (3), Wireless (3), Occupational Training (2), Venture Capital and Private Equity (2), Personnel Policies (2), Internet Marketing (2), Customer Relationship Management (2), Sales Techniques (2), Writing and Editing (2), Change Management (2), Career Management (2), Professional Networking (2), Enterprise Software (2), Telecommunications (2), Job Search (1), Budgeting (1), Foreign Investment (1), Financial Regulation (1), Risk Management (1), Government Policy (1), Internationalization and Localization (1), Offshoring and Outsourcing (1), Employment and Labor Law (1), Direct Marketing (1), Public Relations (1), Business Analytics (1), Corporate Governance (1), Organizational Development (1), Planning (1), Equity Markets (1), Futures Markets (1), Manufacturing (1), Branding (1), Interface Design (1), Business Plans (1), Incorporation (1), Small Business (1), Green Business (1), E-Commerce (1), Software Development (1), Web Development (1)
Hahaha!!
You aren't supposed to TELL everyone!! That's how interactive shops make money!
And not all are crud - Facebook is pretty good (I hear) - Linked In is pretty good too! They're all CMS systems.
Generally speaking most CMSs are good for one niche and don't translate well to another. General ones are useless because they do too little in any given situation. So what?!! These days you can have a custom one written for you for ~75k USD CUSTOM!! Why buy junk for 50k when you can have perfect for 75k?
Its true, you really need to find a CMS that fits your needs and isnt necessarily a jack-of-all-trades. I tried Mambo out and whilst I got things working, there was so much I would have ripped out if I had the patience.
I've started rolling my own CMS in Django and it's going pretty well. Saying that, I'm writing all my own modules and wrappers for things. It just goes to show that a custom solution is sometimes better than one off the shelf.
Chris P
Manager, Portal & Integration Technologies at University of San Diego
Best Answers in: Small Business (2), Web Development (2), Education and Schools (1), Computers and Software (1)
Most CMS are massive projects covering tons of different ground, and I agree end up being fairly complicated to setup and maintain. Assuming this is what you mean by "crud" you might try something like CMS Made Simple. Of course, what makes it fun to use is that it doesn't do nearly as much as the big guys. Also, it has a charmingly recursive name.
I suppose the real question is what you're trying to do. For all their faults, the large CMS engines tend to be better than the alternative if it's building your own wheel.
Links:
More Answers (3)
This is the reason I am now making a new CMS system.
I want the typist in the office to be able to add content, I want the salesman to a products to the CMS system and have a student updating order statuses.
Most of these things are just not possible in widely availible solutions. All have such a complex entry level and don't have the custom datastructure to hold down the requested content. For instance, a carsales module... each dealer want different things...
I am now working on a system that includes more business flows and has custom modules. The typist might write letters but needs approval before sending, same with webcontent.
I know... you might find this elsewhere... but I am going to finish my project. An XML file to define all module properties. I have had a previous version working on The Dugout, a website with 3.000.000 pageviews each month. Now having Soccer Gamers as future partner planning to go live in August.
But to come back to the questions asked. I think that most of the CMS system have a to complex entry level and are to much based on pure tekst content.
Links:
Roshan S
Ruby on Rails and Drupal Guru
Best Answers in: Web Development (4), Intellectual Property (1), E-Commerce (1)
Well, not sure why you call Drupal as a coder's hell. It is known for very clean code and strong technilcal following.
If you want a blogging platform, go with Wordpress. If you just want a newspaper type site, go with Django, If you want to have lot of flexbility with much of functionality available in core and contributed modules, pick Drupal, if you want to have some robust scientific engine and lot of mathematical power, algorightms, and complex logic to power your web 2.0 app, go with Ruby on Rails
Roshanh
Links:
Sean C
MBA/TM, Technology Management, Joomla CMS Expert, Consultant, Account Manager, Project Manager
Best Answers in: Web Development (1)
Well, it depends on the needs and the budget. You can "bend" any CMS to your will for a price...or anything for that matter, but should you? With Joomla! CMS 1.5 now in Beta 2, it looks like it could be your answer, or at least a heck of a lot closer. ;-)
