Comments on: CMS Debate http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/ GeNius oN tAp Sat, 19 Jul 2008 10:53:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5 by: Peter Flynn http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-675 Mon, 11 Sep 2006 11:09:49 +0000 http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-675 Thanx Phillip - yeah the "lock in" factor is a pertinent point. Also proprietary CMSes can't keep up with the open source equivalents in terms of functionality unless they are hellish expensive - like Red Dot for example Thanx Phillip - yeah the “lock in” factor is a pertinent point. Also proprietary CMSes can’t keep up with the open source equivalents in terms of functionality unless they are hellish expensive - like Red Dot for example

]]> by: Phillip http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-610 Sat, 09 Sep 2006 05:43:25 +0000 http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-610 I've worked on a number of sites with Mambo/Joomla. Once you get used to the way it functions on the backend you're set. You can pretty much do whatever you need. The support base is good, and if there isn't something that you need out there you can extend it. I've created a number of components for clients that plug in and play well with the rest of the Mambo/Joomla system. A while back I also looked at Typo3 and it was a little too complicated to install and use. There are a couple of CMS products in SA and they seem to focus on making things easy for the users on the backend. Some I find are too simple - which can be a good thing for clients. The problem I have with them is that they become hack jobs when it comes to extending the functionality. Also a big problem I find is that you're dependant on the developer, they either guard their product - afriad you'll steal it, or you're locked into a bad license. I've seen companies locked into CMSes, and then when they finally do break free the CMS the product supplier get's hostile and screws you. Open source I find is good for developers and clients in terms of flexibility, speed of roll out, and site road map. The free price is a bonus for everyone too, cheaper site deployments, more money for the developer to pull off a good site. I’ve worked on a number of sites with Mambo/Joomla. Once you get used to the way it functions on the backend you’re set. You can pretty much do whatever you need. The support base is good, and if there isn’t something that you need out there you can extend it. I’ve created a number of components for clients that plug in and play well with the rest of the Mambo/Joomla system.

A while back I also looked at Typo3 and it was a little too complicated to install and use. There are a couple of CMS products in SA and they seem to focus on making things easy for the users on the backend. Some I find are too simple - which can be a good thing for clients. The problem I have with them is that they become hack jobs when it comes to extending the functionality. Also a big problem I find is that you’re dependant on the developer, they either guard their product - afriad you’ll steal it, or you’re locked into a bad license. I’ve seen companies locked into CMSes, and then when they finally do break free the CMS the product supplier get’s hostile and screws you.

Open source I find is good for developers and clients in terms of flexibility, speed of roll out, and site road map. The free price is a bonus for everyone too, cheaper site deployments, more money for the developer to pull off a good site.

]]> by: Mark http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-139 Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:57:31 +0000 http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-139 Hey Peter, We are also in the predicament of what CMS system to use with the sites we are designing. We have installed Mambo on our test server, and after an easy installation, a somewhat difficult play around with the backend (takes some getting used to, so much functionality hidden away in the system), and a pretty straight forward customization of the template file, we are happy to say that we love this CMS system. I'm sure all the CMSs you have touched on have great drawcards, in the end I suppose you just have to pick one, and try it out. I've heard Joomla is really good to. Hey Peter,

We are also in the predicament of what CMS system to use with the sites we are designing.

We have installed Mambo on our test server, and after an easy installation, a somewhat difficult play around with the backend (takes some getting used to, so much functionality hidden away in the system), and a pretty straight forward customization of the template file, we are happy to say that we love this CMS system.

I’m sure all the CMSs you have touched on have great drawcards, in the end I suppose you just have to pick one, and try it out.

I’ve heard Joomla is really good to.

]]> by: Anoop Atre http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-122 Mon, 19 Jun 2006 18:33:00 +0000 http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-122 I agree with pdaether about TYPO3, I've been using it for sometime and it sure is worth the effort. As for comparing Drupal & TYPO3 > http://www.cmsmatrix.org/matrix/cms-matrix?func=compare&listingId=1050&listingId=1023 Hope that helps : ) I agree with pdaether about TYPO3, I’ve been using it for sometime and it sure is worth the effort. As for comparing Drupal & TYPO3
> http://www.cmsmatrix.org/matrix/cms-matrix?func=compare&listingId=1050&listingId=1023

Hope that helps : )

]]> by: Stephen Reardon http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-119 Mon, 19 Jun 2006 12:20:51 +0000 http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-119 I have used both Mambo and Joomla and find them quite simple to install and use. What about the look and feel stuff though, I know you guys are ultimately interested in functionality but surely the availablilty of templates and being easy to customise should also be considerations. I have used both Mambo and Joomla and find them quite simple to install and use. What about the look and feel stuff though, I know you guys are ultimately interested in functionality but surely the availablilty of templates and being easy to customise should also be considerations.

]]> by: Colin Frost http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-113 Mon, 19 Jun 2006 08:34:59 +0000 http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-113 Hi, I came across your blog/site via a link on RSA Web. We are a ASP solution technology company out of Sydney, Oz - we offer a next generation CMS/CRM/e-Commerce, etc solution for the web design market. Will be looking to set up our solution in SA in next 3-6 months. We cannot service SA market from Oz due to latency. Business Catalyst are not open source, but offer so much more to the market. Check out our website...trial no longer active I am afraid. Regard Colin www.businesscatalyst.com Hi,
I came across your blog/site via a link on RSA Web. We are a ASP solution technology company out of Sydney, Oz - we offer a next generation CMS/CRM/e-Commerce, etc solution for the web design market. Will be looking to set up our solution in SA in next 3-6 months. We cannot service SA market from Oz due to latency. Business Catalyst are not open source, but offer so much more to the market. Check out our website…trial no longer active I am afraid.
Regard
Colin
www.businesscatalyst.com

]]> by: BarCamp Cape Town at Web 2.0, AJAX http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-89 Sat, 17 Jun 2006 10:25:14 +0000 http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-89 [...] Our Work « CMS Debate [...] […] Our Work « CMS Debate […]

]]> by: Rob Gilmour http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-59 Wed, 14 Jun 2006 13:07:50 +0000 http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-59 Great Roundup, have a look at http://www.midgard-project.org/ Its a good CMS, with an active communinty and uses Prototype elements, so could be an alternative for a web2.0 rollout. Another one to put on your watchlist and maybe try out. Great Roundup, have a look at http://www.midgard-project.org/

Its a good CMS, with an active communinty and uses Prototype elements, so could be an alternative for a web2.0 rollout.

Another one to put on your watchlist and maybe try out.

]]> by: Peter Flynn http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-58 Wed, 14 Jun 2006 12:55:34 +0000 http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-58 Yeah - I know that Typo3 can manage multiple site, but so can Drupal and I think it does so more managably. Drupal also has various plugins. I also don't like TypoScript and I think it was a bad call to ever use that in Typo3. Does anyone else out there know more detail on Drupal vs. Typo3? Where is Typo3 stronger than Drupal? Yeah - I know that Typo3 can manage multiple site, but so can Drupal and I think it does so more managably. Drupal also has various plugins. I also don’t like TypoScript and I think it was a bad call to ever use that in Typo3.
Does anyone else out there know more detail on Drupal vs. Typo3? Where is Typo3 stronger than Drupal?

]]> by: pdaether http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-57 Wed, 14 Jun 2006 12:39:19 +0000 http://blog.whitewallweb.com/2006/06/14/cms-debate/#comment-57 Typo3 is VERY complex. Typo3 is not a good choice if you plan to set up just one site, but as IT company you can benefit from the flexibility and all the ready to use extensions. To getting started with Typo3 is not easy and takes a couple of weeks, but it can be a good investment. Typo3 is VERY complex.
Typo3 is not a good choice if you plan to set up just one site, but as IT company you can benefit from the flexibility and all the ready to use extensions.
To getting started with Typo3 is not easy and takes a couple of weeks, but it can be a good investment.

]]>