4 ms·

What have they moved on to? I'm investigating CMS's for a client (an task I have entirely no experience with). Is Joomla any better? Or is the whole concept

by daxfohl 11y ago

What have they moved on to? I'm investigating CMS's for a client (an task I have entirely no experience with). Is Joomla any better? Or is the whole concept of CMS dying?

monk_e_boy 11y ago
CMS is dying. We find it's easier to have a separate blog, shop, photo site etc than try to stick it all in Drupal. After ditching our custom CMS software for Drupal, we find we spend more time making Drupal do what we need than just starting a site from scratch.
- busterarm 11y ago
  Wordpress powers 1/4 of the internet... Any company with a decently sized content (producing) team is going to need to use a CMS. A lot of folks are also using Hubspot and Salesforce to create their sites...Gotta love vendor lock in.
  - monk_e_boy 11y ago
    I wouldn't count wordpress as a CMS personally, more of a super blog. Drupal is much more powerful and flexible (out of the box -- you can modify both)
jordanlev 11y ago
More people are on wordpress than any other CMS, which is one data point in the decision but certainly does not mean it's "the best". But based on the wording of your question ("which have they moved on to"), this is probably the closest correct-ish answer. Other than that, people have moved on to all sorts of CMS's: * If you're looking for something in the spirit of Drupal (most configuration done via dashboard interface, very flexible content modeling), try ProcessWire (http://processwire.com/ http://processwire.com/) (free/open-source) * If you're looking for something more designer-friendly and have a budget for the project, Craft CMS (https://craftcms.com/ https://craftcms.com/) is very popular these days. * Also designer-friendly and less complex than Craft (and less expensive), so it's better for simpler sites: Perch CMS (https://grabaperch.com/ https://grabaperch.com/). * For the most easy-to-use editing interface, I recommend Concrete5 (http://www.concrete5.org/ http://www.concrete5.org/) -- my personal favorite (free/open-source). * If this is a super basic site though and you just want to use an off-the-shelf theme and let the client manage it as much as possible, you're probably best off with a hosted solution such as Weebly (http://www.weebly.com/ http://www.weebly.com/) or Squarespace (http://squarespace.com/ http://squarespace.com/). These have monthly fees (but comparable to decent web hosting). There's also 18 bajillion other options out there... welcome to the world of CMS's, where we had decision fatigue long before javascript made it cool ;)
noamyoungerm 11y ago
CMSs are dying and static sites are replacing them - there's absolutely no reason to run a complex backend when the entire site is supposed to hold some text and maybe a space for comments. Things like Jekyll or Hexo are straightforward and easy to work with, but because static sites are really just tools to transform markdown into HTML, something like Metalsmith could probably even handle online shops.
- bartmcpherson 11y ago
  Static sites for large institutions is asking for trouble down the road. Think about universities with hundreds of content providers. They'll put anything and everything on their sites with no regard for the standard layout/design. CMS gives them design choices, and enforces standards so you can update/refresh the look and feel in the future.
  - daxfohl 11y ago
    Interesting, I hadn't thought of that. Do you have any additional thoughts on when a CMS is appropriate versus static sites or from-scratch sites?
    - jordanlev 11y ago
      It's an easy distinction: if non-programmers are managing the content of the site, don't use a static site or a static site generator. Asking people whose job isn't "building websites" to edit text files, run some sort of compiler on the command line, connect to a server via FTP, or deal with version control is a total failure mode. But if a developer (or an especially adventurous designer) is going to be editing the content of the site as time goes on, then static files or a static site generator can be a great option.
snowwrestler 11y ago
They haven't moved on. You're not going to get an accurate picture of the CMS market here on HN. Most folks here are developers...PHP CMS's are not what they are interested in. The prevailing opinion on HN is something like "CMS's suck, you should build it yourself with node/React" or whatever. If you need to build a content website, and the information architecture is complex, Drupal is a very strong choice. I haven't use D8 yet, and I would not recommend building a high-profile project on it yet, unless you really want to be an early adopter. But D7 works well and will be supported for a long time yet to come. If your info architecture is fairly simple, take a look at Wordpress. You'll have an easier time finding low-cost vendors than with Drupal. Drupal is powerful but expensive.
- daxfohl 11y ago
  Very believable. I'd have probably responded with the "prevailing opinion" to myself if I hadn't been the one that asked the question. :)
  - snowwrestler 11y ago
    Ha! :) IMO the true advantages of a popular, open-source CMS are not in the code, which I think most developers will agree tends to be idiosyncratic at best. The advantages tend to be business-type advantages, like: - It's easy to find case studies to help explain and plan your project. - It's easy to find vendors who can build or support the technology. That makes it easier to run competitive RFPs, and fire/replace vendors without having to rebuild from scratch. - You benefit from a security program that has a lot of inputs--a lot of bad guys trying to get in, and a lot of good guys trying to keep them out. The code is battle-tested and frequently patched. - You benefit from a community module system that has a lot of inputs. Chances are if you want to do something, there is a module to do it, or at least get close. - You can more easily empower "tech savvy" employees to do pseudo-development tasks like build filtered lists and manage content workflows. It's easier and cheaper to scale tech-savvy employees than full developers. - There are enterprise-savvy support options available. - It's easy to find hosting. Developers, particularly those who want to innovate and build new tools and products, tend not to value these sorts of things as much.
chrisparsons 11y ago
I imagine most (like us) are just staying put until a clear alternative is present. There's no rush to get off of Drupal 7. Security updates are still flowing, the module environment is finally starting to mature, and there's no real sign that there's an EOL being set anytime soon. If I was building a new site that made sense to use a CMS and not build something from scratch, I'd still probably go Drupal 7.
ommunist 11y ago
Depends on a client. Static site? Consider jekyll. Custom functionality and integrations? Look into Symphony. Canned solution for typical workflow real cheap? WordPress is the answer. Huge budget to share? Go Drupal.
- ksenzee 11y ago
  If you're using Symfony anyway you might as well look into Drupal 8 if it's a content-heavy site. You get a lot of what you would otherwise build for free, and anything else you can do with Symfony.
brightball 11y ago
I always wondered by Mod X didn't get more support. Always liked it better than Drupal or Wordpress.
GSimon 11y ago
You should take a look at ProcessWire: https://processwire.com https://processwire.com, I absolute love it after previously building site after using Wordpress as a CMS.
Supraperplex 11y ago
Joomla and Drupal think of it like Python and Ruby, in the sense of: the same thing but fundamentally absolutely different. I would say Drupal is better. But it doesn't really matter, either is fine and will get the job done. If the site is not very big, consider Wordpress. For one reason: the community and with that mainly the pulgins available. For example there are WP plugins that do the whole conversion for mobile for you or do SEO for you. It really depends on what the site should do. But Wordpress can be easily the best solution. Now, all that is moot, to a level, because all these CMS have nice importerts/exporters, so you cannot really make a big mistake that will sink everything. If however, the site in question is bigger a site than just "a website", consider Typo3. It's a beast. It's cool. It may not worth the effort for a small shop, but if the site has enough size, try Typo3. Beast!

by daxfohl 11y ago

What have they moved on to? I'm investigating CMS's for a client (an task I have entirely no experience with). Is Joomla any better? Or is the whole concept of CMS dying?

monk_e_boy 11y ago

CMS is dying. We find it's easier to have a separate blog, shop, photo site etc than try to stick it all in Drupal. After ditching our custom CMS software for Drupal, we find we spend more time making Drupal do what we need than just starting a site from scratch.

busterarm 11y ago
Wordpress powers 1/4 of the internet... Any company with a decently sized content (producing) team is going to need to use a CMS. A lot of folks are also using Hubspot and Salesforce to create their sites...Gotta love vendor lock in.
- monk_e_boy 11y ago
  I wouldn't count wordpress as a CMS personally, more of a super blog. Drupal is much more powerful and flexible (out of the box -- you can modify both)

jordanlev 11y ago

More people are on wordpress than any other CMS, which is one data point in the decision but certainly does not mean it's "the best". But based on the wording of your question ("which have they moved on to"), this is probably the closest correct-ish answer. Other than that, people have moved on to all sorts of CMS's: * If you're looking for something in the spirit of Drupal (most configuration done via dashboard interface, very flexible content modeling), try ProcessWire (http://processwire.com/ http://processwire.com/) (free/open-source) * If you're looking for something more designer-friendly and have a budget for the project, Craft CMS (https://craftcms.com/ https://craftcms.com/) is very popular these days. * Also designer-friendly and less complex than Craft (and less expensive), so it's better for simpler sites: Perch CMS (https://grabaperch.com/ https://grabaperch.com/). * For the most easy-to-use editing interface, I recommend Concrete5 (http://www.concrete5.org/ http://www.concrete5.org/) -- my personal favorite (free/open-source). * If this is a super basic site though and you just want to use an off-the-shelf theme and let the client manage it as much as possible, you're probably best off with a hosted solution such as Weebly (http://www.weebly.com/ http://www.weebly.com/) or Squarespace (http://squarespace.com/ http://squarespace.com/). These have monthly fees (but comparable to decent web hosting). There's also 18 bajillion other options out there... welcome to the world of CMS's, where we had decision fatigue long before javascript made it cool ;)

noamyoungerm 11y ago

CMSs are dying and static sites are replacing them - there's absolutely no reason to run a complex backend when the entire site is supposed to hold some text and maybe a space for comments. Things like Jekyll or Hexo are straightforward and easy to work with, but because static sites are really just tools to transform markdown into HTML, something like Metalsmith could probably even handle online shops.

bartmcpherson 11y ago
Static sites for large institutions is asking for trouble down the road. Think about universities with hundreds of content providers. They'll put anything and everything on their sites with no regard for the standard layout/design. CMS gives them design choices, and enforces standards so you can update/refresh the look and feel in the future.
- daxfohl 11y ago
  Interesting, I hadn't thought of that. Do you have any additional thoughts on when a CMS is appropriate versus static sites or from-scratch sites?
  - jordanlev 11y ago
    It's an easy distinction: if non-programmers are managing the content of the site, don't use a static site or a static site generator. Asking people whose job isn't "building websites" to edit text files, run some sort of compiler on the command line, connect to a server via FTP, or deal with version control is a total failure mode. But if a developer (or an especially adventurous designer) is going to be editing the content of the site as time goes on, then static files or a static site generator can be a great option.

snowwrestler 11y ago

They haven't moved on. You're not going to get an accurate picture of the CMS market here on HN. Most folks here are developers...PHP CMS's are not what they are interested in. The prevailing opinion on HN is something like "CMS's suck, you should build it yourself with node/React" or whatever. If you need to build a content website, and the information architecture is complex, Drupal is a very strong choice. I haven't use D8 yet, and I would not recommend building a high-profile project on it yet, unless you really want to be an early adopter. But D7 works well and will be supported for a long time yet to come. If your info architecture is fairly simple, take a look at Wordpress. You'll have an easier time finding low-cost vendors than with Drupal. Drupal is powerful but expensive.

daxfohl 11y ago
Very believable. I'd have probably responded with the "prevailing opinion" to myself if I hadn't been the one that asked the question. :)
- snowwrestler 11y ago
  Ha! :) IMO the true advantages of a popular, open-source CMS are not in the code, which I think most developers will agree tends to be idiosyncratic at best. The advantages tend to be business-type advantages, like: - It's easy to find case studies to help explain and plan your project. - It's easy to find vendors who can build or support the technology. That makes it easier to run competitive RFPs, and fire/replace vendors without having to rebuild from scratch. - You benefit from a security program that has a lot of inputs--a lot of bad guys trying to get in, and a lot of good guys trying to keep them out. The code is battle-tested and frequently patched. - You benefit from a community module system that has a lot of inputs. Chances are if you want to do something, there is a module to do it, or at least get close. - You can more easily empower "tech savvy" employees to do pseudo-development tasks like build filtered lists and manage content workflows. It's easier and cheaper to scale tech-savvy employees than full developers. - There are enterprise-savvy support options available. - It's easy to find hosting. Developers, particularly those who want to innovate and build new tools and products, tend not to value these sorts of things as much.

chrisparsons 11y ago

I imagine most (like us) are just staying put until a clear alternative is present. There's no rush to get off of Drupal 7. Security updates are still flowing, the module environment is finally starting to mature, and there's no real sign that there's an EOL being set anytime soon. If I was building a new site that made sense to use a CMS and not build something from scratch, I'd still probably go Drupal 7.

ommunist 11y ago

Depends on a client. Static site? Consider jekyll. Custom functionality and integrations? Look into Symphony. Canned solution for typical workflow real cheap? WordPress is the answer. Huge budget to share? Go Drupal.

ksenzee 11y ago
If you're using Symfony anyway you might as well look into Drupal 8 if it's a content-heavy site. You get a lot of what you would otherwise build for free, and anything else you can do with Symfony.

brightball 11y ago

I always wondered by Mod X didn't get more support. Always liked it better than Drupal or Wordpress.

GSimon 11y ago

You should take a look at ProcessWire: https://processwire.com https://processwire.com, I absolute love it after previously building site after using Wordpress as a CMS.

Supraperplex 11y ago

Joomla and Drupal think of it like Python and Ruby, in the sense of: the same thing but fundamentally absolutely different. I would say Drupal is better. But it doesn't really matter, either is fine and will get the job done. If the site is not very big, consider Wordpress. For one reason: the community and with that mainly the pulgins available. For example there are WP plugins that do the whole conversion for mobile for you or do SEO for you. It really depends on what the site should do. But Wordpress can be easily the best solution. Now, all that is moot, to a level, because all these CMS have nice importerts/exporters, so you cannot really make a big mistake that will sink everything. If however, the site in question is bigger a site than just "a website", consider Typo3. It's a beast. It's cool. It may not worth the effort for a small shop, but if the site has enough size, try Typo3. Beast!