4 ms·
CMS are mainly document-centric, whereas Hull is interaction-centric. The social mechanics are available for those CMS as plugins, yes, but you need to work ou
by romain_dardour 14y ago
CMS are mainly document-centric, whereas Hull is interaction-centric.
The social mechanics are available for those CMS as plugins, yes, but you need to work out how to integrate them, when they're made by different developers, and write glue code.
A big strengh of hull is also it's client-side widgets library, that just work and allow you to combine and extend them easily.
Lastly, hanging off OpenGraph does not make you the owner of the data.
- xcambar 14y agoTo go further the comparison with CMS, maybe it's time to coin a new term for what Hull has to offer. Social as a Service is a good one, but it's somehow not showing how easy the integration can be with Hull. Hull provides devs with tools to integrate the social activity of their users, which looks like a "SoMS" or "SoMaS" (Social Management System) to me. Too bad SMS can hardly be used ;-)