CMS Made Simple Forums

Download it in PDF format here:
http://welovecmsms.com/news/2/149/CMS-Shootout/

Nice work.

Some comments, in no particular order and not exhaustive:

"CMSMS is a database - driven program so you will need to set up a database (and user) for it to begin the installation process. It will do a “Pre Flight” check to make sure your server settings are adequate for its needs, and unless you have some really offbeat server settings, you should be fin e. Once you upload the installation files to your server, you simply point to the installation script and CMSMS does the rest."

Well, not quite. You forgot to mention that you need to
- change permissions on some folders
- setup an appropriate .htacess file
- create an empty config.php file and set permissions

WP does that all from the installer, AFAIR.


"There are no shortage of great WordPress themes out there, both free and premium. But if you want to design your own, that’s easy enough to do as well. There are myriad excellent tutorials out there to get you started, as long as you have a grasp on the concepts of HTML and CSS.
Taking a premade theme and customizing it is a good way to start. And some of the newer, more intricate themes make it unnecessary for you to even touch your design code, since they allow you to swap out logos, header graphics and edit styles (fonts and colors mainly) right from their option panel. "

"One thing that makes WordPress easy to design for is its templating system. Since it’s constructed in a modular format, with header.php, sidebar.php, footer.php, index.php and page.php straight out of the box, along with some other default templates, you can customize each template, add new templates and call one template into another."

I beg to differ. Apart from HTML and CSS knowledge, you need a fairly good understanding of PHP and the WP code base to do this. Try making a template set ("theme") from scratch, and you see what I mean. And some of the pre-made templates use quite tricky php code (uncommented, of course ...).

CMSMS templates in most cases require just HTML and CSS. And a bit SMARTY, if needed at all.

"WordPress doesn’t really begin to shine until you enhance it with plugins, IMHO."

Well, same with CMSMS ...

"If you want a particular function and WordPress doesn’t already do it, chances are someone has created a plugin that will do exactly that and more. "

While this is true, there is (at least) one big problem. With CMSMS, it seems that the module developers almost unanimously chose JQUERY as their standard JS library. This is quite different in WP: you find all sorts of libraries. And as soon as you use a number of plugins, your site loads three or even more complete libraries, which bogs down load time and creates all kinds of crazy conflicts.

"You get a lot of bang for your buck with WordPress and since it is so popular, there is no shortage of help via official WordPress channels and elsewhere."

To be frank, the help mostly consists of the stereotypical "just uninstall one plugin after the other until you find the culprit". Which can be a HUGE task, as you have to re-install/re-configure all your plugins. Additionally, all your plugin's database entries are lost. And when you find the culprit - what now? Bummer.
When you really need help, there is almost no one who understands the system good enough to help you. I find the expertise in the CMSMS community much higher.

Upgrading

"You simply click the button and WordPress will perform the upgrade."

And days later you discover that all your rss feeds are broken and that you need to install 3rd party software to fix that. Every time you upgrade. EVERY TIME YOU UPGRADE.


BACKEND

You have omitted (at least) two features of WP which IMO really shine in comparison to CMSMS:

1) The mediabase. With CMSMS, media handling/management is simply non-existent, it is a total mess. WP's mediabase is not flawless, but it is a HUGE improvement.

2) WP's implementation of TinyMCE. If you have to deal with huge amounts of content - e.g. an online newspaper - you can work MUCH faster with the WP TinyMCE. For example, you can just paste from WORD and it cleans up the code automatically, leaving the structure intact. Or you can paste simple text and every paragraph gets converted to a paragraph, not double BRs as in the CMSMS implementation. The interaction with the mediabase is the icing on the cake. Once you've defined your standard image sizes, you don't need to change pixel sizes on image selection *everytime*.


"A handy language module (Babel) lets you offer up the site in several different languages, seamlessly. "

This info is a bit dated, isn't it? I mean, Babel isn't even in the forge anymore ....
MLEcms is a far better candidate (IMO), although it is a bit complex to deploy, and there is only marginal support of other modules.
http://dev.cmsmadesimple.org/projects/mlecms

"CMS Made Simple Resources"

I would mention "CMS Made Simple Development Cookbook" by Samuel Goldstein.

SCALABILITY

CMSMS is usable for small to medium projects. Once you are above, say, 500 PAGES, it becomes quite unmanageable.

My current WP flagship site has 16.000 POSTS, and I can handle that nicely.

Well, you can argue that WP is a BLOG software and you need to compare to a CMSMS blog module. But just compare e.g. CGBlog's article browser to WP's ...

On the other hand, 500 PAGES in WP is pure crazyness, too ...

Which brings me to the main point: WP and CMSMS cannot really be compared, IMO. They serve different purposes. Using WP as CMS is a PITA, as is using CMSMS as editing/publishing system for an online publication.
WP is also aimed at the novice webmaster: A one-click-installation, download a theme and some plugins, and you are ready to go, albeit with a badly configured system, but who cares? Most of the WP "webmasters" I know don't have a clue anyway.


Just my 2 cents,
Alex

Alex thank you for your additional comparing. Very useful.

faglork wrote: - create an empty config.php file and set permissions

WP does that all from the installer, AFAIR.

CMSMS will/can do it too, depending on some server defaults.

I will carefully consider Alex's well thought out comments in a future update. Admittedly I haven't been working with CMSMS (2007) as long as WP (2004), but anyone claiming that WP cannot be used (easily I might add) as a CMS doesn't understand WP at all. I use them both, about 35/65, CMSMS/WP. I put nearly all my non-profits on CMSMS. But most other sites (and I haven't done a purely blogging website in years) use WP.

And kind of off topic to this, despite the myriad document/file download/management plugins out there for WP, nothing -- and I mean NOTHING -- holds a candle to CMSMS's User Uploads module.

pixelita wrote: anyone claiming that WP cannot be used (easily I might add) as a CMS doesn't understand WP at all.

Thanks for your kind words.

I did never state that "WP cannot be used (...) as a CMS". I just tried to point out that it is (IMO!) not one of its strongholds. Just create 600 PAGES (pages! not posts) within WP and try to manage that ...

It all depends on what you see as core functions of a CMS. I admit this is sort of a djihad. But that's how I see it: WP being an advanced blogging software with CMS features and CMSMS being an advanced CMS software with blogging features.

You are welcome to differ.

Cheers,
Alex

Well 600 pages in just about any system is likely a nightmare, no?

2.0 ContentManager (admin side) has been tested with ~6000 pages with no difficulty.

Building a 6000 item navigation on the front end would be ludicrous, but given enough memory will work. However, I only tested with a navigation of a few hundred items. No issues there.

The mad scientist in you just couldn't help himself, could he?

calguy1000 wrote:2.0 ContentManager (admin side) has been tested with ~6000 pages with no difficulty.

Well, that's fantastic news. I have some installations with 600+ pages, and this is already hard to manage. I was considering to use a different CMS for big sites, glad that I can stay with CMSMS. After all, it is my favorite CMS since version 1.

calguy1000 wrote: Building a 6000 item navigation on the front end would be ludicrous, but given enough memory will work. However, I only tested with a navigation of a few hundred items. No issues there.

Yes, information architecture for a 6000 pages website would be quite a challenge. Love challenges ...

Cheers,
Alex