Nathan J Pledger

Program.X musings from the Isle of Man concerning ASP.NET, in particular accessibility, web standards and neat ideas.

Still no viable Content Management solutions?

I previously wrote a blog over at Work Connexions*  titled "Why Content Management is a con" (make sure you go to .com not .co.uk - Bizzarre splitting of branding, I know) that broke down, for me, the benefits of a Content Management System and highlighted the true costs associated with it's implementation. For example, while a CMS seems a "Plug-in" solution for a web site, it rarely is for the majority of web sites, particularly corporate sites that require specific functionality such as shopping baskets, support portals and true control over branding.

Over the past few months, in my free time, I have been looking at a variety of Content Management Systems, which vary from the free to the tens of thousands of pounds mark. Mainly as a basis for research, but also with a view to revamping my own site. My site has suffered over the last few years due to too much work of others! It's like they always say, the successful, quality painter/decorators tend to have the scruffiest houses - and the same is obviously true for web design and development! Putting some work back a little bit, I thought I would check out some for [hopefully] a quick installation on my own site.

I looked at 5 individual systems in my research, mainly .NET-based. First, though, let me outline my requirements, with a view to the objections I raised in my previous post on the subject.

  • I want a system that is modular - and I mean modular. I do not have the time to maintain my own site, but do have a need to upgrade it's functionality at will without affecting the whole. Therefore, I want the ability to drop DLL's, controls and pages into the site and not have to worry about affecting other elements of the site. .NET is great for this, if the application is written well enough. This allows me to maintain the guts of the site in a piece-meal fashion, thereby avoiding a "big bang" publish and minimising costs to me (which in my case, is time).
  • I want a system that is cheap. I am not averse to paying for software, indeed, in many cases I prefer it (see How to solve a Problem like Open Source), but this is a small site and I have a limited budget - both in terms of hosting costs and purchase of software. I certainly want to avoid the expense outlined previously!
  • I want a system that is accessible and semantic. The quality of markup generated by automated systems such as Content Management Systems, Blogs, rich text editors, etc. is appalling. (Semantic Web 2.0 content is hard to achieve) While I believe Web 2.0 is muddying the waters a bit with regards to quality and meaningful content, I do want Web 2.0 features such as user feedback, and an AJAX-y feel. I hate the Web 2.0 term, I've been craving Web 3.0 for a long while, now - that is when XML becomes sexy to everyone!
  • Finally, I want a system that is flexible. I want to be able to have absolute control over mark-up, and I want to have control over how the site is structured when detail is important. If it comes down to writing in XSL, so be it - I have yet to think of a better way.

All these requirements are based around quality of content and reduction of cost.

So what packages did I look at?

  • Kentico - a low cost solution that initially seemed quite impressive. Having downloaded a trial and organised an online walk through from the US, I was quite impressed about how it was structured and how I was being 'chaparoned' to making the purchase. Unfortunately, when the software failed to perform a simple task (I forget what it was, it literally was something like publishing an article) during the demonstration, I'd had enough.
  • Umbraco - a free, open source solution that - while completely functional - lacked the "pazaz" that I would have hoped for, the admin interface being very muted monochromatic colours making it difficult to differentiate the various sections of the screen and the purposes of controls. I played with it for a while, but was not pleased with the output of XHTML and open-source worries me.
  • WordPress - a fellow member of the Isle of Man BCS is well involved (U-G-H GreyMatter) with WordPress and has helped in the installation of a number of sites (most recently, and impressively, Strive PR's Strive Notes) so I was quite intrigued about this software. While it looks quite a strong package, it feels too blog-ish, which is not the look I want. Additionally, it requires PHP and while I have PHP capability, I don't have the skill and prefer the [superior] .NET platform (PHP fans - remember you are on a .NET blog site!).
  • SiteFinity - a Content Management System from the makers of radControls, which I have used at Work Connexions (and are still being used - hopefully not on my $999 license!) Obviously, this system is based around their radControls, which I am familiar with, but unfortunately, is also a weakness for me. The quality of XHTML output from rich text editors is poor when they rely on the rich text editors built in to the browsers (particularly Microsofts), and this shows in this package in the editor component and the surrounding navigation components. A beautiful drag-and-drop metaphor, however, which makes content management a breeze. Full marks for interface, shame about the output.
  • Sitecore Xpress - finally, there is Sitecore Xpress. Sitecore is an enterprise level CMS that I have a lot of experience with, so when this was released, it was a dead cert I would be pleased about it! And I was. Despite the very limiting license agreement, I thought I would give this a shot. Bearing in mind, it is the same enterprise class software in most respects as the core Sitecore product, this was fast to install on my development environment and I had full blogging services and a design written in TWO DAYS - from scratch. This is largely because of my experience on the platform, but also because the guts of Sitecore is all XML, so those who have a modicum of XSL can make the entire site run like a dream on snippets of XSL with excellent levels of flexibility. Unfortunately, while it is called "Xpress" and is a "personal license", it breaks down at that point. By "personal license", I expect to be able to install it on my personal hosting, which is not insignificant. WIth five databases, my preferred MS SQL database was out of the question as I only pay for one. Any further databases would cost me a lot of money. MySQL would have been slightly cheaper, but still not cost effective. So I had to settle with the SQL Lite, and despite all attempts at my excellent hosting provider, the system is just not viable on a shared platform. This, to me, is rather a trial for the "real" version.

So, after all this looking, I have come out with nothing. Although, I have learnt a lot about various Content Management Systems, what is important to users, developers and partners/resellers. Over the past couple of years I have been playing around with some techniques for generating dynamic content - such as HttpHandlers, etc. So I'm going to write my own. How hard can it be? With the WinFX technologies such as Communications Foundation and Workflow Foundation, it becomes even easier to create rich .NET applications that are truly enterprise level but cheap to develop.

Maybe if I have these requirements, other people will too, and that would drive down the "true" cost of Content Management. I intend to try. Work is well under way and I hope to have something to show for it soon.

If you're interested in following my work, please do comment and let me know. Any ideas, suggestions, reality checks, welcome.

 * For those of you who read regularly, I am no longer involved with this site, a shame after all my hard work!

 

Comments

Fashion » Still no viable Content Management solutions? said:

Pingback from  Fashion » Still no viable Content Management solutions?

# April 9, 2008 11:43 AM

Alex de Groot said:

Cool, thanks a lot for the feedback on the systems. We're aware of the issues with Sitecore Xpress when it comes to databases.

We didn't got the possibility to change our original product for the Xpress release, and actually we don't want too. The system should be directly derived from our Trunk.

I'm currently investigating the possibilities to create 1 SQL Server database out of it using Schemes, but I'm not sure this will work out.

But I'm very glad you took the time evoluate. Please feel free to contact us using our Forums on SDN(http://sdn.sitecore.net) or contact a local office.

We'll collect them and make sure they will be fixed in the upcoming release.

Kind regards,

Alex de Groot

Solution Architect

Sitecore International

# April 9, 2008 8:42 PM

Hartvig said:

Warning - very long comment. Disclaimer: I'm the founder of the umbraco project  ;-)

There's never one system to rule them all - that's why there are so many cms's out there.

> I played with it for a while, but was not pleased

> with the output of XHTML and open-source worries me.

Just out of curiosity, what do you mean by the "not pleased with the output of XHTML"? umbraco is second-to-none when it comes to a cms leaving your markup intact and making it easy to produce valid xhtml strict sites - like our own :)

It's very easy to customize the looks of umbraco, like replacing the section icons in the lower left corner (it's just image files). However a lot of people like the anonymous design of the application, which doesn't takes focus away from what's essential - the content of your site.

Regarding the worries of open source, umbraco is a commercial open source project under the MIT license. The MIT license means no string attached (unlike the GPL and other copy-left licenses where there's a risk that using such a product means extra obligations for your work thats based on the product).

Being a commercial open source product, it means that you can get support, that there's people working full time on the platform, etc. The only difference is that at least for web cms, a paradigm shift has come where it's actually so (relatively) cheap to develop software that using the open source model for distribution is profitable (for us at least).

There's a ton of myths when it comes to open source one of them is that open source is free and also that people tend to compare them with "traditional software packages" - both there *are* big differences on both sides. A traditional product often consist of a box, documentation, manuals, a cd-rom (dvd) - and indirectly printed brochures, ads, sales meetings, etc. On the open source side, the only thing you get for free is the "bits" which most of the cases are downloaded.

This has two perspectives, from the open source side it's very interesting that you can get a product distributed with a close-to-zero marketing/sales budget. The sales cost of a traditional product is at least 50 percent of the retail price, often much more. Another thing that often add to the price of a closed source product is the lifetime cycle of the product. By this I mean that the expenses of maintaining/selling a closed source product doesn't stop once the product is sold. Often you have customer services and support which also add costs which is a part of the retail price.

With an open source product the marketing costs are close-to-zero, the distribution costs close-to-zero and the lifetime cycle costs zero. This means that the costs of developing and maintaining an open source product is the development and management costs alone, and in software that's often the lowest part of a budget for a software development company.

If umbraco users needs the usual gains from a closed source product like support and training, we offer that. But you only pay for the services you need. In my opinion it's the best of both worlds (however, I'm not saying that it'll work with any type of software product, but for us it was a match made in heaven).

Being an open source project also means involvement and this is where many oss projects suffer from bad or no management at all. Many projects gets bloated because developers love to add features, but care much less to maintain, design and polish existing ones. And often there's no real vision for the project. Many closed source projects suffer from the same, but they die. The get out of business. That doesn't happen to the open source projects as that type usually just attracts more and more hobby programmers who're pleased that no one questions that yet-another-useless-feature gets added. Building great software takes great management and the courage to say no and the ability to listen and focus on what matters for the people who uses your product. And that's no matter whether it's closed or open source.

But if you have great management AND a great community you can get a lot of advantages from not being a silo project where all discussions and development are kept secret within company walls. You can turn your users into participants and gain from a massive collective intelligence. When it works, it's phenomenal and way beyond what's possible being closed (not just in source but also in mindset).

At the same time, an open source company have the advantages of a *very* viral distribution form if your product fits the market. We grew 991% last year and 350% the year before that. With a close-to-zero marketing budget. That's not only insane, but absolutely impossible without an extremely viral model.

Having a large distribution (umbraco has grown from 1.500 installations to almost 50.000 in two years) means that you get a big install base where you can offer smaller and cheaper products. You'll need to think different but it does indeed pays of.

As I said - for many types of software a paradigm shift is happening and open source is not different. It's not magic, not voodoo. It still takes great management and a piece of software doesn't get better just because it has a 0$ price tag. Crap is still crap no matter how cheap it is. But if you combine the best from both worlds you get something that's very powerful - and profitable.

Feel free to contact me at nh (a) umbraco [.] dk if you get further questions :-)

Cheers,

Niels / umbraco

# April 9, 2008 8:53 PM

Petr Palas, Kentico said:

"

Hi Nathan,

I'm sorry to hear that you had problems with using our software, Kentico CMS. Did you try to contact our support (support@kentico.com)? They will be happy to help you.

As with any other software, there's always some learning curve, so it's possible that a simple advice may have helped you. Kentico CMS is used by customers in 60 countries right now, so I believe it may work for you, too.

Best Regards,

Petr Palas, Kentico Software

"
# April 11, 2008 10:58 AM

Nathan Pledger said:

Interesting to see that within hours, Sitecore, then Kentico (sorry, I have no idea where they're comments went - thanks Community Server) and Umbraco have replied regarding thier packages.

In my response, I do wish Sitecore was a viable solution for me, both interms of licensing and viability of installation on a shared platform. For .NET enthusiasts, I recommend downloading Sitecore Xpress, it is true genius in a ball of XML, XSL and XAML. Checkout Alex's blog, too.

I am going to try Umbraco again. Maybe I didn't give it enough of a try. It sounds impressive, though is a bit downspec-ced.

Though I am still going to write my own, which is going really well, thanks!

# April 13, 2008 9:56 PM

Dennis van der Stelt said:

Nathan, I'm doing a training right now. Last week was the DNS transfer to the new server ip address. The comment is probably on the old server, not here, because DNS take 24 hours to update.

I'll have a look if I can find anything on the old server that's gone here and see if I can post it.

# April 14, 2008 10:18 PM

Mischa Kroon said:

Ahh so that's where my comment went.

You did check your comments review admin part I take it ?

# April 17, 2008 2:12 PM

Dennis van der Stelt said:

There's one comment that I've restored now, by Petr Palas (Kentico). No Mischa comment though. It wasn't in the database.

# April 18, 2008 8:49 AM

Nathan Pledger said:

Oh thanks, Dennis!

Sorry about your comment going, Mischa. I don't have anything in my admin area, I'm afraid.

Is there anyway I can get my comments to be emailed to me, then I won't miss anything?

# April 18, 2008 9:49 PM

Dennis van der Stelt said:

Yeah, somewhere in your settings. My comments are always emailed to me.

# April 19, 2008 1:52 AM

Link Love April | Strive Notes said:

Pingback from  Link Love April | Strive Notes

# May 4, 2008 12:28 PM
Leave a Comment

(required) 

(required) 

(optional)

(required) 


Please add 3 and 5 and type the answer here: