Skip to main content

Where to start looking for a CMS

A lot of people of around me tend to ask me where they can find a good CMS solution. The most typical question is how they can get started with their own website (where my typical answer is 'Don't. Register a blog instead'). More ambitous entrepeneurs ask where can they buy a total CMS solution solving business requirement X, Y and Z. To these I often end up answering that such a solution does not exist yet, and it will be darn expensive to develop. However, if they still want to see what's out there, I recommend reading the rest of this blog-post and continue the research on their own.


Communities

The WCMS market is so large that it is nearly impossible to get a complete overview of solutions. Attempts to explore this market have already been made by some online communities, and in my opinion the best way to experience the market is by following the lead of these communities. There are also a number of annual conferences specifically intended for content management system vendors, consultants and users.

CMProfessionals1 is a membership-based community of practice for content management practitioners. Their members are largely responsible for the CMS Forum2, conferences and the CMS Meta Language, among other resource for CMS evaluation.

The ContentWatch organization has been disbanded, as has the CMS Mailing List3. Attempts have been made to revive these, but they have either failed or been absorbed into other communities.

Neighboring communities are less structured and scattered around the Internet. Some camps focus on the relevant theory and practices of intranets, knowledge management and web technologies, and thus provide occasional input to the web content management field.

Implementations

Profiling the WCMS as an isolated product has resulted in quite a number of WCMS-products available, some of which are based on an open source business model.

It has been claimed that the birth of the WCMS can be dated back to early summer 1995 [Doyle, 2004]. As stated before, this thesis does not aim to review the available alternatives as far better resources are available elsewhere. One starting point is the CMS Community Wiki 4, a knowledge base for Content Management Professionals. It covers many topics of content management as well as several product directories. Another umbrella site for several CMS resources is CMS Review5.

The consultancy company CMS Works has done a division of WCMS products into seven categories [Byrne, 2006]. These are (1) Major Enterprise Web Content Management Systems, (2) Upper Tier Companies, (3) Mid-Market Mainstream CMS Packages, (4) Mid-Market Challengers, (5) Hosted Services, (6) Low-Priced Products and finally (7) Open Source Alternatives.

A simplified interpretation of the divisions is presented below.

Large

The most known vendors in this class include Vignette, Interwoven and Stellent. These systems are for large sized companies, possibly running web-sites across continents, generating a large need for dealing with globalization and extreme masses of content. Installation, development and maintenance can usually be measured in hundred thousands or perhaps millions of dollars on an annual basis. It is most unlikely that such companies will run their WCMS totally isolated from their other content systems, rather it will be part of an ECM effort. These systems profile on high level of integration, both between their own proprietary services, as well as across open protocols.

Medium

Fatwire, Day, Microsoft and IBM's products are members of this class. These vendors supply content management systems to medium sized business. The products suffice to store large masses of content administered by 10-100 content administrators. The software is not shelf-ware, and the WCMS typically requires application servers to contain it. These systems are seldom treated in isolation, and might be incorporated in an ECM solution. The rest of the content process interacts with the online content.

Small

The market for smaller WCM systems is usually dominated by local and regional vendors. Most Norwegian companies turn to local vendors for implementation since WCM is mostly done in one single language. Small companies have no globalization issues and require an administration interface in their local language. Small WCMS can be sold as shelf-ware, deployable on smaller servers or even desktop machines. These small systems are less likely to interconnect with other information systems in the company's infrastructure. Most will rely on manual file transfer when such interaction is necessary, although some systems have support for protocols which can transfer content from the WCMS to other systems, or the other way around.

Hosted services

Users who want to entirely outsource the maintenance of their WCMS have several hosted options to choose from. These systems offer low risk as the WCMS costs will result in a static monthly fee plus support expenses. The downside is that these hosted systems are the hardest to customize, as the host will have total control of the system. Also, this WCMS service results in heavy lock-in to the hosting vendor as content and functionality lies here. There is very little chance that the vendor will make an effort to help migrate away from the system, nor give away source code of the functionality with which the content has been enabled.

Open Source WCM systems

The open source WCMS also come in different shapes, and can in a similar fashion spread over several tiers of company sizes [Gottlieb, 2005].

Technical approaches remain much the same for open source and proprietary systems. Although this is gradually changing, the situation is that there is little use of open source in the uppermost tiers of the market [Chawner, 2005]. The common feel of open source WCMS projects is that there is great potential, but also reluctance among buyers as such systems come without warranty, and therefore represent risk.

Open source software attracts two kinds of users. The first are small companies with small WCM budgets but skilled in-house developers. There is little wish to invest larger sums in trying out shelf-ware, and management is convinced that the developers can handle the configuration of an open source product. The other kind is companies who wish to comply with open standards, typically governmental offices regulated to do so, or non-profit organizations who do so for principal reasons.

There are many sources for exploring the landscape of open source WCM systems. OSCOM6 is the international association for Open Source Content Management. It maintains the CMS Matrix for comparing open source products. The matrix is somewhat outdated and only features the most renowned projects. There is OpenSourceCMS7 that reviews mostly lightweight WCM systems, most of them based on PHP and other scripting languages, and finally Java-Source.net8, a directory of open source content management systems based on Java.



References

Byrne, T. 2006, "The CMS Report ", CMS Works Inc.

Chawner, B. , "F/OSS in the Library World: An Exploration", conference proceedings from 5-WOSSE, ACM

Doyle, B. 2004, "CMS Genesis: Who Did What When ?" Retrieved 5. April, 2006

Gottlieb, S. 2005, "Content Management Problems and Open Source Solutions " Retrieved 27. April, 2005

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Open source CMS evaluations

I have now seen three more or less serious open source CMS reviews. First guy to hit the field was Matt Raible ( 1 2 3 4 ), ending up with Drupal , Joomla , Magnolia , OpenCms and MeshCMS being runner-ups. Then there is OpenAdvantage that tries out a handful ( Drupal , Exponent CMS , Lenya , Mambo , and Silva ), including Plone which they use for their own site (funny/annoying that the entire site has no RSS-feeds, nor is it possible to comment on the articles), following Matt's approach by exluding many CMS that seem not to fit the criteria. It is somewhat strange that OpenAdvantage cuts away Magnolia because it "Requires J2EE server; difficult to install and configure; more of a framework than CMS", and proceed to include Apache Lenya in the full evaluation. Magnolia does not require a J2EE server. It runs on Tomcat just like Lenya does (maybe it's an idea to bundle Magnolia with Jetty to make it seem more lightweight). I'm still sure that OpenAdvant...

Encrypting and Decrypting with Spring

I was recently working with protecting some sensitive data in a typical Java application with a database underneath. We convert the data on its way out of the application using Spring Security Crypto Utilities . It "was decided" that we'd be doing AES with a key-length of 256 , and this just happens to be the kind of encryption Spring crypto does out of the box. Sweet! The big aber is that whatever JRE is running the application has to be patched with Oracle's JCE  in order to do 256 bits. It's a fascinating story , the short version being that U.S. companies are restricted from exporting various encryption algorithms to certain countries, and some countries are restricted from importing them. Once I had patched my JRE with the JCE, I found it fascinating how straight forward it was to encrypt and decrypt using the Spring Encryptors. So just for fun at the weekend, I threw together a little desktop app that will encrypt and decrypt stuff for the given password...

The Git Users Mailing List

A year ago or so, I came across the Git-user mailing list (aka. "Git for human beings"). Over the year, I grew a little addicted to helping people out with their Git problems. When the new git-scm.com webpage launched , and the link to the mailing list had disappeared, I was quick to ask them to add it again . I think this mailing list fills an important hole in the Git community between: The Git developer mailing list git@vger.kernel.org  - which I find to be a bit too hard-core and scary for Git newbies. Besides, the Majordomo mailing list system is pretty archaic, and I personally can't stand browsing or searching in the Gmane archives. The IRC channel #git on Freenode, which is a bit out-of-reach for people who never experienced the glory days of IRC. Furthermore, when the channel is busy, it's a big pain to follow any discussion. StackOverflow questions tagged git , these come pretty close, but it's a bit hard to keep an overview of what questio...

Git tools for keeping patches on top of moving upstreams

At work, we maintain patches for some pretty large open source repositories that regularly release new versions, forcing us to update our patches to match. So far, we've been using basic Git operations to transplant our modifications from one major version of the upstream to the next. Every time we make such a transplant, we simply squash together the modifications we made in the previous version, and land it as one big commit into the next version. Those who are used to very stringent keeping of Git history may wrinkle their nose at this, but it is a pragmatic choice. Maintaining modifications on top of the rapidly changing upstream is a lot of work, and so far we haven't had the opportunity to figure out a more clever way to do it. Nor have we really suffered any consequences of not having an easy to read history of our modifications - it's a relatively small amount of patches, after all. With a recent boost in team size, we may have that opportunity. Also the need for be...

Managing dot-files with vcsh and myrepos

Say I want to get my dot-files out on a new computer. Here's what I do: # install vcsh & myrepos via apt/brew/etc vcsh clone https://github.com/tfnico/config-mr.git mr mr update Done! All dot-files are ready to use and in place. No deploy command, no linking up symlinks to the files . No checking/out in my entire home directory as a Git repository. Yet, all my dot-files are neatly kept in fine-grained repositories, and any changes I make are immediately ready to be committed: config-atom.git     -> ~/.atom/* config-mr.git     -> ~/.mrconfig     -> ~/.config/mr/* config-tmuxinator.git       -> ~/.tmuxinator/* config-vim.git     -> ~/.vimrc     -> ~/.vim/* config-bin.git        -> ~/bin/* config-git.git               -> ~/.gitconfig config-tmux.git       -> ~/.tmux.conf     config...