Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


LET, what do you guys think of the current CMS' in general?
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

LET, what do you guys think of the current CMS' in general?

There's a number of content management systems out there. Here in Malaysia I believe the popular ones are Joomla and WordPress. I've used them both. Started with Joomla but saw more potential in WordPress eventually.

Anyway I'm just curious what you guys think of it? From a sysadmin/netsec viewpoint to the design vantage or even some social perspective. What's your take on the rise of the CMS?

«1

Comments

  • GM2015GM2015 Member
    edited October 2015

    I work with wordpress. There's plenty of things to learn before you can become really proficient with it unless you came from a webdesigner/coder background.

    There's php, css and html that needs to worried about, plus on your own servers, you need to worry about everything else as well.

    This is another discussion where there's no good answer.

    I've seen a couple of cms comparison threads and none of them had any points after people started comparing CMSs based on their preferences.

    A couple of things to consider before sticking with a cms I think are:

    -does it fullfill our publishing needs
    -is it secure
    -how many people can use it, can they collaborate
    -do you need users to be able to register
    -can the cms be extended
    -is the cms supported
    -free or paid cms?
    -easy or difficult to administer the cms
    

    Just take it Izzy.

    Thanked by 1iskandarreza
  • joepie91joepie91 Member, Patron Provider
    edited October 2015

    As a security-oriented developer who cares about good, reliable software (considering the social implications): they're horrible.

    And I don't mean "they're not ideal", I really mean horrible. You-should-not-be-using-this-for-anything-whatsoever horrible. A selection of the issues:

    • It removes the initial barrier of entry for setting up something interactive. Which sounds good, until you realize that this means people also have no idea what the minimum requirements are for protecting user data... and user data is something that these sites take in with alarming regularity.
    • Components that fit together poorly. Often resulting in duplicate content, duplicate UI elements, confusing to navigate, poor accessibility for those with limited vision/hearing/motor skills, and so on.
    • Constant loss of data. Whether it is because the site owner doesn't understand backups, or because they don't understand what 'bitrot' or its consequences are, or because they fail to correctly understand even the basic legal aspects of operating a website.

    Instead of providing 'generic' CMSes, we should be working on making actual software development - whether web-based or otherwise - more accessible and easier to understand. It should be possible for a random non-technical person to spend a few evenings, and have a decent handle of how to build a 'proper' website; not just from a technical perspective, but also from a security and privacy perspective.

    This is absolutely a real-world possibility, but the documentation, tooling and will to help just aren't there yet.

    We need to collectively stop accepting these kind of taped-together systems as 'good enough', and be more welcoming to people who want to do it right. These aren't toy sites - these are almost always sites processing real people's information, often without the owners even being aware of it.

    Websites and web applications are increasingly becoming critical infrastructure - including the cobbled-together "monuments to duct-tape" like doctor's sites, promotional sites, and so on - and we should start treating them as such. Not by excluding people from building them, but by encouraging people to build them correctly, and by encouraging real participation.

    </rant>

  • @joepie91 said:
    Websites and web applications are increasingly becoming critical infrastructure - including the cobbled-together "monuments to duct-tape" like doctor's sites, promotional sites, and so on - and we should start treating them as such. Not by excluding people from building them, but by encouraging people to build them correctly, and by encouraging real participation.

    </rant>

    I totally agree that site owners need to participate more in the proper manner.

  • When I first start publishing a website, I can only afford free web hosting that usually do not give use access to MySQL unless we pay.

    So my choices at that time only limited to plain HTML or build a text base CMS with PuszBaza by Puszkin or PHP Text DB by c-worker.ch or use a limited choice of mini CMS like:

    1. Ax (Agora) mini power CMS
    2. snippetmaster
    3. Kokesh
    4. Phortail
    5. Portix
    6. MiniPortail (Now become freeguppy.org)
    7. Limbo (now become Lanius)

    My first MySQL CMS is Ovidentia then I moved to B2Evolution. I am in favor of portable (easy to move) CMS and I personally choose FreeGuppy most of the time (some of them uses SQlite instead of the original text database), SQlite WordPress, and SQlite sNews that I tweak for my own use.

    I make my own plugins as plugins from others, reside inside our control panel offering to update when available. Imagine what if a bad guy takeover a plugins developer's site and inject malicious code right into our control panel.

  • NyrNyr Community Contributor, Veteran

    I was just waiting for the WordPress hate to start.

    Yeah, it has some (big) structural problems, but still it isn't a disaster in general terms. Plenty of PHP software is way worse, the forum system where I am writing right now serves as a great example.

    The WordPress team acts fast on security issues and as long as the user doesn't start installing random plugins, it can be considered reasonably secure for plenty of tasks like a blog. The plugin ecosystem is nearly unusable, I agree.

    Finally, for many use cases there aren't good alternatives with similar functionality, so you don't have much options.

    Thanked by 44n0nx Aga jar mpkossen
  • When you use a CMS you depend on it forever :(

    So I would not use one in the first place. Or at least one that's pretty big. And one that updates itself (which ones do, besides Wordpress? Pls tell me I am curious)

  • Nyr said: The WordPress team acts fast on security issues and as long as the user doesn't start installing random plugins, it can be considered reasonably secure for plenty of tasks like a blog. The plugin ecosystem is nearly unusable, I agree.

    This is true.

    Thanked by 24n0nx Nyr
  • edited November 2015

    @4n0nx said:
    When you use a CMS you depend on it forever :(

    So I would not use one in the first place. Or at least one that's pretty big. And one that updates itself (which ones do, besides Wordpress? Pls tell me I am curious)

    I ran into that issue. I generally just needed some type of method to manage posts and content sitewide without having to edit each page, or repeat markup for each post.

    Began with a templating system (Jekyll),and then moved to ModX. ModX simply allows you to create HTML templates with spots for content which was perfect for my use.

    Thanked by 24n0nx raindog308
  • @>; @4n0nx said:

    When you use a CMS you depend on it forever :(

    I beg to disagree. There are tools to convert it to HTML if you want to. I converted a client's outdated and buggy Joomla installation once into HTML. Months later client wanted an upgraded website, so I went with WordPress and converted it to HTML after arranging and designing the layout for five hours and client approved.

    What I like about CMS is that it cuts down development time considerably. This is very important especially if you want to have more sites done per month and you want to keep the price low so the demand is there.

  • iskandarreza said: There are tools to convert it to HTML if you want to.

    just then it's not dynamic anymore...

  • joepie91joepie91 Member, Patron Provider
    edited November 2015

    Nyr said: The WordPress team acts fast on security issues and as long as the user doesn't start installing random plugins, it can be considered reasonably secure for plenty of tasks like a blog. The plugin ecosystem is nearly unusable, I agree.

    Depends entirely on the kind of issue. I have had some... poor experiences in the past with how seriously they take certain issues. Monitoring of the plugin ecosystem on their side is also insufficient.

    And being reactive isn't good enough. You need to be proactive (ie. solve the structural problems), and they're not. They just keep adding on more crap. You cannot build secure systems without being proactive about it, end of story.

  • iskandarreza said: I went with WordPress and converted it to HTML after arranging and designing the layout

    What's the point on using an CMS if you were going to deliver just plain HTML?

    iskandarreza said: What I like about CMS is that it cuts down development time considerably

    If you use it just to generate static HTML I think it will add development time considerably.

    Plain HTML/CSS/JS would probably be faster and with less work.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran
    edited November 2015

    Wordpress and Joomla are great, in my opinion. Not perfect, but great. What isn't great is how easy it is to install horrible plugins and themes, then have the entirety of the internet tell you that your web host is crap and that you need to chew them out when your 70 "SEO" plugins screw up your site.

    Alright, maybe I'm a little bitter still from my managed support days :P

    But seriously... Wordpress and Joomla should both uphold guidelines for plugin/theme submission to their repos, and bad developers who sell on envato need to get called out in public more for their coding crimes.

    Newbies should, at the very least, be encouraged to use auto-updating base copies of the CMS and not to install shady plugins and themes.

    What is an even more fun discussion is what the popularity of the CMS did to the shared hosting industry. Seemed like almost overnight people went from Frontpage and badly made static sites to Wordpress, causing an incredible increase in resource overhead per user, which changed the business plans for shared hosting companies across the industry with far less warning than most were prepared for.

  • K4Y5K4Y5 Member
    edited November 2015

    I routinely work with joomla, wordpress, drupal and even magento for ecommerce websites. But, it finally comes down to the specific task or project at hand.

    Having said that, almost all the CMS require quite a bit of tweaking to harden up the default installation. While I do explain the risks of going with such (bloated) solutions to clients, most of them still choose significant savings, over a custom solution built to address their specific requirements.

    At times, I feel that the amateur 'template designers' have literally ruined the web development business by peddling bloated crap / sub-standard code (often copied and brutalized from some other unsuspecting dev) from envato to the masses at extremely low prices, and literally driving the legit professional web developers to the fringes.

    //End of rant

    Thanked by 3jar vRozenSch00n NeoXiD
  • @Aga said:
    What's the point on using an CMS if you were going to deliver just plain HTML?

    Clients want CMS to be able to update their website. Time passes and turns out they don't have much to update. I convert it to html and it uses less resources. The CMS remains but is disabled unless needed. This doesn't happen often though. Most times I have the sites caching improved because you are right, it'd be more work to convert from one format to the other.

  • For low end environments, particularly those sought after here, check out DokuWiki. It can be tweaked to present a clean, secure Web environment. It certainly is much more limited than the likes of Joomla or WordPress, but with the proper template, you can construct a very nice site. I also like it because it doesn't require a database--it's all done with flat files.

  • Has anyone used modx, craftcms, perchcms or statamic?

  • I stopped using Joomla when the developers split their ways. Now they have version 2.x and 3.x, each with their own vulnerabilities.

  • hiphiphip0 said: Has anyone used modx, craftcms, perchcms or statamic?

    Are they opensource and free?

  • AmitzAmitz Member
    edited November 2015

    I like kirby and use it wherever appropriate. http://getkirby.com Not completely free though. No database (flat files) and fantastic to modify/maintain.

    Thanked by 2vRozenSch00n Aga
  • GM2015GM2015 Member
    edited November 2015

    I might try PicoCMS.org or PhileCMS.com for flatfile CMS-s one day.
    image

  • @GM2015 said:

    I might try PicoCMS.org or PhileCMS.com for flatfile CMS-s one day.

    I was looking for a small blog type engine with a flatfile CMS and found fBlog could be adapted. However, I'd be worried about the scalability of a flat file for most situations.>

  • Well it may be fine for small advertising publishers unless they plan on taking staff and such.

    Ole_Juul said: I'd be worried

  • iskandarreza said: Here in Malaysia I believe the popular ones are Joomla and WordPress.

    Yes, those are popular in Malaysia. Also everywhere else in the world.

  • How about Drupal CMF?

  • bersy said: How about Drupal CMF?

    Drupal is best for large web application or portal. Optimizing Drupal is not as easy as optimizing other CMS due to its design.

    Drupal is designed that way to be modular and yet scalable (from a single website to an enterprise class portal), so it needs more resources to run smoothly.

    You might want to try the SQlite version of Drupal to play around though :)

    Thanked by 2bersy iskandarreza
  • Apache is my CMS. Literally. I'm using common features like SSI, autoindex, and rewrites to get dynamic templates. Anything "fancy" is done client-side with JavaScript.

    The real question is what content you need to manage. If it's not really complex enough to require a convoluted system on top of the web server, do everyone a favor and keep it simple. The fewer moving parts, the better.

    Thanked by 2Aga iskandarreza
  • raindog308raindog308 Administrator, Veteran

    Amitz said: Not completely free though.

    Not even remotely free, is it? $19 for personal or $89 for commercial. I don't see any free option.

    Ole_Juul said: I was looking for a small blog type engine with a flatfile CMS and found fBlog could be adapted. However, I'd be worried about the scalability of a flat file for most situations.>

    Why so?

  • @raindog308: Oh, yes - you are right! I did not remember the full licensing prices. I bought it so long ago that I forgot. But it is and was worth every penny to me. I played around and tested it for months before actually buying a license. It's not they they are hunting you to do so, taking the time to evaluate is okay for them:
    http://getkirby.com/try

  • from a CMS I want a few things.

    Security
    Simplicity
    Open Source
    Simple to manage.

    I hate wordpress as it is over complicated. If you want to blog thats it

Sign In or Register to comment.