With this new wordpress forum I think we should talk about if/when to use wordpress as a CMS. So, when should you use it? Why in that particular place?
Some links to consider:
http://navigatetomorrow.com/20...
http://navigatetomorrow.com/20...
You can actually find a lot of sites that will say you can use wordpress as a CMS.
Here are a few of my reasons not to use it as a CMS:
- "WordPress is a state-of-the-art semantic personal publishing platform..." (from wordpress.org). A CMS is more than just publishing content.
- The framework to extend wordpress is just not very good. Not when compared with drupal or joomla 1.5.
- "WordPress is a blog publishing system" (from wikipedia). It's a blog not a CMS.
- Theming wordpress is not as easy or extensible as joomla, drupal, or the others.
- The code is ugly. The wordpress codebase is not a very pretty site. I'm a developer... what can I say.
- If you want to, at any point, transform your site into a community site, integrate in relationship management, or extend the site in many desired ways wordpress just can't go there.
- The WYSIWYG editor.
So, to contradict myself I here is my list of reasons to use wordpress as a CMS:
- It's easy to use.
- There are a lot of good looking templates.
- The WYSIWYG editor.
- It's well supported.
- Much of what church websites do it publishing.Should this actually be the case?
- Administration is easy.
My personal preference is to say we should use wordpress for blogs (which it is great at) and leave CMS to the others. The ways I think a church website should go (with things like communities) is not a realm wordpress excels at.
So, what do you think? Why? Please feel free to contradict me.
Please no religious war. Let's keep this polite.
WHEN should you use WP as CMS?
The better question when is WP suitable for a CMS. Ford and CNN both use WP for specific purposes. The fact that they use it shows that it is at least suitable, in the right situation. Of course, the fact that neither of these companies use it for their primary website shows that it is not a full service CMS.
I think that WP can be used for a pamphlet style website that will have a handful of pages that will be mostly static. It can also be used for a church or ministry that has a little bit of basic content but mostly wants a blog to communicate with the community.
I agree with you that if the site has the potential to grow and change, then drupal and joomla are probably better options to start with.
Where I have considered using it is for the small company that I work for. We have about 8 people. Our current website is all hard coded HTML, very Web 0.9. Any changes go through the person who put it together. WP would allow the office staff to change the text of pages, or add a new page. It also would make it easy to upload new pictures. Because the total site only needs, at most 10 pages of content, WP would be a candidate. The site would have no community elements, no comments, no blog, no podcast, none of the bells and whistles that make drupal and joomla shine.
John
john-simons.com
I really disagree
With respect to you guys and your opinions, I really, really can't stand Drupal. I'm a huge WordPress fan. I'm been neck-deep in PHP code for the past ten years, so I'd consider myself a pretty strong developer - I then majored in graphic design in college to get the right brain working.
From two angles:
1. Design - visually, WordPress is attractive out of the box, and can easily and rapidly be tweaked to fit a designer's goals. As I think like a designer some of the time, it was pretty easy for me to take my CSS prototyped design and "drape it around" The Loop. It's pretty easy to master the WordPress Loop, and there are a dozen other functions to add to that, to make a design as simple or complicated as you want, and still make it easy to use.
The biggest thing: I can't find anything like "Simplr" for Drupal. Even the "simplest" themes for Drupal had stylesheets all over the place, and other goofy functions that I couldn't find.
2. Code - to design on WordPress, you can take the default theme (Kubrick) or a very plain one like Simplr, and just browse to where the stylesheet is, and there you go. One stylesheet.
I started messing with theming for Drupal months ago, and I still can't figure out why everything is spread all over the place in folders everywhere. WordPress is incredibly clear-cut as to where everything is, and what it does.
There are TONS of modules for WordPress which perform most of the same functions you're looking for in Drupal, but in a simpler, cleaner fashion.
Drupal is trying to do too much, and trying to help everyone, but by doing so, it helps no one. It's too geeky (which means it's not very user-friendly). Not to mention that the API essentially changes every point release, breaking older themes and add-ons. Every time I read about that, they give some sort of vague answer about moving forward, embracing new technologies, etc. They're pushing for this AMFphp and "Druplash" nonsense (which only serves 1 percent of the audience), but in the process, they changed the way the search system worked, as well as theming. Again. If Apple pulled that kind of nonsense on its developers, I'd have stopped developing on a Mac and moved to Windows a long time ago. Wordpress is simply more stable, more secure, and more mature than Drupal. They're both open-source, but I trust WordPress much, much more. Even as a CMS for my church. I have friends who are hard-core Drupal fans, but they don't actually use it for their clients' projects. And they set up WordPress-based sites for their churches. :)
Drupal and WP
Jason,
Sounds like you are comfortable with WordPress and that is cool. I usually recommend WordPress to folks who want to have a blog. That is what it does best. Of course, if I do the blog site, I use Drupal, but that is where my comfort lies.
Your points about design ease and out of the box is on mark I think. You could easily replace Joomla in this post and the arguments could be the same. A Joomla friend of mine said that Drupal is kind of like Unix and Joomla is kind of like Mac/Windows. What he meant is that Joomla is easier to quickly get going. The tools are there. He admits that Drupal is more powerful, has a more solid code base, etc - but you have to really dig in to the geek of it.
With all that said, Drupal is way more powerful that WordPress for doing many types of not only web sites, but web applications. That is they key. Drupal's APIs allow web apps to be built. Also, core API does not change on point releases unless it fixed a major bug or security issue. That is saved for major releases ex. Drupal 6.
Saying WordPress is simply more stable, secure and mature.. can't agree with that. I am not even sure it is that easy to say which project is superior in any of those categories.
From what I have seen, there are many more professional webdev consultants who roll out Drupal sites than WordPress. I don't think that means Drupal is better. I think it is because it is more flexible for doing different things. If it wasn't stable, secure, etc, BBC, The Onion, MTV UK, Warner Bros. Music, etc would not be using it.
Nothing wrong wiht using WordPress or Drupal or Joomla if it fits your needs. I respect them all for what they offer. The friendly competition actually helps to make each project better too.
All friends here :) I am not flaming you and hope you don't take it that way. Respect all the projects for what they offer. We all use what we like and are comfortable with.
Peace,
Shrop
I agree, actually
I actually agree with both Jason and Shrop here :)
When it comes down to core of Jason's post, he's pointing out something that many people seem to have a hard time grasping. That is:
Drupal is a framework, not an "out of the box" CMS.
Joomla and Wordpress are intended for 'end users' to get up and running quickly. The fact that Drupal is lumped in with them frustrates people because they expect the same functionality out of the box. But it's not there, and it's not intended to be there.
To me, Drupal fills a huge niche of people who want completely, from the ground up, custom sites. While Joomla and Wordpress are definitely easier to use out of the box, that's not Drupal's goal. While Drupal wants to be 'as easy as possible' to use, it won't sacrifice power and functionality for ease of use.
So, in the end, Drupal isn't for everyone. As a designer who builds Drupal themes all day long, I see many ways the theming system could improve...but to say that it's built poorly just comes from lack of experience. It's an EXTREMELY robust and powerful theme system, but it's not for people who want a site quick and easy.
When it comes down to it, Drupal is not a true CMS like Joomla and Wordpress, and I htink the fact that it gets lumped in with them makes alot of people dislike it because they don't understand it's goals and approach.
-Rob Feature
Geeks and God Co-Host
www.mustardseedmedia.com
If you guys are looking for
If you guys are looking for a "framework" per se, I could really recommend CakePHP. Of course, it's also quite different, so expect something different - it's actually designed to be like Ruby on Rails, but without the need to learn Ruby.
We're talking building custom apps from the ground up with this thing - it's pretty fast and easy, once you go through the tutorial. You can build a barebones CMS in 15 minutes (my estimate).
If you're looking for a good CMS with great support, I can actually recommend ExpressionEngine. Yes, it's a commercial product, but I think it's somewhere around $150 including the forum modules, tech support, etc. for personal/non-commercial use. The people in the EE help forums tend to be more friendly than those in the Drupal forums (IMHO). I've really grown familiar with EE in my day job, and have even worked with some of the key developers and guys at a firm called SolSpace (because I manage an EE install for my day job). And designer Veerle Peters uses EE for her blog, so it must be good.
There's also a great host that specializes in ExpressionEngine: they're called EngineHosting. Very friendly, helpful people.
Of course, if you're looking to learn a new language, there's always Ruby on Rails. I've had fun with that, too. I've met the guys at 37Signals here in Chicago (they built Rails), and they're pretty smart and friendly. They tend to keep to themselves, though.
FYI:
http://www.cakephp.org
http://www.expressionengine.co... or http://ellislab.com
http://www.rubyonrails.com
PHP Frameworks
I have heard good things about EE for sure. Lifechurch.tv picked it in October, but they are now moving to codeignitor and have hired developers on staff. Pretty wild. http://www.terrystorch.com/tec...
A few other cool PHP frameworks, in addition to CakePHP, are:
http://codeigniter.com/ - really cool stuff. Have a buddy who just wrote an app with it.
http://www.symfony-project.org... - MVC very similar to RoR.
Yep. I like CakePHP too. There was a module to actually integrate Cake projects with Drupal.
I have messed around with all of these and RoR. It is fun to see what others are doing.
Drupal is a web framework, but not an MVC. It is a PAC. I think this wikipedia article rocks. It contains a comparison grid of many web app framework.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
This stuff gets me excited.. thanks!
Shrop
Different types of frameworks
We have really been talking about full stack frameworks in this conversation. What about glue frameworks? For example check out the Zend Framework.
One of the sad things about the PHP frameworks is that so many are trying to be clones of RoR. RoR is great, don't get me wrong. But, their framework design isn't the only way to go. Frameworks that operate very differently from that can be a beautiful thing, too. Take Prado, for example. That framework is different and it's good.
I think as developers it's good to see outside our normal development box. Other people do things other ways and it's good. It's good to see how they do it, it's good to see why they did it, and it's good to learn from others.
The truth is there is no right answer here. There are many ways to solve the same problem and that's a good thing. It allows us to be creative with our solutions. It makes more than one path a possible one.
If someone wants a good MVC framework there are a number of great PHP ones they could run with. There is no shortage of great tools out there. The thing I would love to see more of is PAC frameworks. There seems to be an element of software architecture missing these days in the framework world.
Matt Farina
Geeks and God Co-Host
www.innovatingtomorrow.net
www.mattfarina.com
considered Expression Engine
Expression Engine was one of three finalists when our church was searching for and selecting a full CMS (along with Drupal and Joomla). The cost was low enough for non profits that for many that would not be much of a factor. (They discount for non-profits, letting them purchase at personal license price, which is less than half the commercial price).
From a CSS template designer standpoint it seemed quite attractive (very flexible, and styling work seemed closer to what one does and can easily do with a static page design). The base architecture used modern page structure and layout practices.
It didn't appear to be the most flexible or widely used CMS, and it seemed somewhat less a "full" CMS than Drupal, Joomla and some others, but it reached further outside the blog structure than did Wordpress or Textpad (which is was similar to). I found getting a "basic" multifunction site up and running required more custom and web design experience than the others. Install was also much more finicky. But creating a theme from scratch seemed much easier. It seemed well supported and maintained. Quite a few churches seemed to be using it. I recall quickly finding about a half dozen examples.
Anyway, we thought it could have been an OK choice for us, and I suspect it might be the best choice for some site projects. If primary criteria is on efficient, flexible page styling, and you're not going be too aggressive in terms of CMS ambition, it might be worth looking at.
When looking at any
When looking at any framework on any platform, I recommend going with something that follows an MVC design pattern.
That is "Model-View-Controller" for the uninitiated. Once you grok your brain around the theory behind it, you'll be able to move comfortably between similar systems and compare/contrast them more easily. The fact that Drupal doesn't really follow this is another reason it's tough to make a comparison between it and these other systems.
@mwpeters: I can't remember exactly where off the top of my head, but I know that somewhere in the "Modules" panel on the EE backend, you can find a ton of other Modules (or extensions) to download and install. I only did it once, but I remember it was so easy, I went crazy with it and downloaded all kinds of useful add-ons... spam blockers, special templating tools, etc. There was even an EE "port" of the Akismet anti-spam tool (originally from WordPress).
The thing I see being nice about EE is something that Rob and MF mentioned on the podcast: if you, the guy who set up this site, were to disappear suddenly, what could the church do to keep going? At least they can call the support folks and get some help on the phone in the interim. The OSS projects don't have that, from what I can see.
Right on OSS risk, all software is somewhat a gamble
Good points... and its got me re-thinking
With OSS you we need to arrange for some additional back up support. OTOH: Commercial web app projects can also leave us stuck based on a lack of commercial success. Apache, Linux, MySQL, and Postgres may not have phone support lines, but they all seem less likely to soon cease development than many commercial projects. I think massive OSS projects backed by some contract support provides some of the benefits of each environment. Wordpress seems to be achieving something like that now. Joomla and Drupal are approaching also, but each does seem much more vulnerable (for differing reasons). Until our CMS portal becomes as day-to-day critical as our network or membership database, we can probably deal with the risk of a some slightly longer support gaps.
Expression Engine seems a good system and Ellis Labs looked solid. But I suspect the biggest need our church is going to have should volunteer tech help suddenly be unavailable, is finding someone or some firm that can act as a go between and interpret their needs. I'm not sure Ellis Labs would really fit that bill. Maybe if we hosted with them also??
Expression Engine still seems to occupy a space somewhere between a hyper-power weblog and CMS portals like Typo3, Plone, Mambo, Drupal, etc. Though impressed by the set of modules available for EE, and the install process, but the collection didn't match up well to the volume and variety available for Joomla, Drupal, or Wordpress.
Interesting about MVC. I'm still inclined to start out by asking what capabilities we get in the product toolbox, how easy they are to use, etc. Right now we aren't even real clear on the extent of what we'll be attempting over the life of a platform. I'm not saying the design architecture stuff is unimportant. For long term maintenance it could be very important. And if I was shopping for a weblog it might be the determining factor (as so many products could meet all operating needs). Not so with the low cost CMS portals. None of the candidates... that were within our reach, did a good job of addressing all our ambitions.
I agree on MVC for a
I agree on MVC for a framework to develop from scratch totally. It is a real nice system. I actually use activecollab for project management and it is built on a custom MVC. It is pretty easy to hack because of this model.
The reason I like Drupal as a framewok is that.. well.. sorry to change what I said before, but maybe Drupal is really bigger than framework, it is a platform. I discussed this a little on twiiter with Jeff Eaton (a Drupal rock star) who brought up the question. http://twitter.com/eaton/statu...
With Drupal, I have a CMS with all the modules ready to go with no code. Then I can code in the framework to fill in blanks when there are pieces missing or modifications that need to be made. I know MVC is good for rapid development, but Drupal can provide some pretty rapid dev too. Let's say I need a web app to do something like organize my stamp collection. (I don't have one, but what the heck). I don't have to code a taxonomy system, a login auth system, etc. What I do have to code is anything that Drupal doesn't provide with core or contribe..pretty sweet!
Shrop
Drupal is a Platform
In the past year I really saw drupal grow into a platform. Oh, I agree with Eaton here. It's quite an impressive thing to see. You have the drake module to integrate cakephp (the framework). You have the zend module to integrate the zend framework. So, you can use other frameworks along with it.
Yet, drupal is a framework in and of itself. Not a typical MVC framework and that's ok.
I'd argue that ground up development doesn't mean an MVC framework. That's just what the common buzz words say. For a case I'm dealing with MVC is not the answer. The software architecture just doesn't fit.
I wonder why we seem to have such a hard time with different when it comes to software architecture and frameworks? If it's not an RoR clone and isn't MVC so many people look down on it. That's sad. I think all these frameworks could learn a certain amount from each other and that would make all of them better so the consumer would end up better off.
Matt Farina
Geeks and God Co-Host
www.innovatingtomorrow.net
www.mattfarina.com
MVC and PAC
Sorry it's taken me some time to comment on this conversation. I've been on vacation and not following anything on the Internet.
I've recently gotten into the study of software architectures. MVC is a hot buzz word these days. If someone says 'lets build a web app' you usually hear a web developer say 'that means we need MVC'. But, this isn't necessarily the case.
I was recently looking at the requirements for a web application and trying to fit it into an MVC mold. The problem was the MVC didn't really fit what this was going to do. I really needed a PAC (Presentation-Abstraction-Control) architecture. That fit the complexity of what this was trying to do.
I think there are good cases to use MVC and some places to use PAC. Something to note is that in a number of cases where developers call out their setup as MVC they are actually developing with a PAC architecture. MVC is just the hot buzz word. I'm all for the right tool for the right job.
This is one of those cases where we need the right software architecture (tool) for the right job. We need to be careful not to try and fit the square peg in the round hole.
I am a fan of MVC. I've used it before and am going to use it again for an upcoming project. It's just not the end all of software architectures. Even GUI software architectures.
Matt Farina
Geeks and God Co-Host
www.innovatingtomorrow.net
www.mattfarina.com
Why I'm using Wordpress for Church -> Podpress
Way back a year and a half ago (before "I" even knew what a CMS was), I was tasked with setting up a sermon podcast. After bouncing around a bit I came across recommendations to publish through a blog and some automated software. Some others in our denomination were using branded services, but I struck on the alternative of using the Podpress plug-in for Wordpress. And as of today, I still haven't found anything else that I find as easy, flexible, full-featured and reliable.
I've since added plug-ins for Organizer (gives us a fantastic set of file management functions), a Lightbox Plug-in for some photos, a OpenID extension to handle login authentication, and a fully widget enabled theme.
For our main website we have since selected a different CMS, but as of today, coming close to recreating what our Wordpress+Podpress+Organizer combo is giving us is going to take a lot of additional effort if/when we make a change.
Mark
This is almost as....
almost as bad as the age old question of "what kind of computer should I get?" Not to mention the countless posts that are on the Wordpress forums talking about this exact thing.
It will be different for each person and situation. I personally have used Joomla, PHPNuke, DotNetNuke, Mambo, Blogger, and Wordpress (not mentioning a few others that got installed and uninstalled the same day.) Currently, my personal site is a blog with Wordpress. As is my wife's site. I have found that the blogging tools do everything that I need on a personal site.
So with that said, I think Wordpress would do fine as a basic to intermediate CMS.
The CMS features and functionality that so many of us have gotten use to are now implemented in WP. Are they pretty...in many cases no. That shows as MF pointed out that the code is not "pretty."
However it does work. It captures content from multiple users and delivers that content in different ways using thematic design and user contols.
Now, my only two caveats are that I think that the original CMS programs will do better than WP when size matters. Those programs were developed with the framework in mind to handle a load. The other caveat is that IF you are to make a CMS out of WP, then use a professional. WP is a great blogging software for the average use and through the use of advance tools can be utilized as a CMS. Just amek sure to get it done right.
my two cents....
Wordpress
I love wordpress!! It gets the job done. I use wordpress for my churches site. I have to admit its not the best site every, but we are a small church and it does what we want it to do. I think you can use WP for more than blogs. It just depends on your template. iThemes.com has some very nice WP themes, but they do cost. With their iCompany theme I was able to customize it and do what we want. I love how easy it is for the not so techsavy(pastor, sec., and other people) can just login and add something. I looked into the other drupal, joomla, and many others. However it's just that WP is so easy to tweek and edit. That's just what I think. Our church site is centerhillbaptist.net please excuse somethings we just redesigned it about 2 weeks ago. I'm still in the process of customizing it. Thanks
Good job on using WP for
Good job on using WP for your church site. Looks really nice.