This year, I was given the privilege of sitting on the judging panel for Packt Publishing's 2008 Most Promising Open Source CMS Award. Judges on the panel were required to select their top three CMS based on a number of factors including performance, usability, accessibility, ease of configuration and customization, scalability and security. These top three CMS were to originate from the five finalists in the most promising category which included: CMS Made Simple, ImpressCMS, MemHT Portal, MiaCMS, and SilverStripe.
As I promised earlier, I'm posting online my notes and comments on how I ranked all five finalists in the most promising category. For better or for worse, Packt Publishing also gives their judges a lot of flexibility in how they rank a CMS. While I wouldn't consider this a complete analysis of the CMS, it should provide enough information on the impression each CMS left me when reviewed. While the methodology for determining the best CMS may be subjective, I do try to design my ranking of the CMS to be fair and non-biased.
The order in which I ranked the top "most promising" CMS were:
- SilverStripe (my highest ranked)
- ImpressCMS
- CMS Made Simple
- MiaCMS
- MemHT Portal (my lowest ranked)
In order to come with the above rank, I chose to use factors such as performance, usability, accessibility, ease of configuration, ease of customization, scalability, the the amount of support/documentation offered through the project's site/infrastructure. I did not use security as a factor in my ranking. Since the CMS must be less than two years old to qualify in the most promising category, it seemed unfair to rank these CMS by security since by definition they're not fully matured projects.
SilverStripe
SilverStripe scored high on usability and ease of configuration. I really liked SilverStripe's user interface for editing and managing content. The administrative layout with "tab browsing" enabled access to a host of functions without having to scroll down on my screen. When I tried to add a link to the "home" page the interface and work flow for adding links even impressed me.
In my opinion, SilverStripe's user interface is about a generation ahead of not only the four other CMS finalists but a number of mature CMS already out there in the market. I recently went on record stating that I thought two of my favorite Web applications, Drupal and Wordpress, could learn a couple things from SilverStripe's user interface for editing content.
| SilverStripe | |
|---|---|
| Performance | 4 |
| Usability | 5 |
| Accessibility | 5 |
| Ease of Configuration | 5 |
| Ease of Customization | 4 |
| Scalability | 4 |
| Support/Documentation | 4 |
| Total Points | 31 |
ImpressCMS
With ImpressCMS a fork of XOOPS it wasn't a surprise to me that the CMS ranked high in scalability and performance as it has a mature code base. In the spirit of the "most promising" category, I looked at what ImpressCMS had to offer that XOOPS didn't provide.
The ImpressCMS project has added quite a few new features to their CMS since breaking away from XOOPS. Features that have been added to ImpressCMS since XOOPs includes native multilingual support, administrative user interface improvements, work flow improvements, and an improved installer. But what impressed me most about ImpressCMS is that it has dropped PHP 4 support in favor of PHP 5.2 or greater. To me this is an indication that ImpressCMS is looking toward the future and is not resting on the past successes of XOOPS.
ImpressCMS impressed me so much that I decided to add it to CMS Report's CMS Focus. ImpressCMS pushed XOOPS off of this list!
| ImpressCMS | |
|---|---|
| Performance | 5 |
| Usability | 4 |
| Accessibility | 4 |
| Ease of Configuration | 4 |
| Ease of Customization | 4 |
| Scalability | 5 |
| Support/Documentation | 4 |
| Total Points | 30 |
CMS Made Simple
While MiaCMS and CMS Made Simple were essentially a tie, I gave CMS Made Simple the third spot since its code base originated with the project (MiaCMS is a fork of Mambo).
Although CMS Made Simple didn't score poorly in any of the criteria, it also didn't seem to shine as well as SilverStripe and ImpressCMS. CMS Made Simple scored high in ease of configuration as well as ease of customization. I did have some concerns with regards to performance and scalability that are not addressed well in the project's documentation.
My feeling is that CMS Made Simple would be a good choice for personal Websites and less for businesses or larger organizations.
| CMS Made Simple | |
|---|---|
| Performance | 4 |
| Usability | 4 |
| Accessibility | 3 |
| Ease of Configuration | 4 |
| Ease of Customization | 5 |
| Scalability | 3 |
| Support/Documentation | 4 |
| Total Points | 27 |
MiaCMS
Similar to Joomla!, MiaCMS is another fork of Mambo. However, since the MiaCMS project is still young and the code in MiaCMS too similar to Mambo, I kept seeing MiaCMS as nothing more than a rebranded and improved version of Mambo 4.6. Keeping within the "spirit" of the most promising category...it just seemed too early for me to put MiaCMS in the top three CMS. Time will tell us whether MiaCMS will be its own fully supported CMS or only remembered as a fork under the shadow of Mambo.
I really want to revisit MiaCMS next year and compare it with Joomla! and Mambo. If someone feels that I'm being too harsh on MiaCMS for being a fork of Mambo, know that I was just as harsh on the Joomla! project. It really wasn't until the development of Joomla! 1.5 before I considered the Joomla! project truly legitimate. As Joomla! has learned, it takes more than forking the code and opening a site to create a legitimate open source project...it takes a community willing to change, evolve, and learn. I think MiaCMS is on the right track, but it lacks the history needed to judge it fairly.
| MiaCMS | |
|---|---|
| Performance | 4 |
| Usability | 4 |
| Accessibility | 4 |
| Ease of Configuration | 5 |
| Ease of Customization | 4 |
| Scalability | 4 |
| Support/Documentation | 3 |
| Total Points | 28 |
MemHT Portal
My shortest "review" of a CMS. I just wasn't impressed with MemHT Portal and couldn't really see myself ever using this CMS for a project. MemHT isn't a bad CMS, but is also doesn't seem to be a great CMS. To be fair to MemHT, the latest version of MemHT, 4.0.0 as not reviewed. Also, there are some signals that MemHT may be catching on and perhaps we'll be seeing some hypergrowth to it's community. If you're looking for an up and coming CMS and those projects I've ranked higher don't impress you, then you still may want to check out MemHT.
| MemHT Portal | |
|---|---|
| Performance | 3 |
| Usability | 3 |
| Accessibility | 3 |
| Ease of Configuration | 3 |
| Ease of Customization | 3 |
| Scalability | 3 |
| Support/Documentation | 3 |
| Total Points | 21 |
Correction for links made at 745 PM CST.
Comments
More Promising CMS
Six Revisions posted a similar article today, 10 Promising Content Management Systems. A number of the CMS they list are included in our CMS Focus Top 30 list, but a couple of the CMS they list are even new to me. Go check it out.
By the way, I came across this article due a reference link to CMSReport.com that they provided on their page.
ImpressCMS Forking XOOPS
Bryan, you said:
"I looked at what ImpressCMS had to offer that XOOPS didn't provide."
Did you look into the XOOPS 2.3.1, to have a real comparison between those two?
XOOPS and ImpressCMS
Mamba,
I "glanced" at XOOPS 2.3.1, but I have to admit that I didn't look it in great detail as my focus was on the five CMS on the list.
I know that my positive impressions of ImpressCMS come at a cost of displeasing some loyal XOOPS users. I have nothing against XOOPS.
I do think though that ImpressCMS has given what was XOOPS a second chance of becoming more than it was. I suppose I'm impressed with the synergy and openness of the ImpressCMS community. In some ways, ImpessCMS reminds me of a lot of the Joomla! community (and its fork from Mambo). Time will tell...
17,000 downloads of XOOPS 2.3.1
I think, taking off XOOPS was premature. I would like to invite you to take a closer look into 2.3.1 and its features.
There are close to 17,000 downloads of this new version, while ImpressCMS can only show 2,200 downloads of their new version.
If you go to SourceForge and compare the statistics (not the ranking because SourceForge has obvious problems with the algorithm, and they acknowledge it):
https://sourceforge.net/project/stats/?g...
https://sourceforge.net/project/stats/?g...
then you'll see that there is no comparison (these statistics are for one day only: Nov. 24):
I think, the above numbers speak for itself, which CMS should be on the list.
XOOPS and ImpressCMS
Mamba,
I don't agree that that XOOPS should be on the list but not ImpressCMS. I do however, agree that I was premature in taking XOOPS off the list. Looking back I did keep Mambo and Joomla! on the list for a couple years and should have done the same with XOOPS and ImpressCMS.
So as of today, XOOPS is back on the top 30 list, CMS Focus. It will be interesting to see what the trends will be in 2009 between XOOPS and ImpressCMS.
Please keep the XOOPS information coming! I appreciate the posts submitted by those involved with the CMS.
XOOPS on the CMS List
Thank you for adding XOOPS back on the list. Very much appreciated!
Today it seems to be a good day! Also today SourceForge anonunced the monthly ranking of its Top 25 Projects, and XOOPS is the #24, and with it, it's the #1 CMS program hosted on SourceForge.
See: https://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trov...
I suppose I'm impressed with
Bryan, I guess, you'll have to change you view on the "Openess" of ImpressCMS - they just closed the SVN to the public. In order to have access, you have to apply to become a member of their team. See this link: http://tinyurl.com/apbhcd
The funny thing: just on January 2nd, Vaughan from ImpressCMS claimed:
Well, you can browse and download as anonymous the SVN of our latest RC (XOOPS 2.3.3) from SourceForge, while you cannot do it for ImpressCMS anymore. So much for their "openess"! LOL
What about WordPress, Joomla, or Drupal
What about WordPress, Joomla, or Drupal?
Are they not CMS? I would say so.
Not most promising
The "most promising" category of the Packt award was reserved for open source projects less than two years old. Wordpress, Joomla, and Drupal have been around awhile and have already proved themselves beyond the promise.
Recycling of older CMS
The "most promising" category of the Packt award was reserved for open source projects less than two years old.
Then how did ImpressCMS and MiaCMS qualified to be the finalist? They are just forks of existing CMS solutions that are older than 2 years. Instead of promoting innovation, we promote "recycling" of existing CMS solutions. Both of them should compete in the general category.
By the same logic, I'll take Drupal, change the name to BestCMS, add some hacks and a new theme, and will compete for "the most promising CMS". Since Drupal won this year, "BestCMS" should be the most promising one, as no other new CMS could be better than Drupal.
Rules like these cause that the credibility of such Awards goes down. If I am an author of a new and innovative CMS system, how could I be motivated if I have to compete against two old and established CMS solutions (XOOPS and Mambo) under a different name and few cosmetic changes?
Loopholes
I brought up the same issue with Packt Publishing after the five nominees were publicly announced and after I did some initial homework on the projects. I don't think it was an issue that they had anticipated and hopefully the rules will be tightened next year
If however you reread my article, you'll see that I did take the spirit of the category, most promising, into consideration. Although MiaCMS (a fork of Mambo) scored slightly higher "objectively" than CMS Made Simple...I still ranked CMS Made Simple higher. I penalized ImpressCMS less because I felt that it differed (or will differ) enough from XOOPS to stand on its own. I can't speak for the judges on the other panel, but they likely understood their role in judging the "most promising" category in this way too.
What stops forks from winning the "most promising" award? Users and the open source community. In order for the CMS to make the panel they must be voted by the public with only the top five in each category selected. While you could nominate BestCMS as a fork of Drupal, if you don't have the users or a strong infrastructure independently backing that CMS...it's not going to be a top nominee in awards like these.
How does an author of a new and innovative CMS become motivated to compete with old and established CMS solutions? If the developers of an open source project needs to win awards to be motivated I would say they're in the wrong line of work. The true award is solving a problem, delivering on a solution, involving the users, being associated with an open source community, and if you're really good...making some money. An open source project where only a handful of developers and users are involved do not make a community in my opinion and won't get you this award.
Ranking cms
"Content" for satisfaction? The abrevation "CMS" is not very good. Think it was Typolight that used Web Content Management System as description... but then the publishing part (or not) get lost. It is always nice if words express what we are really talking about and perhaps Web Publishing CMS [WPCMS] would be a fair description.
------
Reviews and rankings: There are not many serious attempts to rank wpcms's on the web. At least not if put in the context that there are >1000 cms's around. Just as an example MODx, when it first was recognized was talked about as a WPCMS good for beginners. Now critics more and more seem to rank MODx as not so easy to learn. Since the WPCMS open source "market" still is young also some good applications seem to have bad Achillies heels (some really weak spot).
For the wpcms's to develop I believe that both ranking and/or reviews there application traits is examined. This is needed in order to get both users and developers to improve awareness. Although just a few traits can be misleading it also gives some conception about "what really matters".
------
Above is PacktPubs given factors: Performance, Usability, Accessibility, Ease of Configuration, Ease of Customization, Scalability, Support/Documentation.
Usability, sounds as it really includes all the other factors into 1 (as an echo). Personally I often think about a softwares Tech Quality which should include: Install, stability, security and bugs.
Config: A software as CMS made simple do not have so many configurations to make... which means that a negative thing (less features) improves on rank. So to be fair the amount of good features should be reflected in some rank too.
Customization. Does that reflect front or backend? A really nice backend doesn't need any customization at all, while ease of customizing artistic templates /websites is really essential.
Sup/Doc: In the optimum case the wpcms is so very intuitive that support and documentation is not needed at all. Meaning that Sup/Doc actually tries to pinpoint the Ease of Use.
What do You say about the PacktPubs factors for evaluation? Good, fair or bad?
.
Thanks for the honour!
Hi.
Just wanted to pop a note in thanking your for the honour of mentioning ImpressCMS here!
Really not sure why Mamba felt the need to compare SourceForge stats though, lol.
ImpressCMS is different in many ways
Whilst mamba claims that impresscms has many features that the new xoops has, really. it is very different, and will be even more different as time develops. it's certainly as secure if not more secure than XOOPS.
XOOPS still uses plain old insecure md5() to hash it's user passwords, now md5 is NOT safe at all in the computer security community.
ImpressCMS uses sha256 hashes + 2 unique salt keys (yes 2) for encrypting user passwords, and it also offers many other alternative methods of encryption aswell, this is something that I believe is unique to ImpressCMS because no other CMS system or forum (that I know of) offers the admins choices in what encryption they would like to use on their site for protecting it's user's passwords.
It also has a password expiry system aswell.
sourceforge stats only proves 1 thing. that xoops has been around 5/6 years longer than ImpressCMS and has an established userbase. it doesn't say anything as to how good each system is. popularity doesn't mean something is good or not.
both XOOPS & ImpressCMS share the same base, agreed. but their developments are very different.
ImpressCMS development is extremely open in nature, whereas XOOPS is not. you need to be part of the groupies from XOOPS in order to join their core development.
their new system is being built by a private commercial company in China, and module developers HAVE to wait for new releases to appear, in order for them to build modules for it, that is, they can't get hold of the latest developments or offer any help. so when the new release is available, that is when developers get to play with the code and find out if their modules work or not, or whether they will have to redesign their modules to work with the new system.
XOOPS is controlled by 1 man, ImpressCMS is controlled by many people & the community in a very open & friendly atmosphere. with regular communication between all the project developers whether it's theme development or module development, everyone communicates and works together.
XOOPS has a team structure which is very hard to get into, and then it's even harder to get anything done or to find out information, because there is very little communication between the teams, and the teams are controlled by 1 man who says, yes or no, but you might have to wait weeks for that answer.
ImpressCMS on the other hand, have no private teams, and no private team groups. the ImpressCMS project is the Team, and that team is made up of everyone who helps with ImpressCMS, whether it's in module or theme development, advisory roles, support or testing. they are all part of 1 team, and we all communicate with each other regularly, in fact the ImpressCMS team regularly collaborate with other projects & share information, and not necessarily CMS projects either, they collaborate with many other projects and developers of 3rd party scripts that are used in their system, not only does this improve efficiency of the 3rd party script to work better for them, but it also helps to push the developments of the 3rd party scripts even more. so everyone gains from collaboration.
i guess i'm writing this to explain a bit more the reasons, why ImpressCMS is not to be considered just a fork of xoops, ImpressCMS is definitely going somewhere different.
ImpressCMS accepts competition and learns from it, XOOPS doesn't like competition (try typing impresscms on xoops site, they have censored the word.)
there was an incident not long back where a long time XOOPS user who ran a dutch xoops support site, had posted a reply to a concerned user that was having some problems with XOOPS, the dutch support member offered some help, and posted some links to an external source (impresscms.org) which gave that concerned user, all the answers he needs and solutions to fix his problem. XOOPS banned the support site user and said that they were promoting another competing CMS. so now you can't even mention the word impresscms on xoops.org, and if you post a link to someone in response to an issue they have, then if the link url contains 'impresscms' then that link will be invalid.
even tho you are fine to post links to joomla, mambo, any other project, just not impressCMS?
why is that? well as we see here, with the comments from mamba and his being mardy that xoops was no longer in the top 30, and that same immature attitude on their website, one can only wonder why more of the XOOPS developers have jumped ship again (the last time, devs left to start XOOPS Cube, then other developers left to join Joomla or drupal), this time, they started their own project, and XOOPS didn't like that.
Interesting
Well you most certainly seem to have some intimate knowledge!
XOOPS is still a great product and I hope to see that is the case for many more years to come.
Timothy Bowers
ImpressCMS Project
http://www.impresscms.org
Mudsliding of XOOPS
Looks like our ImpressCMS friend Vaughan (http://community.impresscms.org/userinfo...) is back at work with his accusations and XOOPS conspiracy theories of an disgruntled former member :(
One has to wonder if he is intoxicated again, as it happened in the past already with many of his rants by his own admission: http://tinyurl.com/9659a9
He's been trolling on the XOOPS Website as well, so we had to ban him there.
I'm not going to trash ImpressCMS as Vaughan is trying to do with XOOPS. After all, under the new name and some cosmetic changes on top, it's still the old good XOOPS :)
But facts are our friends, so let me just pinpoint some of the recent facts:
1) In Nov. 2008, Simple-XOOPS, a German fork built on top of an older version of XOOPS, was deciding whether continue with XOOPS as the basis, or switch to ImpressCMS. After evaluating both systems, they decided to stay with XOOPS and use our newly released XOOPS 2.3 as the basis for going forward.
And the user reactions to that were very positive there!
Read here: http://tinyurl.com/9fds78. It's in Germany, so you might need http://google.com/translate
As a matter of fact, after the evaluation of the XOOPS 2.3 vs. ImpressCMS, the developer of Simple-XOOPS was confident enough about the future of XOOPS and our direction, that he joined the XOOPS Core development Team.
See: http://www.xoops.org/modules/news/articl...
2) Dave Porter in his 2009 Web Predictions mentions XOOPS as one of the three Open Source projects where web developers are moving to for running their Web sites: http://www.axcessnews.com/index.php/arti...
3) XOOPS wins the prestigious 2008 OSSContest Award in China
http://www.xoops.org/modules/news/articl...
'Nough said... :)
Just drop it and move on!
Really Mamba, if it is Vaughan does that really make you any better making your reply, you always have to add fuel to fire and get involved. Couldn't you just have left it with my compliment of XOOPS?
Now your comment about ICMS still being the old XOOPS, who developed the XOOPS project in later years before your take over, I don't see project developments being accredited to those people who are actually now working with ImpressCMS?
Heck in recent months when we were aware of security issues which could also affect XOOPS so we notified you through various channels straight away so X users could have fixed code, I never saw any public gratitude then but we choose to do the right thing!
As for 2.3 code, take a real close look and compare the codes committed in both SVN's then compare original commit dates.
I really wish you could just leave these things alone and move on, instead you continue, sometimes I think your just bored and post under other aliases to try and make people think it's Vaughan and so then you can make a public sceptical out of nothing again.
Just move on, and if it isn't you posting under a pseudo name then just ignore it and eventually they will get bored.
I'm hoping this will be an end to the childishness because this website really should not be used as a battle ground for your own personal gains, it's unfair to the owner, it's users and our projects, this is not a political rally to try and get one up on the other side.
Have a good day!
Timothy Bowers
ImpressCMS Project
http://www.impresscms.org
Re: Just drop it and move on!
Tim,
this is too funny. You're talking about moving on, while it's you and your friends at ICMS who are still not willing to let it go.
My last post here was on November 25, 2008 - since my objective was achieved, and XOOPS was back on the list (Thank you, Bryan!), there was nothing to talk about here anymore.
Then I get Google Alert that XOOPS was mentioned here, so I came here to check it out, saw Vaughan's post and responded to it.
Now, coming here and accusing me of posting under different aliases, is too funny, especially since it's Vaughan who is doing it --> sneaking on XOOPS websites, posting under a different name (Yeppers), and then lying about it on ImpressCMS forums after we banned him again (see: http://tinyurl.com/9r5ftj)
Come on, Vaughan's post was 3 hours after yours, so either you guys were talking, or it was you who posted it. Google Alerts normally take 1-2 days before the alerts are being sent out, so I would have no chance to respond within 3 hours after your original post. But I'm sure Bryan has the IPs stored, so if needed, he could enlighten us who posted it :)
But I agree with you - "drop it and move on", so please keep your friends like Vaughan from posting their rants and conspiracy theories here. We'll will be better off :)
Yawn
Yeah OK Mamba, your the king of the castle.
It's funny how that comment only appeared after I praised XOOPS to cause conflict and it's always the same story, over and over again!
It's pointless in discussing anything with you because no headway is ever made.
Have a good day.
Timothy Bowers
ImpressCMS Project
http://www.impresscms.org
Duplicate post - please delete
Duplicate post - please delete
My fault
I've been trying a different caching method (outside the CMS) which doesn't appear to be working too well. I'll have to try something a little different.