The first time I heard the mention of customer experience management was at CMS Expo 2012. In one of the sessions, Robert Rose spent much of his time at the Expo warning the audience that content management systems need to do more than just content management. Rose believed experience management needed to be given a higher priority over web content management. Yesterday, DNN announced with Evoq 8 they are now ready to "move beyond web content management" and enable "marketers to publish, personalize, and measure content anywhere online". The improvements in Evoq 8 are focused on today's marketing needs for better customer engagement.
Some of my friends over at DotNetNuke have been talking to me about the latest version of their software. They're excited the new emphasis their favorite CMS is taking by combining traditional Web content management with enterprise social publishing capabilities. In fact, just today DotNetNuke Corp. announced the availability of DotNetNuke (DNN) 6.2, a social CMS that provides organizations the tools they need to easily configure and deploy internal social collaboration solutions and online communities.
I haven't had a chance to demo DNN 6.2, but I'll walk you through on what I've gleamed so far from the press releases and conversations within the community. I'm hoping to get an opportunity for a demo on the new features down the road but this will have to do for now. Just to get the definitions straightened out, what DNN is calling Social CMS is what I also like to call a Social Publishing Systems. Everyone has a different take on how to use social media, some companies get it while others are still trying to recognize their importance. Taking DNN 6.2 into consideration, it's apparent to me that DotNetNuke gets social.
A couple weeks ago, Liferay's marketing and communication folks sent me an email mentioning that Liferay was included as a "Leader" in Gartner's2011Magic Quadrant for Horizontal Portals. After my usual procrastination I finally got around to reading the report and what follows in this blog post are some impressions that jumped at me while reading the report. I'm not convinced the randomness of these personal thoughts make up a blog post (at least a well-written blog post) but I'm going for it since my public note taking often turns out better than a well polished article.
This year, I had the privilege of participating as a member on the judging panel for Packt Publishing's Overall Best Open Source CMS Award. As I mentioned last month, WordPress was declared the winner of the award followed by MODx, SilverStripe, DotNetNuke, and finally XOOPS. Since the award announcement, I've had a lot of inquiries asking me how and in what order did I rank the content management systems. I decided to wait for a month before my posting my rankings of the Web applications because I wanted focus to remain on the declared winners and not my individual choices.
My rankings for the Overall Best Open Source CMS (with number one being the highest) were:
Each of the judges on the panel, selects their top three CMS from the five included in this category. The judges are given a lot of reign for how they rank the CMS and may consider a number of factors such as performance, usability, accessibility, ease of configuration and customization, scalability and security. Despite the criteria given, the fact is the best CMS is the CMS you determine is best in meeting your project requirements. In other words, you may find that all five CMSes in this category meet your project needs or in some cases none of the given applications will meet your requirements. Despite how I ranked the CMS you still need to do your own homework before choosing what your "best" CMS.
A series of posts and questions on the CMS blogs are asking whether Microsoft should help finance the costs of open source projects. I have no opinion to give that would add value to this topic. However, I'm happy to give the rundown so far of the posts that speak the loudest regarding Microsoft and open source projects.
The thread of blog posts seems to originate with a post at Dave's Tech Shop. In that post, Dave talks about the need for Microsoft to better support open source projects. Dave's reasoning:
In my company's commercial application we depend upon DotNetNuke, Nant, log4net, NUnit and other open source tools. Those open source projects help support us. (In fact, without DNN, we would probably be out of business because our developments costs would be too high.) In turn, my company helps support Microsoft (because we purchase licenses and MSDN subscriptions). Yet Microsoft does not complete the circle by financially supporting any of those open source projects. NDoc stands out as an example.