Broadsign vs. Contentful vs. Sanity

Very suitable for large networks and projects requiring enhanced functionality. less suitable for small networks as the learning curve might be considerable.

Incentivized

It's a great all rounder for content projects. It's easy in the basics and powerful in the complex, data heavy scenarios. Extending the platform is straightforward and the SDK gives you everything you need. If you have many many varying content types , it gets expensive and perhaps not the best choice .

Incentivized

Customization and creation of CMS are almost limitless. Building and customizing the platform is facilitated by a wealth of documentation and video content. As opposed to graphql and traversing rest APIs, Sanity's query language is a breath of fresh air. It really helps you if you want something lightweight but at the same time you want it to be scalable then I think Sanity is your best option.

Incentivized

• Flexible. This CMS can be easily extended and provide access to dynamic content
• Simple. The WYSWG is very easy to work with and identifying pages and content in the system is fairly easy
• Clean Interface. The interface is clean and uncluttered keeping focus on the content and not other factors.

Incentivized

• GraphQL support.
• Nice Intuitive Web interface to write blogs.
• They provide us a subdomain on their cloud so that we can start testing our things directly on the web.

Incentivized

• Contentful uses "references" to allow you to build very modular content. If I have a "slider" content type, I can create a "slide" content type which references a "button" content type, and so forth. This works well, but I occasionally wish there was a better solution for one-off content, like a settings page. Currently, this is done for creating an entire content type called "settings" with a single entry. Not a big deal, but not ideal, either.
• There are a few quirks with GatsbyJS integration, etc, but these issues are being fixed and improved upon very quickly.
• A minor gripe, but Contentful does not have a way to organize fields within an entry. Entries with many fields are somewhat tiresome to scroll through.

Incentivized

• CMS can be a bit hard to work with for the new users
• Documentation should include more examples of the output and code along with the output.
• Custom inputs are quite difficult to start and work with.

Incentivized

It is a very easy to use and configure application. I find that it is on the user to manage the content after the models have been created, yet I still do not encounter issues finding or creating new components for our site. It is easy to set up and easy to navigate.

Incentivized

We analyzed other solutions in 2008 but were convinced from the get go Broadsign would be a perfect fit for our needs in the long run. 15 years later our choice has been proven right.

Incentivized

Easy to use and much more organized as a single platform versus multi. The layout is clean and easy to read and we don’t have to worry about certain users safe guarding data or content then losing it when they leave the company. It’s a one stop shop for imagery

Incentivized

Pricing is better than graph cms. and easy to use the intuitive interface to write my blog.

Incentivized

• Contentful has saved us valuable development time that was previously spent doing deploys for minor content updates.
• Contentful has helped us maintain consistent documentation, reducing time needed to review for consistency.
• Can't say we've really experienced any negative ROI impacts from using Contentful, but we've run into some limitations in adding too many content models and the next pricing tier is substantially more expensive.

Incentivized

• It helped us to create an excellent developer experience and good experience for their editors as well
• Sanity has created an incredible platform that effortlessly balances good DX for content modeling and good UI for content editing.
• Pay-as-you-go hybrid service, no need to worry about reaching a cap and having to suddenly pay $500

Incentivized