Cascade Server vs Joomla

• Cascade CMS makes no assumptions about your content. Templates control how the content gets displayed.
• Workflows are intuitive and allow for one or more people to review content before it is published.
• The published site is static (no database connection) which allows for faster page loads and reduced risk of attack.

Read full review

• Multiple templates assigned on a page-level basis allow fine-grained control of your site design
• Excellent ACL out-of-the-box means you can have a mutli-user website up and running without needing to install anything additional
• Straightforward control panel and useful help features and documentation make it easy for people to manage their own websites

Read full review

• Cascade CMS is not an out-of-the-box pre-built system that you can install, turn on and expect to be serving sites and pages on day one. It's not a blogging system like WordPress, or a drag-and-drop system like SquareSpace (both of which I've used for their own purposes). You need to have someone tasked with management and system administration – and if you implement the on-premise self-hosted version, you ought to have several people. We have the university's IT shop handling infrastructure (server hardware, containers, clustering, operating systems, load-balancing, DNS, database servers, NAS/SAN drives), our Web & Design team managing Cascade CMS (system settings, sites, templates, permissions) and managers coordinating each respective academic unit (A&S, business, education, law, marine science).

Read full review

• Updating was never as seamless/easy as it seems to be with Wordpress. Obviously we accounted for this with our own workflow/methods, but I remember whenever we did WordPress updates it always seemed a breeze compared to the time/energy involved with a Joomla update/upgrade.
• For a while (I think this has changed some) Joomla left itself open to attacks when administrators were not as well versed as they should be. There were developer additions that did security checks/audits for you, but the CMS was the subject of a lot of attacks when left in the hands of our clients for a long time (who had changed permissions to make editing easier/convenient). Ideally the CMS would have been more restrictive on some of these things to prevent easy abuse. Obviously this is more the fault of the misinformed/human then the CMS, but it could have been more dummy-proof.
• No native versioning. There are some community extensions that add this functionality, but they pale in comparison to the versioning plugins of other CMS's (WordPress specifically). Again this was some time ago and in our experience, it could have changed by now.

Read full review

• Initially, ROI was positive - because we completely redesigned the website when we implemented Cascade.
• Over time, the inability to keep up with the latest interactive tools has reduced visitors time on site.
• Also over time, the difficulty of use has led to less buy-in by backend users, leading to outdated pages, little timely information, and lower visitors.

Read full review

• Joomla has reduced our costs of rolling out a new website because it uses less developer time and can be rolled out by individual users as needed.
• Joomla has a lot of extensions and add-ons that make it easy to create and implement advanced solutions quickly.

Read full review