Clickability (discontinued) vs. Terminalfour Digital Engagement and Web Development Platform

As a true content management system it is great for site and content creation. It does need some help when it comes to adding functionality for using modern code systems that require server side scripting. For a marketing or public company site, it is an ideal CMS. For a SAAS type site, there could be many road blocks.

It's an extremely flexible solution. It can be a nightmare to work with if not properly planned out or fantastic if well thought out. If you have a team and an application owner with a plan it's a great option.

Incentivized

• Easy to get going for a business that has tons of content they need to manage.
• Clickability offers development and design services so you don't really even need IT.
• No need to worry about server uptime, storage, bandwidth, etc you have all the reports at your fingers for what you are using.
• Simple template and content design system, easy to expand and add.
• Powerful CMS and settings with a design and programming guide provided.
• AkAMAI and Limelight CDN's can be used for powerful and fast loading in many regions.
• Debugging tools to see how long specific templates and content load is exceptional. One can narrow down that this specific template ran X number of times and took this look and had to be stopped at X number of time due to exceeding set limits.
• Having a built in Dev, Staging, Production environments for testing makes seeing new features and how they will integrate into your site seamless.

• Ease of use
• Nice interface
• Web-based site manager

Incentivized

• Choosing ad size/placement should be easier than it is. Now, I have to re-create the whole thing.
• When you "save" anything a pop-up comes up that is redundant.
• Ad list only shows a limited number. It's not until you click on one and cancel it out, then you can see all the listings. A bit tedious and redundant.

Incentivized

• It can be a bit buggy with media library management.
• The html editor can act pretty wonky sometimes with the html it translates things into.
• The navigation builder tool is pretty confusing.

Incentivized

As mentioned in the last questions we are going to use a competitor brand next year. I think the issues are trying to find and fix problems from the previous programer. The steep learning curve and lack of mobile and social sharing capabilities. Things that I like are the strength of the programing which comes with a trade off. The ease for those who don't know markup to make updates to the website. Clickability isn't the easiest and can be difficult to find the content that you are interested in. We will not be using it next year.

My experience with Clickability has been mostly positive but there are a few areas for improvement. It's generally easy to learn and use on a daily basis. I can move fast and do my job with speed with needed. But there is some clunky functionality with targeting and page building. My rating would be higher if some improvements were made.

I found that some agents were better then others, usually you have an account representative and that I would consider level 1 support. To get really complex answers you need to talk with an engineer.

Overall, it was pretty seemless to switch the sites over.

Many of other content management systems similar to WordPress need custom installation. The server costs and upgrades quickly add up. Clickability while expensive, eliminated the overhead of managing all the dependency needs for a CMS. Clickability also works with its clients to understand the business needs and proposes the solutions accordingly. They have a good support team.

Incentivized

I was not part of the decision process, but I was very happy with the choice to use TerminalFour.

Incentivized

• I know a big positive is the fact that it is always-on. We are the leading news corporation for our state, and in many markets, nationwide. We pride ourselves on our strong ethics in the community and thus need to exude reliability to maintain the trust of these communities. Having a website fail periodically erodes that reliable perception.
• It has allowed different areas of the company to approach our team and work in a cohesive manner.

• Increased employee efficiency.
• Happier internal customers because changes are much easier than they used to be and we can often empower them to make their own changes to their websites.
• For our application owner it's become a huge project that consumes all of his time. Not ideal but it's working for now. Knowledge sharing the more intricate pieces can be really difficult.

Incentivized