CommonSpot vs. Ghost

I do actually think CommonSpot is pretty well suited when the organization that you work for requires very specific parameters on site design. It was very clear what could be used and what could not in the design of individual department pages. The other thing I think CommonSpot is best suited for is website content management done by people with little or no website content management experience. It's very intuitive and easy to use and thus, easy to train people on.

Incentivized

It is well suited for distributed writing and publishing with a subscription component

Incentivized

• I think CommonSpot's greatest strength is its ease of use. It's relatively intuitive in it's usage, so it therefore makes it easy to train new people to use it.
• Within my usage of it, our options were limited, which again added to it's ease of use.

Incentivized

• Creating a newsletter for web and email simultaneously
• Allowing for paid subscriptions
• Allowing content to be segmented by subscription type

Incentivized

• Commonspot needs to improve on its authoring feature. It is impossible to author on more than one page at a time . (One must always click on "View work on all changes") before switching between pages otherwise, the changes will not be saved.
• CommonSpot does not support sharing the definition of any custom element or any template layouts. Therefore, one must recreate these in each site.
• In Commonspot, a user who has to manage content in multiple sites will have to log in to each site to see and act on any actions.

Incentivized

• They wysiwig editor is missing critical functions like superscript and subscript
• The markdown complement has those features but it doesn’t integrate well with the wysiwig editor
• Footnoting is hard to do

Incentivized

I had no previous background in content management, and found it very easy to use. If I could figure it out, I am pretty certain that just about anyone else could as well.

Incentivized

Commonspot works in tandem with Zendesk very well to accomplish tasks an an efficient manner.

Incentivized

It is simpler, headless, faster than WordPress. The core functionality is focused on subscription membership which is a bloated add on for WordPress.

The simplicity has a cost as WordPress, while complicated, offers more expansion opportunities.

Incentivized

• Better customer service
• Improved accountability as it regards tracking the tasks assigned to which employee
• Improved accountability led to increased employee efficiency

Incentivized

• Our business is totally built around this product
• It has allowed us to easily and quickly scale our free and (soon) our paywalled content

Incentivized