Contentful vs. Percussion CMS

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

Best suited for large organizations where everyone knows how to deal with Java in an increasingly Java unfriendly world. Said organization should be willing to pay a huge price for a piece of dinosaur technology

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

• Separate CMS environment publishes to remote server environment - great for security
• Highly scalable
• Full scale workflow allows for custom routing, approving, etc..

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

• One word: JAVA! We don't live in the 1990's anymore! An AJAX/DHTML environment seems a long time coming.
• Horrible end-user experience, learning curve. Our end users' inability to easily use the archaic, Java-based interface, means they send the web developer their content requests. This creates a huge bottleneck and completely defeats the purpose of a CMS.
• Image mangement and integration with content is aweful and time consuming. An image processing tool called ImedImage was developed for Percussion at one point, and left completely stagnant with very little support.
• Implementation is extremely complicated, given the complexity of the system. Sure, scalability is a good thing, but there is very little out-of-the box function. Don't expect to implement a site as quickly as with other CMS platforms.

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

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

No contest. I can't wait to get off of Percussion CMS.

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

• We are locked into Percussion CMS simply due to the expense and complexity of migrating to another solution (and the lack of time and budget to do so). I long for the day when I am no longer required to support Percussion CMS, to say the least.

Incentivized