CoreMedia vs. Netlify CMS

I think this CMS is best suited as an enterprise level system. For small, or simple sites, there are better options, but for large high-traffic sites, this is a great CMS.

Netlify CMS is well suited when you have very less frequent updates to your content, maybe once a day and very few people need to access your data. You can connect it to Netlify, GitHub, or any platform and have multiple people access it and do as many updates as you wish, but the process is not well-defined and you need to build your own system for that. It is well suited for projects you need to pull off with very low cost, it is essentially free as the software is open source and free to use, and all you need to do is set up your schema correctly and find a deployment pipeline where you can build your static site/API to redeploy whenever the content changes. I personally used a GitHub Login -> Netlify CMS -> next app consumer of content -> GitHub pipelines to run next SSG -> GitHub Pages to deploy the built static site. It might not be appropriate for large teams where users themselves need no-code tools to modify the schema of the content.

Incentivized

• Allows many staff members to contribute content to various portions of our website, and allows our Electronic-Communications staff to delegate tasks to these various staff (diffusing the work-load).
• CoreMedia allows for easy creation of different types of content (like teasers, articles, download objects, links, etc). Permission levels can be set, so only certain staff can upload content such as photos, videos, or audio files.
• The CoreMedia workflow process is easy to understand and follow. Once a staff member has submitted content for publishing to the web, they can then see who it's been assigned to for review, and at what time. You're able to leave detailed notes and stay abreast of where the workflow is at any given time.

• Storing content data in customized schema without a database
• Full control over your content and infrastructure where it is deployed and stored
• Very low-cost way for building your own CMS and CDN

Incentivized

• Early learning within the company was slow.
• We elected a customized version of CoreMedia - which in the end may not have been the best decision.

Incentivized

• Linking between different schema types, i.e. having some relations between content
• Better ways to define content schema, like how TinaCMS would handle using a JSON

Incentivized

CoreMedia continues to refine and deliver new features. They also explore new technologies and trends, like social media integration. The platform is solid and growing. We are also slightly locked into using CoreMedia. Migrating such a large amount of content to another system would likely not be feasible or prudent.

Set aside more time than you think you need to migrate content. That is the hard part. Implementing the technology is easy.

While CoreMedia has a better workflow, django CMS has a much easier user interface, wysiwyg editor, and is superior on every other level. Django CMS is easier to teach and support, easier to manage and develop, and provides much more flexibility in the development and design areas.

Incentivized

We really can't compare it to full-fledged CMS software, like WordPress, which has a lot of community and support with widgets, plugins, and whatnot. It's not built for that, but you can compare it to Contentful, Ghost, Strapi, etc., which provide similar functionality to a headless CMS with custom schema options, but even among them, it still lacks a lot of functionality, ease of use, and support. But Netlify CMS pros would be of the opinion that compared to other platforms where most schemas need to use their own tools and frameworks, it's very cost-effective. Something new called TinaCMS has come up to compete with Netlify CMS by covering most of its shortcomings, but it's something new being built by the same team that built Forestry CMS and comes with many modern features, yet currently only supports NextJS SSG.

Incentivized

• Increased employee proficiency compared to nothing at all. I really don't have anything else to compare it to though.
• Reports from Core do not help/.

• Helped us inject dynamic content into existing site very quickly
• Wasted a lot of time to implement when something complex, such as querying content, was needed

Incentivized