DNN Platform vs. Progress Sitefinity

DNN [Platform] is great for organizations of any size who wish to have a robust CMS to manage their site. DNN is not ideal for a small site that is better suited to a super easy to user interface such as Wix. DNN [Platform] is plenty strong enough for enterprises and large entities.

Progress Sitefinity remains a little heavyweight for sites that require basic text content, or a limited number of pages. However, its flexibility (including the range of different content types if supports) make it a good choice for any organization requiring advanced content management capabilities at an affordable price.

• Very easy to use CMS - Ease of use is paramount with CMS products to minimise on support calls. Also the template structure of pages ensures that content editors cannot inadvertently corrupt the layout of the page.
• Powerful application framework - The existence of APIs for all functionality within the CMS provides limitless scope in terms of developing bespoke applications which sit within the CMS.
• Commercially supported option available - For larger clients, the comfort factor of having a direct line to the developers of the application is a big selling point.

• 'Low-code structured content' (dynamic content types) is one of Sitefinity's most powerful features that allows you to structure content according to business needs, while at the same time dampening editorial freedom to ensure accessibility, meta enhancement, SEO and API consumption can be achieved.
• Sitefinity's content provider model allows us to flexibly (by means of admin interface) easily aggregate or separate content sharing within a multi-site instance.
• This proofs particularly powerful in emerging situations where there suddenly is a demand for content sharing across countries or regions.
• Adaptability at its core.
• While there's never a perfect fit for everything, it allows for easy code customization and extension being a .NET application at heart. Giving it a corporate edge over other custom solutions, whether it is on the development side or deployment side (on premise, IaaS or Azure DevOps Paas). And it has enabled us to put the system to use in its core feature - which is to manage content, where on other occasions we were able to take full advantage of its features such as A/B testing and personalization.

• Out of the box, it has some modules, but not enough unless you do a paid version.
• The support is a bit slow.
• The menuing can be confusing and terms used a bit strange. which makes training difficult.

• Diagram or illustrate more use cases for server setups, and managing of upgrades.
• I'd like to see the ability to synchronize from one server to multiple others at once.
• Implementation assistance as part of the purchase rather than farming out to 3rd party, although they did answer every question we asked in order to determine our best architecture setup.

Pricing makes this a no brainer. Not the best CMS, but with work arounds and some fumbling around we are able to make it do what we want it to do

Very big fan of this CMS, as it allows scalability, performance, and everything else. The support is great whenever we need it. As a marketer, the digital/marketing side of things is very easy to use and we've seen strong results from an SEO and marketing perspective. I can't speak to the developer/creative side too much, but in talking with these teams, they do recommend the tool as well.

Has been solid for us on availability

A bit sluggish sometimes as the compiler works.

Support can be pretty good, even though, depending on the level of licensing, it can take longer to hear back from their team. They do have a phone option, which works well. Overall, they are knowledgeable, and helpful when needed. At times, support is able to access the system directly and troubleshoot critical items when needed.

N/A - I was not part of the implementation team. We have had this internally for over 5 years. Based on my experience, ensure that you have documentation on the initial implementation and subsequent upgrades. I would also recommend to have all the documentation on how and why the system was implemented the way it was

My experience with Joomla! was over six years ago so a lot could have changed. However, I prefer DNN over Joomla because DNN offers more modules and a better administration user interface.

It is hands down just easier for our customers to use. The interface and the page builder experience is much better than what we have used in the past and has many enterprise features even in the lower price-point

Seems pretty scalable.

• DNN helps us win bids on projects through the improvements the community has done over the past few years; we were ready to scrap it all together but it has made great strides
• DNN's community has come back and is actively working to improve and expand the capabilities of the cms
• on a negative note, the confusion between evoq and dnn has caused us headaches

• Sitefinity has reduced the amount of time it takes to edit and publish content, which has enabled us to get information out more quickly.
• Sitefinity allowed us to establish a consistent and modern brand identity and apply it across multiple websites.