Magnolia vs. Makeswift

Magnolia is a very capable DXP, that provides client with lots of flexibility in composing its own stack. While the core of the platform is a content management system, the open architecture of Magnolia DXP allows it to connect to any platform, allowing client to extend the capabilities. One scenario would be a centralized content hub - where through a single platform, content authors can choose which channel to distribute what content. For example, long form content for consumers viewing on a laptop, short form content for those using a mobile browser. This allow the client to personalized the experience based on channels. Another scenarios would be leveraging on GenAI - using Magnolia's built-in connector to ChatGPT. If that is not the service that one desire, you can always connect to another AI service such as Google Gemini. With GenAI, connected, content author can use AI as co-pilot to help them scale up their content production.

Makeswift is an excellent choice when you need to create high quality landing pages. Since it removes the code process, you can move from a design concept to a live site easily. It is particularly helpful for designers who want total creative freedom, as the interface feels more like Figma than a normal website builder. Plus, it’s a lifesaver for collaborative teams because the real time editing allows different people to create and design at the same time without any friction. On the other hand, it might not be the right tool if you are trying to build a complex web application like a custom dashboard or an e-commerce store with thousands of filters. It’s also important to note that while it is no code for design work, the initial setup like getting custom components or the localhost environment running usually requires a developer’s assistance.

Incentivized

• Speed of development - time to delivery from zero to MVP was excellent
• Ease of use - the authoring experience is very easy to build and train
• PAAS/SAAS - the managed service platform removed the traditional overhead of running in-house technologies, meaning we could focus on value add, with less time spent keeping the lights on.

• It feels more like "Designing" than "Coding"
• What you see is actually what you get
• Handling Different Screen Sizes (Responsive Design)
• Editing with other peers

Incentivized

• The documentation provides samples that are often out of context, and difficult to know where the provided example code should be implemented. More tutorials providing the full project or step-by-step instructions on how to implement subject material would help greatly. Baeldung is a resource I would consider the gold standard in how this is done in other spaces.
• The use of JCR and Nodes makes object serialization/deserialization painful. Jackson compatibility or similar would be a welcome enhancement to the developer experience. Maybe leveraging code-gen from light modules to build model classes when possible could help accomplish this.
• Modifying the home layout from light modules is frustrating. It seems that any configuration overrides made merge with the default rather than overwriting, which makes for a difficult combination of guess-and-check while referencing the documentation to see what should be in each row/column when making changes.
• Including "mark all as read" or "delete all" in the notifications app would be a great quality of life improvement. It seems that by default, users have to individually select messages and operate them.

Incentivized

• Starting from scratch - Base templates
• Advanced layout logic
• Learning curve for custom elements
• Localhost stability

Incentivized

We have invested a lot of time and energy into tailoring a solution that works for the company.

We think the new features in v6.2 will help us get to the next level

We also don't have the resources to rebuild a website platform from scratch even if we wanted to

Incentivized

We've shown it to a number of users both clients and our own team and despite initial apprehensions, they "get it" very quickly. It's intuitive and friendly and quick to perform daily tasks. We once had a client tell us "Using Magnolia makes me smile" which says it all for us.

Incentivized

Once you are inside the builder, the daily experience is incredibly smooth. It really does feel like a strong design tool rather than a clunky website builder. The drag and drop feature is fluid and the collaboration mode makes working with my team feel natural rather than a headache. It’s intuitive enough that I can jump in and make significant changes without feeling like I need a manual next to me.

Incentivized

I gave [it] 7/10 only because of the loading time of pages. Otherwise, I think it deserves an 8. Normally this is not an issue per [se] but considering the rating matrix and as I have been asked to honestly write about it. Yes, the page loading times could be improved.

You always get an answer based on your SLA. But you always get a solution. That's the successfactor in this case. To often i was frustrated about people in a company without even a clue what there product is about or how to solve a problem. Magnolia's Support Team does a very good job and try to help you in most of the cases

I've used several CMSs like AEM and EpiServer, and comparatively, they all excel at different things. Magnolia is the best to develop for/against. Episerver has the best/most fluid UI in terms of content editing, and the overall admin experience AEM is just all around sucks.

Incentivized

Essentially the learning curve. I chose Makeswift because it feels much more like a design tool (like Figma) than a development environment. It gives the designers the control to create what they want. It allows to move faster, collaborate in real time without locking each other out of pages, and still gives the developers the freedom to drop in custom components when we need something specific.

Incentivized

• Magnolia has brought about positive impacts. For instance, we need not outsource web design and marketing services because thanks to this software, we can handle most work inhouse
• The software is affordable with no compromises on capabilities and therefore it is gives us value for money.
• The templates makes the whole process easy

Incentivized

• Cost savings on external dev work
• Improved on faster iteration
• Efficiency via p2p collaboration

Incentivized