Tridion

Interwoven teamsites, Documentum, Adobe - teamsites and documentum are old and limited. Adobe rocks but I like where I am and Tridion does a lot of the same things. No need to reinvent the wheel or move to a lateral product.

It is a nuclear missile compared to the other handguns and knives on the market today. But it also requires nuclear technicians and expertise that a handgun doesn't require. Do you need to decimate your competition and you have the investment capabilities necessary to put a nuclear missile into the sky? Then definitely do it. Especially if you need a very good multi-lingual blueprint provider like Tridion.

SDL Tridion is far superior to CommonSpot. It is much more user friendly and increases efficiency.

I did not play a role in selecting this product so I can't say how it stacked up. I do know that Tridion is an improvement over the last CMS.

Tridion is much better for multi-site installations, though Sitecore is a bit easier for content editors to know content types are being used based on visual icon indicators. We've had content editors pick the wrong templates by accident, but Sitecore's visual indicator typically mitigates that. Sitecore API is MUCH easier to use, too. It is the one primary way to work with content, and the documentation is much more consistent. I've found multiple ways to to communicate with the Broker and CM database, but found it hard to get a consistent approach for working with the API (plus, it didn't work with our upgraded servers, so I was forced to look into alternatives).

SDL has a better API and also handles high server load much better. Also, the built-in integrations for translations are more suited for performing lots of translations for many sites. However, Umbraco, like Tridion, has a great community and finding solutions with both platforms is very easy.

Adobe CQ is SDL Tridion main competitor. Sitecore is designed for smaller companys. Adobe CQ is all java and thus has limitations. Sitecore is also all .net and has limitations. Both use a dynamic model and everything is compiled at runtime. SDL Tridion can be published in a number of different ways and can be published statically.

Tridion again seemed to be more enterprise level then EpiServer, EpiServer allowed for faster ramp up time of a intuitive .NET framework, but Tridion seemed to have more tools and overall functionality once the CMS was customized towards the needs of the customer.

I feel that SDL Tridion's User Interface is to difficult for content authors to understand. I worked with a client that used Tridion for years and she still would get lost in the UI and had to ask questions. There was close to 30% of continual time spent on the project simply to figure out the UI.

I have also used Adobe CQ5 and Sitecore for other clients.

Adobe CQ5 is a complex UI, however it is very nice for content authors sue to the fact that it resembles what the site will actually look like when viewed by a user. Instead of just modules being added to a list and not really knowing how they will be ordered on the page.

Sitecore is an easy to use UI for both developer and content author. The UI resembles that of a desktop interface that everyone is use to already. This makes it intuitive for the user to figure out how to do something. There is an easy flow to the structure of the sites created in Sitecore. A developer can find an exact page to look at in Sitecore based on the URL that a user is looking at. I found that extremely difficult and time consuming to do in SDL Tridion.

I believe the biggest selling factor for SDL was its customer service and it ability to be responsive. We knew that it was a company that was going to be around for a long time and would continue to provide the support that we would need in the long term.

Tridion's strength is really hosting multiple websites across development, test stage and production.

The decision to purchase Tridion was made at a corporate level removed from the technical teams. Against our previous open source solution, this has been wildly expensive, impossible to find experienced developers for, and has required completely retooling our organization.

We didn't chose WordPress because can't handle the traffic we generate. Sitecore is what we are currently looking at and it looks like a much better alternative to Tridion.

Adobe does a great job in managing sites. Its user interface for authors is intuitive and leaps and bounds better than SDL Tridions new 2013 UI. The ease of install and management makes Adobe CQ a much better product. However, Adobe CQ (AEM) has limitations. It cannot scale as well as SDL Tridion does when managing content in the MM of pages. Also, it forces you to use the CQ UI. If you want to create different experiences and leverage code, it becomes difficult, but still do able. In general, i would recommend Adobe CQ over SDL Tridion for almost all companies but the large multi-brand companies.