Report on Content Management Systems

 

Management Summary

Below are my conclusions from research on content management systems for Lynnwood Bowl and Skate. In researching content management systems (CMS), I chose three systems that could meet Lynnwood Bowl and Skate’s needs. The company is well aware of the importance of keeping fresh content on their pages and wishes to be able to easily update their pages. The company operates a combination bowling lane and roller skating rink in Lynnwood. They are curious as to whether there are content management systems that they should consider.

My Tasks

I was asked to research and recommend a content management system the company might be interested in using. To accomplish this, I got a list of CMSs that appeared to be relatively easy to use. I chose three different systems to do further research on – Ingeniux, Drupal and Alfresco. Drupal and Alfresco are open source applications. Ingenuix is not. I drew up a list of general considerations for recommending a CMS and focused on those that I considered to be relevant to the company’s needs. The areas I examined to the extent possible are:

·         The ease of use of the authoring interface

·         Site structure

·         Link management

·         Workflow

·         System installation requirements

·         User management

·         How it handles templates

·         How it transfers content for publishing

·         Image handling

·         Costs

Conclusion

I have concluded that of the three systems that I examined, I would recommend Alfresco for Lynnwood Bowl and Skate’s CMS.

Below is a summary and comparison of the three systems. It is a summary of the features, advantages and disadvantages of each system.

 

CMS

Features

Advantages

Disadvantages

Ingenuix

AJAX web client, support for outputting to multiple destinations, automatic link checking, has content life cycle and scheduling features, has multi-lingual publishing and versioning features

Web client – no installation necessary, has a WYSIWYG XHTML editor, automatic link checking, automated redirects, in-context editing

Ingenuix is not an open source application, therefore, more expensive.

Drupal

Primarily uses XHTML, CSS and PHP, structure consists of modules as the core, output from the modules is provided by blocks and menus, user has the ability to alter and extend the Drupal’s capabilities, has a very large user base

An open source application (free), has a large user base or “community”, has almost 10,000 community-contributed add-ons, the site looks identical to editors and anonymous users, except editors  have the tools for managing content, users can create their own content types

Drupal has overlapping functionality with the use of modules and add-ons. This may be confusing to some users. Some users may have a steep learning curve in using it.

Alfresco

Simple user interface, easy for adding new navigation links, workflow stages allow comments, content can be repurposed for delivery for various platforms (web, smart phones, tablets, etc.)

An open source application, users can modify content within the web application, you can upload and modify content using Sharepoint, can be used remotely by mounting the application on a client computer like a network drive

Alfresco is a recent newcomer to web content management and therefore will have a smaller user base (Their original product is document

Management software).

 

In concluding that Alfresco would be the CMS I would recommend, of primary concern for me was how easy it is to become proficient at using the software. I found the interface to be pretty simple for opening an article or creating a new one. Drupal has a flexible interface and a large community of users, but the way it is structured may prove to be more difficult for users to understand its complexity. Ingenuix uses a Web client and has a number of desirable features, but unlike Drupal or Alfresco, it is not an open source application. (I did not request a price quote because I didn’t want to mislead their sales staff into thinking I was interested in a purchase.) Alfresco does not have these disadvantages.

Alfresco users can choose from a number of different interfaces for creating and updating content. I don’t know if Lynnwood Bowl and Skate plans to have employees work remotely, but the ability to do so by mounting the application on a client computer makes this possible. Alfresco is fairly flexible, and the ease-of-use factor put this software at the top of my list. I am not alone in this opinion. In 2007 Alfresco got a top overall score by InfoWorld (http://www.infoworld.com/t/data-management/open-source-cmses-prove-well-worth-price-915 ) for ease of use, features, security, scalability and value.

Summary

I have researched three content management systems – Drupal, Ingenuix and Alfresco. I looked at several factors in determining my choice, such as the ease of use of the authoring interface, link management, work flow management and costs. I have chosen to recommend Alfresco for Lynnwood Bowl and Skate’s CMS. I have concluded that with its feature set, Alfresco will best meet the needs of content creators at the company to create fresh content in written text.

Sources:

Ingenuix Web site; http://www.ingeniux.com/products/ingeniux-cms-website-content-management-software?_kk=content%20management&_kt=1d59f546-a5d4-44a7-bf0d-dee2fe746d74&gclid=CI-TxIu_kakCFQcBbAodWze-ow ; visited 05/27/2011

Drupal Web site; http://drupal.org/ ;visited 05/27/2011

Drupal (Wikipedia search);  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drupal ; visited 05/27/2011

Alfresco Web site;  http://www.alfresco.com/products/web-content-management/ ; visited 05/29/2011

Alfresco (Wikipedia search); http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfresco_(software) ; visited 06/02/2011

Alfresco (InfoWorld, 2007);  http://www.infoworld.com/t/data-management/open-source-cmses-prove-well-worth-price-915 ; visited 06/02/2011