Idealware has published a report comparing four open-source CMSs. Its title: Comparing Open Source Content Management Systems: WordPress, Joomla, Drupal and Plone. (Is that a straightforward title, or what? Heh.) I read about it in a few blogs I follow.
If you’re interested in CMSs, I recommend this report. Here are some quotes to whet your appetite…
On User Roles and Workflow:
Plone is the most powerful system of the group in this area. It allows the highest level of control of user roles, user permissions and detailed configuration of the flow of content through the system. Drupal also has a detailed and granular system for user roles and permissions. Site managers can define custom user roles and be very specific about what roles have what permissions. There are modules that also allow permissions by node (content unit) as well as by taxonomy (content category). But Drupal does not have Plone’s out-of-the-box powerful workflow configuration.
Plone is the best of the bunch in this area: it has very few reported security vulnerabilities, and is immune to SQL injection attacks.
Its Plone summary:
Plone is a powerful and robust system suitable for organizations with very complex needs. It’s used by major newspapers and huge businesses, and it shows. The system offers a huge degree of flexibility and control, and it supports almost infinitely complicated workflows. And since the content admin tools are well laid-out and friendly, it’s easy for non-technical administrators to update text and images. Plone’s features are as strong, or stronger, than the other three systems in every area we reviewed except for one—Web 2.0/Community support, where Drupal came out on top.
This got me thinking about the new Plone-based CMS that my team was building for Fisher Communications, before Fisher cancelled the project. (Drat, and I had just gotten it out of my system…) I’m thinking about what could have been. It would have been so sweet. All I wanted to do was give Fisher a best-in-class system, which would have been the foundation for new, engaging web sites. Alas.