

Ask HN: What is the most modern CMS? - lovskogen

I work as a interface designer on a CMS, among other products. In doing some research for further developing our CMS I had a hard time finding systems that were easy to use for a non-techie.<p>Which CMS would you say is the most modern in terms of end user design? Not accounting for the technical setup of things, just user experience.<p>Thanks you :)<p>Edit: Some seems to think I'm looking for good CMSes for web designers, I'm not. I'm after systems that makes it easy for a non-tech crowd to run their - custom - web site.
======
knieveltech
Brief: There really isn't a single CMS that outshines all the rest. You should
carefully tailor your choice of CMS's based on the site specification.

Not so brief: The underlying assumption here is that ongoing maintenance of a
modern website is (or even can be) a non-techical task. This is unfortunately
unrealistic. As an example consider the needs of a "simple" single user blog.

Any blogging CMS worthy of the name should provide a simple interface for
adding, editing and deleting content. It should also provide a simple
interface for choosing which content is displayed on the site and most do.

Well and good, but what about related content? Should a user be shown a list
of related links when the view a blog post? How is "related" content defined?
Is this limited to content on the site or should off-site links be included?
Should this list be sorted by date, relevancy, popularity? What about rich
text formatting or pasting content from MS Word?

Most blogs also have some mechanism for accepting and displaying reader
comments and just about every CMS I've ever come across has some method of
handling this. But again we run into problems. Spam is a real issue and
spammers have taken to using mechanical turk and other methods to get real
live people to post spam for them. This approach completely bypasses captcha
and even the best automated anti-spam services (mollum as an example) can't
catch all of this, so now you've got to include manual comment moderation
(which is a shitload of work on a heavily commented site) into the mix.

Generally blogs also have RSS feeds and social media links. Most CMS's handle
these fairly well without a lot of tinkering but it can get interesting if you
(for example) want to segregate your content into multiple feeds based on
subject matter or whatever.

So even with a "simple" site the end user has a lot of potentially very
technical decisions to make regarding how content is displayed, who can see
what, who can comment, how comments are moderated, and what (if any) content
is syndicated. Note this doesn't even get into SEO or analytics.

The point I'm getting at here is even simple websites can be miserably
complicated little beasts and unfortunately only so much of this complexity
can be abstracted before you start running into issues where the available
feature set isn't a good fit for some/most/any websites.

With that said each CMS I've studied attempts to solve some subset of the
problems associated with creating and maintaining a website. Which subset is
tackled varies wildly from CMS to CMS.

For example Wordpress does an excellent job of solving most of the problems
associated with implementing and maintaining a blog. I wouldn't care to
implement a company intranet portal with it though.

Drupal is incredibly flexible, with plugins available for just about any
feature set you'd care to implement. It is brilliant when a site has a
complicated or fiddly feature set, but can be intimidating to end users due to
the steep learning curve involved. As such it's frequently overkill for truly
simple websites.

Various other CMS's have their own core competencies and tend to shine in the
situations they where developed to work well for.

If you're looking for something to pattern off of my suggestion would be to
first figure out which CMS you would reimplement your site in if you had the
option and then go from there.

Edit - Full disclosure: I'm a contributing developer for several Drupal
modules.

~~~
BenSS
Nice answer, there's a vast number of CMS systems out there from the free to
the pricey (Interwoven, etc). I'll echo that the choice really depends on what
kind of site you are developing. Frankly, for most blogs a CMS system is total
overkill.

~~~
lovskogen
I agree there is a vast number. But the number of ones being fairly usable to
a mere mortal is 0. If we're stepping outside theming services.

~~~
BenSS
Which is why it goes back to what your needs are! Site for a company with a
half-mil employees would be insane to use Wordpress, an individual blogger
would go insane (and broke) trying to us Interwoven.

~~~
lovskogen
I don't think I made myself clear enough. I'm not really looking for features,
but good ux for the person(s) managing the site after delivery, the non tech
client.

------
lshepstone
(Disclosure, I worked on this product in a previous life) So this is an
enterprise CMS example, but the UI did get some pretty decent feedback from
customers.

Have a look at <http://media.vignette.com> and you can see some screenshots.
This product was targeted towards media companies (Gaming companies, Online
media/news sites, video producers etc) so it did allow us to focus on some
specific needs. You can imagine that with the volume of content that news
sites produce, their requirements can be a little more high-end that your
average user as they can spend 6-8hrs a day in the tool.

After designing and implementing quite a few CMS platforms, I think it is
pretty hard to come up with a UI that will be appropriate for _all_ users as
many of them come to the tool with very different tasks in mind. Think about
the legal guy or manager who just needs to approve something, the creative
team who needs to upload some assets, someone working on a page or content, a
marketing person who just needs to put some promotions on the site. Even
within a media company there are people with pretty distinct roles and tasks
they own. Therefore in our last UI we built the notion of workspaces...there
was: \- a Review Workspace which had an optimal layout for reviewing and
approving content \- an Asset Workspace which was optimised around batch
uploading media, resizing it, a filter based UI because the library of
images/videos tended to get pretty large \- a Marketing Workspace just for the
marketing team who is normally responsible for creating new promotions, and
then deciding where they go on the site. Not every site needs this, but for
those that do it worked pretty well as the marketing team just saw this
workspace when logging in and didn't have to learn or care about all the other
areas of the CMS. \- And of course don't forget the Content Workspace where
you can create content and pages :-) \- For smaller shops, the workspaces are
all accessible to multiple users, it is just the notion of the right UI for
the task as opposed to one UI for all roles and tasks.

Not suggestion these are universally appropriate or right for your customer
base, but I think on close examination you'd find at least 3-4 profiles of
users or common tasks that can be optimised. The result for optimising for the
80% common tasks in this system meant that certain complex tasks could be done
in <5 clicks. While I personally rate WordPress very highly for UI, the users
we were designing for used this products for many hours a day and they felt WP
was too many clicks, especially for media handling.

I've probably droned on for too long already and so there is not enough time
to list every UI tweak and feature we created, we spent 2 years on the UI, but
here is one example. Dynamic UI Controls based on dataset size: A common
problem with a number of CMS tools we found was that the UI designer made a
guess about how much data would be in the system for a certain task, and then
design a UI control that might work great for 10 items, but would be useless
if there ended up being 10,000 of those items in the system. So we built some
UI controls that would adapt to data volumes...say you had content type x and
there were only 10 of the items in the system, you'd ideally want to present
it with a set of radio buttons (assuming select one requirement)....more than
10 but <50, popup/overlay with all items listed alphabetically on a single
page for quick selection, 10,000 and you're going to need some type of
navigator or set of filter controls.

P.S. Don't confuse this with some other previous Vignette products which have
a pretty poor UI, this CMS was specifically created with a new UI from the
ground up for that reason.

~~~
lovskogen
Thank you for elaborating. The thing I noticed on the screenshots, and as I've
reiterated in alot of comments is putting editing of a site outside, in a
seperate admin interface. I did not see the site that was being edited in one
of the screenshots. I think placing editing outside of context makes it hard
for mere mortals to relate to the editing.

On the topic of different UI for different users I'm on the fence. Modes in
interface design is considered bad, but I do see how they can be effective. I
think the two mot important roles to seperate is technical and non-technical.

~~~
gk47
Having worked with media organisations and many journalists, writers and
content producers, most of them don't care to see the content in context.
Content can be used across many different sites or syndicated, making the
ultimate destination unknown.

~~~
lovskogen
So the conclusion is: most people doesn't care to know what/where content they
are editing? I don't buy that. I'll buy that it's a OK solution, but not a
good one.

~~~
knieveltech
You may not buy it but it's absolutely true. I spent a few years doing CMS
support and site development for one of the largest newspaper conglomerates in
North America and based on the design of our in-house CMS it wasn't even
possible to edit a piece of content from the page it was displayed on. The
really bizarre part was, all the journalists and editors where totally fine
with that. Their biggest concerns where making sure the content published to
the right section and making sure it also got pushed to the back end system
used by the pressmen.

~~~
lovskogen
I think journalists publihing articles has a too narrow use case to make a
conclusion for all non tech users out there.

------
jordanlev
Definitely check out concrete5 (<http://concrete5.org>). As others have
mentioned, different systems are better for different situations, but if
you're talking about easy to use by non-tech people to manage an informational
website, I have found Concrete5 to be better than the rest by leaps and
bounds.

The reason it works well for these kinds of sites is that it aligns with non-
technical users' mental model of their website. Non-tech users don't think of
their site as a template that displays content from a database, but rather as
a bunch of pages with stuff on the pages. Most CMS's require users to go to an
administrative back-end which shows a hierarchical sitemap of pages -- an
abstract representation of their site -- and this is VERY confusing to most
people. Concrete5, on the other hand, is based on the concept of content
blocks on a page. So to edit a page, you GO to the page and add/edit blocks of
content there. The blocks thing is great because it allows for different
"mini-UI's" for different kinds of content. For example, to edit regular text,
a standard WYSIWYG editor works fine, but if you want to add an image or a
youtube video or a navigation list or a google map, it doesn't work as
gracefully -- the block system means that different kinds of content can get
different editing UI's specifically tailored for that type of content (for
example, a youtube video just gets a textbox to paste in the URL, or a google
map block presents fields for addresses, marker options, etc.).

There are many web-based CMS's that utilize this approach -- Weebly (a YC
company), WebVanta, SnapPages, Yola, etc. -- but I haven't come across an
open-source install-yourself CMS other than Concrete5 which works this way.

~~~
lovskogen
Thank you. This is a modern approach. I'll look more into it, and the other
CMSes you list. I totally agree on the non tech mindset of blocks, and not
templates.

------
tptacek
Plenty of non-technical people set up Wordpress as a CMS.

Squarespace is an extremely popular hosted CMS that aims at nontechnical
people.

Drupal seems to be one of the most popular CMS _qua_ CMS's.

~~~
lovskogen
Wordpress with a theme is more like a service. Squarespace is a valid system,
although their 'templates' might just make them a 'richer' service.

Joomla is what I'd call a full blown CMS. But would you say the interaction is
worthy a title à Modern CMS?

~~~
tptacek
Did you ask this question just so you could argue your system is better?

~~~
lovskogen
No, how so?

------
te_chris
Silverstripe. Open source BSD licensed built ontop of a quite nice MVC php
framework that takes a lot of influence from RoR.

Is a dream to build both basic and powerful CMS driven sites in. And has a
templating language that is like a simpler Erb. No I don't work for them, I
just think it is by far the best CMS I've come across

~~~
lovskogen
You're not a mere mortal, but a techie ;-) I want to know if there is any
CMSes that has a great experience for the people managing the site after
delivery.

~~~
te_chris
Ha, fair point. The interface is pretty simple though and with the sites I've
worked on the content editors have normally found it pretty nice to work with
:) here's a demo site <http://demo.silverstripe.com/>

~~~
lovskogen
I wrote this comment for Drupal, I seems it's also true for Silverstripe. i'm
sure it's a nice CMS, but doesn't give a modern experience when working with
content.

"As a rule, if the CMS puts you away from your page and to a list of "posts"
to edit with TinyMCE, it's not modern. Atleast in my book."

~~~
superk
I thought SilverStripe was pretty good when I first looked at it. The
framework it's built on is actually not as good as they hype (in my
experience) and documentation lacking... but from the enduser standpoint it is
a pretty good mix of ease-of-use and power. The blending of traditional
concept of posts and versioning of a wiki - all centered around the mighty URL
- was one of the best executions I've seen.

~~~
lovskogen
Is the ux as great as SnapPages?

------
pierrefar
I think most CMSes are a balance: how general are they so that they can be
useful to many different use cases vs how complicated that makes them.

All these CMSes bring their own terminology too. WordPress keeps it simple:
it's a page or a post. Leaves it up to you to interpret what that means.

Drupal takes that a few steps further with content blocks.

Joomla, when I last used it, was like having pages ripped from a book,
shredded into tiny pieces, and jumbled into a pile.

So when judging end user design, I'd also mention the context and the use
case: Do I simply want to produce content that is sorted in reverse
chronological order? Do I want to be able to handle all types of content
imaginable or just text? And what kind of meta data are you keeping track of
in conjunction with the content? Meta data is the author, category(ies),
various timestamps, etc.

~~~
lovskogen
I'm also interested in propietary CMSes by web bureaus. Wordpress, Dupal and
Joomla does not make for a good custom site experience. Either too generic or
having a gui that is too complex and hacky for mere mortals.

~~~
knieveltech
You raise an excellent point here. Any custom site implementation is going to
require some custom code to nail down the user interaction. This is a fact of
life regardless of what CMS you're using.

~~~
lovskogen
Yes. But does a CMS do this in a good way? Custom fields inside a admin
interface is not a very modern approach.

~~~
knieveltech
I'm sorry but I don't agree. Having the ability to define custom data entry
forms (including unique field types like calendar dates, google maps location
pickers, etc) and the data storage that goes with them via a web interface
with no coding required seems pretty modern to me. Can you point out an
example of another approach that seems better to you?

~~~
lovskogen
Doing all those things in context. Imagine the client logging in, and on the
About Us page pressing "Add Content". Then chosing "Insert a map" from a drop
down of content types. A resizeble map container appears on the site. The
client searches or drags the map into the right location and presses "save".
Then he publishes the page.

~~~
lshepstone
I think we're mixing requirements here.

Use case 1: I need to create a new page and for many corporate sites, each new
page is different than the next for the majority of the body copy...different
layout, one has a map etc. I need to choose where this page goes in the site
as well. An in-context approach is very well suited.

Use case 2: I just need to create a press release quickly, it always has the
same template, always goes to the same part of the site and it's always the
same process I go through. An in-context approach here isn't that good, you
want a template approach where the user fills in some fields on a form, a
title, body text, maybe image, checkbox for map yes/no etc. This isn't a page
at all really, it is a piece of content that is created and using the Press
Releas template, the page is created dynamically at the right point in the
menu structure. They'll create the page in 30 secs and be done. There is very
little point in choosing from a list of modules to insert when you're dealing
with a fixed template.

So you're talking about the templated approach vs the page builder approach.
Neither is better or worse, just suited to different use cases.

------
mattsouth
I find it somewhat comforting that folks are talking about drupal which I've
found excellent for creating sites, adding features and keeping them updated
and have been advocating strongly in my organisation, having had fairly poor
experiences with other CMS products. But my non-technical colleagues seem to
find it simultaneously overwhelming and too restrictive for adding and
maintaining their content. Those same colleagues are currently keener on a
slightly more modern CMS called modx, which seems to be both more configurable
and provide a better non-technical experience. However, modx is being
championed by a technical colleague of mine, and I havent had the the
opportunity to properly compare the installation, configuration and
maintenance experience to drupal.

~~~
lovskogen
It's those mere mortals favorite CMS I'm after. The ones suggesting WP, Drupal
and Joomla seems to do so because of the tech side, not so much the ux for the
client getting the system after delivery.

------
ilamont
Drupal and Wordpress can be configured/customized in ways that are easy for
users to use (or an absolute nightmare) depending on the template,
functionality and design choices made by the site owner.

For blogging and news, Wordpress seems to have the most flexibility in terms
of design. There really are some beautiful templates out there (see
<http://wordpress.org/showcase/> for some examples).

But Drupal goes beyond blogging. There must be thousands of available modules,
offering all kinds of functionality, ranging from advertising support to
"relevant content" boxes. (search <http://drupal.org/project/modules> to see
some examples).

~~~
lovskogen
Wordpress with a theme is more like a service if you're not a webdev.

Drupal is too (with Joomla) what I'd call a full blown CMS. But would you say
the interaction is worthy a title à Modern CMS? reply

~~~
ilamont
It's boils down to a tradeoff between design simplicity and functionality.

Honestly, I haven't seen any Drupal designs/UXs that have really bowled me
over. But I think the reason for that relates a lot to the fact that the sites
that prefer to use Drupal want to take advantage of the additional
functionality offered by modules. The modules often add a lot more boxes,
navigational options, and other major elements (forums, e-commerce, etc.) that
make the UX far more complex than what you might find on a Wordpress blog.

~~~
lovskogen
True, but even Wordpress puts all it's editing in a seperate admin area, like
it's been done the last 20 years of CMSes.

------
NHQ
I'm just entering the world of CMS design, after having tried many. I tried
them for myself, and for client websites. Then I started looking into making
my own, to solve my own problems. However, based on my experience, I would say
there is no CMS that is good n easy for the non-techie. The fact is, you have
to become somewhat techie in order to proceed on any of them, unless you just
want to blog.

Custom CMSs are the way to go (not customizable, like drupal: custom made).
This is, for me, the biggest advantage of document databases. I'm new to
software design, and self taught, but not a coder. I've never tangled with a
relational database yet. It's incredibly easy to design case-specific CMSs
with document databases.

It all boils down to form design.

~~~
lovskogen
Sad fact, but I'm starting to believe there is none.

~~~
NHQ
If the CMS has a special Admin page, then it is not a CMS for the non-techie.

Administration can be no more than filling out forms, uploading images, etc,
etc. No plugins, no DBs, no hosting, no nuthin'.

~~~
lovskogen
I agree.

~~~
andybak
I'm not sure I understand the point being argued here.

------
Ueland
Edit from my side(since for some stupid reason did not explain why i prefer
Wordpress):

I have experience from CMS`es ranging from enterprise solutions to all round
platforms like Wordpress, my brief opinion about some of them:

1) Polopoly: A enterprise solution typically used for magazine/news sites. The
problem (with many enterprise solutions) is that it is very advanced and not
easy to use at all for new users. I would almost say that training is a must
for such a solution. I feel pretty sure that with better usability in focus,
it could have been almost a killer app for larger sites.

2) EZ: Taken from the name, EZ should be easy to use, it`s not. This is just
another solution fallen into the "Enterprise" trap, instead of focusing on the
users that actually have to work with it, they focus on the bosses and persons
with the money, in order to sell in the system. The solution itself is
relatively plain but you can not simply log in a place and select "new
article", instead it is typically creating objects here and there.

3) Wordpress: Finally a system that has the user in focus, the system is
designed for people NOT being geeks. Anybody will without any training be able
to login and create some content. It is plain and simple but in the same time
it gives the user the needed information and not everything else.

There is a good reason Microsoft has decided to close their blogging services
and rather move all their users over to Wordpress.

So to conclude: I put Wordpress on first place, with the possibility of
Polopoly going to first place for larger solutions if they could get their
user interface in order.

* I guess some of you would say that Wordpress is not a CMS,in that case i do wonder... What is the difference between Wordpress and a "real" CMS? :)

~~~
lovskogen
Wordpress moves editing to a place away from your site. A non techie might be
confused on what content he is editing, and where it is. I don't see Wordpress
as a modern CMS because this kind of editing has been done in the last 20
years.

I'll look into the ux of Polopoly, thanks.

Edit: had a really hard time getting info out of the PP website, could you
show me some screenshots?

------
Sizlak
Django isn't a CMS, but it's a framework that seems designed to build CMSs.
I'd much rather build a CMS from scratch in Django than try to bend Drupal to
my will.

~~~
lovskogen
I wouldn't bend Drupal in any way.

You're suggesting there is no modern CMS , and I should build it?

------
FraaJad
Plone. Obsessively focussed on being user friendly.

<http://plone.org/products/plone/features/>

There are many features that are part of core plone, that many other CMSes do
not even think exist in a CMS. Anybody suggesting Wordpress as a CMS obviously
did not read your requirement for "most modern in terms of ...user
experience".

If you hear negative comments about Plone, it is usually from developers who
don't actually _use_ the product or opining based on hearsay.

~~~
knieveltech
Technically I'm not convinced Wordpress is qualified for the term CMS, or at
least no more qualified than say PHPbb, Gallery 2, or any other installable
purpose built web application with a limited feature scope. Apparently there
where sufficient individuals who disagree with this view for Wordpress to win
CMS of the Year for 2010.

~~~
mg1313
Wordpress can be customized a lot and can do a lot with those
plugins/themes...not just blogging.

------
Andaith
We use expression engine(<http://expressionengine.com/>) where I work mainly
because the back end interface is highly configurable for us and very easy to
use for our clients. Everything is laid out quite consistently and it has
everything our clients need(with a few extensions).

It's also really easy to create extensions for any functionality a client
would want that isn't provided out of the box.

~~~
lovskogen
I wrote this in a comment to Drupal, how does it hold up to EE?

"As a rule, if the CMS puts you away from your page and to a list of "posts"
to edit with TinyMCE, it's not modern. Atleast in my book."

~~~
Andaith
I've never used Drupal, but EE gives you more than just a TinyMCE field. You
can create as many fields as you want. The four defaults are text input, text
area, date field, and file field, but you can add new fields through
extensions to get WYSIWYG, table fields, etc etc.

These can then be ordered on the publish page how you want, made required
fields, searchable, enable or disable HTML, etc, so it gives a lot of control.

~~~
lovskogen
But where are those fields put? If it's in a admin interface away from the
site I wouldn't call it a modern system.

~~~
Andaith
Yeah it's an admin interface away from the site.

I think non-techies would also prefer something simple and consistent, like
logging in -> publish -> type in fields -> submit.

~~~
lovskogen
What about log in -> edit site -> publish? Edit site being direct manipulation
of the content.

------
notahacker
Last time I looked at it (about a year ago) ModX struck a nice balance between
extensibility and administrative power, designer/developer friendliness and
simple in-page edits for content editors. You'd probably need someone with
some degree of technical competence to get it started though.

~~~
lovskogen
I'll check it out _in the morning_. Thank you for your feedback.

------
mrj
I've been running dotCMS for 1.5 years now, and it's worked great. The
templates are almost pure html, so designers will have free reign.

~~~
lovskogen
I'm sorry for not specifying more. I'm interested in the part of the system
that does the editing, not the theme for the site. The use case where the
owner updates his site with new content.

~~~
knieveltech
In that case my vote absolutely goes with Drupal. Having the ability to define
new content types and add/remove form fields (link list? add a URL field. Need
an event? Add date fields, etc) as needed is huge.

Drupal also handles complex editorial workflows easily with the Workflow
module, can support embargoed content, does simple content revisioning and
provides limitless ways of organizing content.

~~~
lovskogen
But does it have a friendly interface for non-techies?

~~~
knieveltech
I think so provided we're only talking about adding, editing and deleting
content. It's also worth noting that UX has been receiving a huge amount of
attention with the Drupal 7 release and is an ongoing topic of serious
interest among module developers.

~~~
lovskogen
I had a hard time over at Drupal.com finding screens of the interface the
client is presented with when editing and managing content.

As a rule, if the CMS puts you away from your page and to a list of "posts" to
edit with TinyMCE, it's not modern. Atleast in my book.

~~~
knieveltech
I'm not sure what screen you're referring to. Perhaps the admin content list?
Typically content producers will add content via the "add content" link/button
(depends on your theme), edits are possible from any screen where the content
is displayed.

Drupal supports a number of rich text editors, TinyMCE is only one of them.

~~~
lovskogen
Could you give me a screenshot of editing in a page where content is
displayed? Didn't find one on their site.

------
scorpion032
If cost is no object, you should be looking at: <http://www.ellingtoncms.com/>

~~~
lovskogen
Do you care to elaborate?

~~~
scorpion032
Sure. It is the best CMS out there, the one django was originally carved out
of. A few django core developers still work on that and it is the framework
used by all the major news companies in the world.

But comes at a high price.

~~~
lovskogen
All the major news companies? Don't see that on their page. I don't find any
screenshots of it in-use, could you help me with that?

------
Athtar
Sounds like you are looking for something bigger/more capable than a WordPress
type of CMS. In that case, try Umbraco. I have never used it myself but it
looks very user-friendly: [http://umbraco.org/help-and-support/video-
tutorials/getting-...](http://umbraco.org/help-and-support/video-
tutorials/getting-started/what-is-umbraco)

~~~
lovskogen
It is way to tech centric in terms of updating info and creating. Boxy admin
interface. Sorry.

------
agarfors
Apostrophe Now is modern, and their homepage describing it is modern as well:
A screencast. Not like certain others expecting you to look elsewhere to be
shown how it looks like.

<http://www.apostrophenow.com/>

Won't mention techy stuff like the framework it's built on, (Symfony).

~~~
lovskogen
Looks good, but basic - wonder how it handles more custom 'modules'.

------
msacks
Most CMS systems leave the design up to the developer. The UX components are
based on how well you lay over CSS, JavaScript and graphics. Drupal and
Wordpress already have rich theming systems and a lot of (out-of-the-box)
themes that give a nice UX. For something a bit more advanced you could use
something like Apache Lenya.

~~~
lovskogen
I'm sorry for not specifying more. I'm interested in the part of the system
that does the editing, not the theme for the site. The use case where the
owner updates his site with new content.

------
RoyG
Having hacked my way through Joomla, I think the answer to your question would
be a wrapper that hides the CMS.

~~~
lovskogen
What kind of wrapper?

------
eitland
Element Fusion, especialy lightcms (<http://www.lightcms.com/>). Hosted, no
worries. Easy to use.

~~~
lovskogen
I looked at the videos, and the editing ux seems simple. But when clicking
"Settings" the user gets a boat load of techy stuff to adjust.

------
bergie
Two things I wouldn't want to see in a modern CMS:

\- IDE-like administeation UI with fifty buttons in the toolbar

\- Forms for content editing

~~~
lovskogen
Totally agree!

------
azrealus
I really like goodie.com and flavors.me. Although they are not full CMS the
way they mange content is very impressive.

~~~
lovskogen
I see them more like services than a full blown CMS, but thanks for the input.

------
jules
What features are you looking for in the CMS? Just content on pages? -> use a
password protected wiki?

~~~
lovskogen
The feature I'm trying to dig up while doing research is a friendly interface
for the people managing the site after delivery from webdev/designer.

------
chopsueyar
Is Django off the mark here?

~~~
lovskogen
Yeah.

~~~
chopsueyar
Why?

------
clistctrl
As a sitecore certified developer i feel inclined to pimp it :)

If you're looking for a great .net based cms, its the best.

~~~
lovskogen
If your doing self promotion, please elaborate on why it's great.

------
Ueland
Wordpress, end of story.

