[drupal-docs] CMS comparison

[puregin]

On 27 May 2005, at 2:11 PM, Steven Wittens wrote:
> I thought this review was quite odd...
>
> I read through it, and from the text I got a very good impression of
> Drupal and most of the other software. Yet at the end, they decide to
> give each CMS a score based on the presence of certain shallow 
> features.
> As has been pointed out, they did not include contributed modules, so
> Drupal is said not to have wysiwig or trackback and scores very, very
> low. On top of that, the report was written for 21Publish, and in spite
> of a claim of no bias, I find it suspicious that that product scores
> 9.5, though there was mention of some serious bugs and lack of
> extensibility which almost all the competitors have.

> By their own logic, we should score 9.5, not 5.5 ;). I guess the
> question is: how can we make our existing features more visible to
> users? Something for the docs team to think about...

   Point taken...

   There's a couple of ways documentation would help:

      * exposing capabilities and features

      * easing installation/administration, thereby
         addressing the 'difficult to install/administer' perception

      * providing a cookbook path for common configurations/tasks

Besides this, however,  I think we need to put out our own concise
features comparisons, and drive the discussion a bit, rather than
just reacting.

     Djun