The best cms. Comparison of free CMS. Pros and cons of free CMS
CMS (Content Management System) is a website management system, i.e. the engine (program code) on which the site runs.
Which is better, paid or free CMS?
Today you can’t buy anyone with payment support for different payment systems or integration with Google Analitycs and other systems. All this is already available in free versions. Paid CMSs largely get their users by collaborating with web development studios who “convince” (sell) their clients that they need to make a website on a paid CMS by purchasing a license for it. And the developers themselves receive a partner percentage from sales of these licenses.
Many people mistakenly believe that paid CMSs are more secure than free ones. This is an absolute myth! Today, free CMSs have teams of hundreds of people working on them, and hundreds of thousands of people who are users and reporting bugs to the developers. This leads to constant testing and fixing "holes" through which the system can be hacked. For a CMS to be secure, it must be constantly updated, and whether it is paid or free has nothing to do with this. We have a separate article on website security on this topic, if interested.
How to choose a CMS for a website?
Choosing a CMS should begin with the fact that you clearly know the objectives of the site for which you are choosing a management system. In the recommendations of our experts, we tried to take into account our own experience of using various CMSs, and also paid attention to the fact that the system works well on most domestic hosting sites and does not have excessive requirements for them.
CMS rating for an online store
Paid or free?
Our advice is free! This market segment is so popular that free solutions provide a lot of functionality. Paid CMSs captivate with their support service (in a paid CMS you ask a question to the developer support service, and in a free CMS you ask a question on the forum), and also try to achieve maximum audience coverage by differentiating the functionality (the more modules are available, the more expensive the CMS version is). However, everyone already understands that modern free CMSs have all this functionality, and you don’t have to pay for it.
Here, the market leaders are both individual engines and bundles of popular CMSs with special add-ons to them, which make it easy to create online stores. For us, purely subjectively, number one n- this is a combination of Joomla + VirtueMart (official website). All the basic requirements for an online store are perfectly implemented here (plus it works well with popular payment systems), and you can also find many paid and free templates on the Internet. The only downside is the need to have at least a minimal understanding of Joomla. For a more or less experienced user this will certainly not be difficult. If you don’t want to master Joomla, then see the next line of our rating.
After all, on conditional second (and objectively first) place We are not installing a bundle, but a separate CMS - PrestaShop (official website). There are also practically only advantages: the development team is more than 100 people, 150,000 online stores work on this system, good localization into the languages of different countries, excellent work with different currencies, etc. Personally, we really liked the convenience, ease of learning and good speed.
On third place We have Magento (official website | Russian unofficial website) - as many believe, the world's most popular CMS for an online store, which was purchased by eBay in 2011. It will be a little more difficult to figure out than with PrestaShop and it doesn’t work as fast (most users don’t even notice the difference), but it has very powerful functionality, and probably the largest community in the world. The disadvantages also include the not entirely traditional work with MySQL databases (InnoDB), which can lead to problematic work with some hosting providers. Although, as a rule, contacting support resolves this issue. We also note that developers are constantly trying to “sell” you the paid version of Magento, although the free version has plenty of functionality.
Fourth position we give away osCommerce (official website | Russian website). In addition to the fact that it is free, this system has more than 200,000 people in its community, which gives it a lot of possibilities and makes it very flexible and suitable for almost any requirement.
On fifth place We have a combination of WordPress and WP e-Commerce (official website). This is just a plugin for WordPress, and it provides only minimal functionality for online commerce. But given the overwhelming popularity of WordPress among bloggers, the WP e-Commerce plugin itself has become quite popular. In principle, we can only recommend it to WP fans, and for everyone else, we recommend looking at the higher lines of our rating.
Sixth place : openCart (official website) is a CMS that is used not only by online stores, but also by regular websites, but it still has a clear focus on e-commerce. This is a rather complex system that can only be recommended to developers. The disadvantages also include not very good implementation of SEO settings, as well as work with goods. Although from version to version these and many other parameters are significantly improved.
Seventh place - Drupal + Ubercart (official website). Not to mention that Drupal itself is quite difficult to master, its add-on for online stores Ubercart is no exception. Among other things, it does not have a large community, which hinders the development of the system. But for Drupal fans, this engine is quite suitable as a first step in mastering e-commerce.
In principle, we cannot make any rating in this section, because... there is obvious market leader - WordPress, and then everyone else comes with a big lag. So if you want your own blog, don’t listen to anyone, and make it on WordPress (official website). WP has a very large community all over the world, which has led to the emergence of a huge variety of modules and gadgets that allow you to create not only a blog, but even a very serious news site or portal. It is also very easy to learn and very often you can find cases where people over 50 who are just starting to get acquainted with the Internet understand it without any problems. One of the downsides is that experienced developers like this system less and less. The reason is constant engine updates, which make the system less flexible to professional settings (additions). But trust us, for the vast majority of bloggers, WordPress is enough.
If you have a personal dislike for WP, then Joomla (official site | Russian site) and MODX (official site | Russian site) are good options for a blog.
CMS rating for websites of various types
For corporate websites, business card websites, and other entry-level and mid-level projects, the following CMSs are perfect:
First place : Joomla (official website | Russian website) - yes, we love it, and we consider it the most suitable for such tasks. It has a stronger engine than WordPress and is easier to understand than Drupal and MODX. There are also many templates that are suitable for any project (websites of photographers/artists, real estate agencies, hosting providers, etc.).
Second place : WordPress (official site) is an engine that is more suitable for blogging, but there are excellent examples of corporate and even news sites on this CMS. Even Ford uses it for some of its projects. Among the advantages we highlight is that it is a fast, understandable, easily customizable engine, with good localization into Russian and many plugins/extensions.
Third And fourth place share MODX (official site | Russian site) and Drupal (official site | Russian site) - these systems have a smaller community and are quite difficult to learn. But nevertheless, they are very good and strong (from the point of view of program code) engines. Therefore, many developers use them to create almost any website for their customers.
UMI.CMS, Bitrix, NetCat - many of our users ask in the comments why these popular systems were not included in our rating? The answer is because they are paid, and in our opinion they do not have obvious advantages over their free counterparts.
There are opinions on the Internet that the more popular the forum, the more programs can spam it. It's like thinking "the more popular a CMS, the more people hack it." Yes, more popularity attracts more hackers and spammers. But great popularity is the large number of users who send messages to the developers about hacking, thereby pointing out “holes” in the site’s engine. And the more secure the engine becomes, because Developers are constantly releasing updates to “patch” these “holes.”
So, first place : phpBB (official site | Russian site) is probably the most popular free forum engine in the world. For first place in our rating, a good set of localizations, a large set of modules, ease of use, and fairly frequent updates were enough (this is a big plus for website security). Another plus was the large set of assemblies that users make, which allows you to get exactly the kind of forum functionality that most webmasters need. This is considered the most popular build.
On second and third places paid engines IPB (official site |) and vBulletin (official site | Russian site). They are approximately the same and we did not see the point in putting them on different lines of the rating. The advantages include high speed, well-developed security and spam protection, as well as very large communities around the world.
On fourth place we install the PunBB engine (official website) - this is one of the simplest engines for creating forums. Thanks to this, it works quickly, does not require hosting, is easy to set up, and is also easy to understand. It's also worth mentioning that it's free. The downside is that it doesn’t have as much functionality as CMSs that are higher in the rankings.
On fifth place Vanilla (official website) - for the most part, this engine was added to the rating in advance. It is the youngest of the popular CMS for forums, but very promising. It has a user-friendly interface, style, and is made on its own framework, which gives developers great opportunities.
When it comes to portals, webmasters mean wide functionality (news, banners, galleries, FAQ, reviews, comments, accounts, etc.) and high traffic. To ensure that the portal does not load the server on which it is located (if too many visitors come to your site and the server cannot process them, the site will begin to work intermittently), the site engine must be optimized for heavy loads and high traffic. For example, a crooked engine will overload a server with an attendance of 500 people per day.
To provide wide functionality, you need to either install separate modules on a regular website (for them, it doesn’t matter what CMS the site is running on - they work independently), or use a CMS that already has all these modules (or you can add them). We are not considering the first option, because... All these individual modules have a different design and users, for example, going to the FAQ section, think that they were transferred to another site.
The second option is a CMS that would not load the server and would have all the necessary extensions (FAQ, news, etc.). And here we would need to compile another rating, but it is simply impossible to compile it. Because We highly recommend using self-written CMS for portals. Those. look for very high-quality studios that have previously developed large websites and made them on a CMS that they created themselves and for the specific tasks of the project. True, the cost of their services will be from $10,000.
You don’t want to pay that kind of money, but you really want to have a portal? Then pay attention to a combination of such CMS as Joomla (official site | Russian site), MODX (official site | Russian site) and Drupal (official site | Russian site). All of them are free, have many extensions, and can also withstand high traffic.
CMS for knowledge base
The most popular engine for creating various encyclopedias, dictionaries, terms and knowledge bases is the CMS MediaWiki (official website) on which Wikipedia is created. This engine is free, works on almost any modern hosting, and is also quite easy to use and familiar to most users (try to find at least one person who has not visited the Wikipedia website at least once in their life). Confluence and Jira from Atlassian are also considered quite popular, but these are paid solutions. Therefore, we recommend using MediaWiki.
CMS (Content management system) is a system or program (software package) designed to manage, edit, create the content of a website, page, blog, allowing the administrator to interact with visitors.
The CMS creates a unique page for each visitor in response to his request, in a matter of seconds, from the content available in the library (photos, videos, texts, charts, graphs, etc.) and site page templates. Moreover, this uniqueness is absolute. For example, by visiting the website of an online store and adding a purchase to the cart, only this visitor will see this information, and it will remain invisible to other visitors.
In this case, the CMS performs the following functions:
- Provides the administrator with a set of special tools that allow you to edit, create and change site content, organizing collaboration. That is, the administrator sets a set of commands, and the CMS does everything else according to his requirements.
- The site engine can independently support and change the content. It performs storage functions, controls versions, regulates access, manages and distributes incoming data (customer personal data, reviews, ratings and other types of content), etc.
- Has the ability to publish content.
- In addition, the system provides information in an easy-to-search and navigate form for both the administrator and the visitor.
Choosing an engine (CMS) for a website has many myths that are created by competitors and engine creators. Therefore, in order to choose the right engine for a website, you need to discard the “marketing fluff” and proceed from your goals. Honestly answer yourself the question and look into the future of your project: “What functionality will I need? Will I be able to implement my tasks using this CMS?”
There are no good or bad engines, there are specific tasks that a CMS must solve.
For example, the creators of paid engines come up with the myth that free CMSs are easy to hack because they are freely available and hackers can download them, study the code and find weak points. This is partly true, but it is not difficult to find paid engines on the Internet in the public domain. So throw away all these opinions and use common sense.
Let's start choosing
First, you need to decide on the type of your site - a blog, an online store, a catalog. Describe what functions you need. Do you have a budget to purchase a CMS?
There are many services on the Internet to help you choose an engine. But as a beginner, it is very difficult to use these services because they have characteristics that will not be familiar to you.
How do you know which programming language is better?
Therefore, if you are a beginner, then the best solution is to ask professionals on the forum or look for reviews about CMS in search engines, ratings, catalogs, and look at reviews.
Pros:
- This is the most popular engine of all.
- It is easy to manage, convenient admin panel.
- Has good support and a large number of free plugins.
- It's not a problem to find specialists.
- Frequently updated to fix security issues.
Minuses:
- For a beginner, installation may be difficult. But if you do it once, you will realize that it is actually very easy.
- The engine is heavy and puts a decent load on the server. It can be solved by installing caching systems, of which there are a lot for WordPress.
- You cannot create the same URL at different levels of nesting. For example, you have a category /articles/. If you want to make two different categories with the same url name, but at different nesting levels. For example, like this: 1) site.ru/articles/ 2) site.ru/blog/articles/ - you won’t be able to do that. WordPress does not support two identical names in a URL.
Despite all the disadvantages, WordPress is my favorite system, and we even dedicated a whole section on the website to it, where we teach how to work with it.
What to choose for an online store?
pros
- Free
- Easy to install and manage
- Has all the basic functions for an online store
- Lots of templates
- Nimble
Minuses
- Not entirely SEO optimized, needs to be improved to fully optimize
- Almost all the necessary plugins are paid
- Inconvenient image loading system
What to choose for the forum?
The most popular engine for the phpBB forum.
pros
- Free
- Developed community
- Many modules
- Constant update
- Doesn't load the system
Minuses
- Spammers attack this engine very hard. We'll have to put up protection.
- Difficulty in installing modules
What to choose for a corporate website?
pros
- Flexible - it is possible to realize any desires
- Not greedy for resources
- Many specialists
Minuses
- Confusing admin panel
Conclusion
You should take the choice of a CMS seriously and don’t be lazy - read reviews, try different engines and ask on forums. And only then make your choice.
You should not make the choice of engine based on one individual specialist. After all, everyone will praise their engine in which they worked and know!
The article was updated on January 18, 2018 and is completely current.
Almost every beginner is faced with the question of choosing a CMS for their website or blog. This is understandable, because it is impossible to know everything in advance. And quite a lot of different content management systems have already appeared. This review contains only free solutions. They are in no way inferior to their paid counterparts, and sometimes even compare favorably with them. After all, it is much easier to make amendments to open source code, therefore all found vulnerabilities are fixed faster. And also all new and bold ideas appear here first.
To begin with, we should conditionally divide systems according to their focus. There are CMS designed exclusively for creating blogs, as well as more flexible systems that allow you to create full-fledged websites and media portals. At the same time, blogging systems can be designed to create a whole series of projects, for example, for an entire enterprise. It is also worth noting the development period of the platform (the longer it is, the better the system is developed and contains fewer errors), the presence of a community (it will help if difficulties arise in installing, debugging or using the system), performance (not all systems are suitable for high-load projects). so, Now let's look at each CMS in more detail.
Official site .
This is one of the fairly old and well-proven engines. It is great for e-commerce and selling products online. Many plugins, such as VirtueMart, allow you to open a store very quickly and in a short time. True, to understand everything from scratch, you will have to spend a little time reading manuals, reading documentation and forums. Fortunately, Joomla has very good support and a huge community in several languages, including Russian.
The advantages of the system include the presence of the following functions “out of the box”:
- user authentication, including through OpenID;
- visual article editor;
- convenient file management;
- comment system and protection against spam in them;
- manager of plugins and extensions.
In fact, there are many more advantages; it is very difficult to simply list them all in one article. That is why it occupies a leading position in CMS ratings and tops. But there are some drawbacks: thanks to its flexibility and many settings, a beginner will have to spend more than one day understanding all this diversity. Also, its functionality may be redundant for many simple business card sites. But it is suitable for online stores and product displays.
TYPO3
Official site .
Not long ago, a fairly old CMS, TYPO3, began to gain popularity on the Internet, and now it is firmly entrenched in the TOP 5. The site structure here is represented by a tree of pages. Each of them can contain standard content elements: text, pictures, tables, etc. This content management system is based on templates that you can either download ready-made or write yourself in TypoScript.
Pros of TYPO3:
- the ability to fine-tune user rights;
- ease of maintaining several sites at the same time;
- ability to use extensions from TER (TYPO3 extension repository);
- high safety requirements;
- advanced text editor with spell check, preview, change history.
Disadvantages of this system:
- the difficulty of editing the site structure using a template engine;
- slow rendering of large pages with varied content (tables, pictures);
- few ready-made solutions for online stores
Recommended for use within large industrial companies and banks. It will most likely not be suitable for young and small sites, or the costs of development and support will be disproportionate to the benefits of use.
Drupal
Official site .
It is also a very popular and widespread CMS, which is used to create websites by very large enterprises, for example, Sony Music. They choose Drupal because of its wide range of functions for building both internal and external websites for the corporate network. There is a huge database of tools for managing a single user base. Well suited for organizing a system of blogs and forums. Drupal has a very active developer community, a huge knowledge base, and a live forum. You can find answers to questions about installation and deployment of sites and modules quite simply.
Advantages of Drupal:
- excellent support from the user and developer community;
- more than 6000 modules that facilitate the expansion of functionality;
- Easily manage user rights, create collective blogs and forums.
Disadvantages of the system:
- may be overly complex for simple sites;
- total lack of beautiful and functional themes;
- difficult to learn for an untrained user.
For business card websites, choosing this CMS is categorically not recommended, but for organizing medium and large portals where users will add their material and comment on it, Drupal is suitable like no other.
MODX
Official site .
One of the youngest CMS (development has been going on since 2004), which appeared at the very beginning of the formation of the so-called Web 2.0. The idea was to involve users in editing and adding content to the site. For example, writing reviews, reviews and even entire articles. Therefore, there is a good user registration system, site search using AJAX (without reloading the page), you can quickly expand the news feed, and a collective blog. Disadvantages include frequent problems with Russian encoding, which have not been fully resolved, although they appeared a long time ago; lack of ready-made modules and solutions for organizing a gallery, forum, or electronic store.
WordPress
Official site .
If anyone still doubts that WordPress has long outgrown the “blogging system” stage, then these doubts should be cast aside. A great variety of websites are developed on this CMS, including social networks, company websites, online stores and product displays, forums, as well as simple business card sites.
Thanks to thousands of ready-made themes, plugins and even ready-made assemblies for various needs, WordPress takes a well-deserved place in the TOP 5. There is an active community of developers that generates lessons and information materials.
Advantages of WordPress:
- large developer community and well-structured documentation;
- thousands of free plugins and themes for the site;
- convenient admin panel.
Disadvantages of WordPress
- the starting functionality immediately after installation is quite modest, you need to supplement it with at least 4-5 plugins;
- After a simple installation, some security improvements are needed.
In fact, this is one of the simplest and most beginner-friendly systems. It allows you to create websites without understanding anything about programming (read mine). Highly recommended as your first CMS. In the future, if its functionality turns out to be limited for you, then you can easily transfer the site to another engine of your choice.
[In most cases, the top ones are occupied by these 5 CMS, which I reviewed in this article.
When answering the question “which CMS to choose for a website,” you should pay attention to the fact that popular engines are constantly under attack. Their code is open for use by everyone, including not entirely honest people who can look for vulnerabilities in it and use them for their own selfish purposes. The danger can be avoided if you promptly update the engine to the latest version. At the same time, if you use a less common content management system, then if difficulties arise, you may have nowhere to find help and can only rely on yourself. Take this factor into account as well. Good luck!
Instead of an introduction: this material is almost completely copied from the CESL Group website, author Nikita Semenov.
Just... I want to keep the material for myself. The story is told in 2012. Today, 5 years later, the TOP sites are a little different, but the research results and conclusions from the articles, in my opinion, are still relevant today.
Very often, new clients come to us at SECL Group and ask to create a portal or social network on a boxed CMS, while using existing large portals from their niche as an example. And every time we have to explain that high-load sites are NOT made on boxed CMS. Today I want to justify why CMS are extremely rarely used for large projects, both with some facts and with research into which RuNet sites from the top hundred in terms of traffic use a boxed CMS.
What CMS are popular in RuNet?
As the Runet Rating tells us, among commercial engines these are: 1C-Bitrix, NetCat, UMI.CMS, HostCMS, AMIRO.CMS and among free ones these are: Joomla!, Drupal, MODx, WordPress, TYPO3. Each CMS has its own features, pros and cons, but that’s not what this article is about.
From me: in 2017, according to the Runet Rating, commercial engines: 1C-Bitrix, UMI.CMS, NetCat, HostCMS, CS-Cart. UMI.CMS and NetCat swapped places, AMIRO.CMS dropped out, CS-Cart appeared. Open-source engines: WordPress, Drupal, Joomla!, MODx, OpenCart. WP is in first place, I wonder why in 2012 it was in fourth... MODx lost one position, Joomla - two positions, OpenCart knocked TYPO3 out of the ranking.
Let's start by researching the top 100 sites, and then analyze the data obtained. For the study, we chose two ratings of the top 100 sites at once: according to Alexa data (region - Russian Federation and region - all countries). Straz should explain that these ratings are slightly different, Alexa collects data through the installed toolbar, and taking into account the fact that in RuNet it is used mainly by people connected to the Internet, then Alexa’s data is accordingly slightly biased towards sites for programmers and SEO specialists etc. That is why we also made an analysis based on LiveInternet data. The analysis included more than 50 popular CMS, including all the most popular. The CMS was determined by the location of the admin panel, by the site code, etc. Errors may exist, etc. Because some website owners deliberately hide signs of using a CMS, but in any case, this error, if there is one, is small.
Analysis from 09/11/2012. Data on Alexa (less relevant, but more interesting for its IT nature)
| Place in the ranking | Site URL | CMS used |
|---|---|---|
| №1 | yandex.ru | No |
| №2 | vk.com | No |
| №3 | mail.ru | No |
| №4 | google.com | No |
| №5 | google.ru | No |
| №6 | youtube.com | No |
| №7 | odnoklassniki.ru | No |
| №8 | facebook.com | No |
| №9 | wikipedia.org | No |
| №10 | livejournal.com | No |
| №11 | liveinternet.ru | No |
| №12 | twitter.com | No |
| №13 | ucoz.ru | No |
| №14 | rambler.ru | No |
| №15 | rutracker.org | No |
| №16 | blogspot.com | No |
| №17 | narod.ru | No |
| №18 | avito.ru | No |
| №19 | rbc.ru | No |
| №20 | sape.ru | No |
| №21 | ya.ru | No |
| №22 | lenta.ru | No |
| №23 | gi-akademie.com | 1C-Bitrix |
| №24 | webmoney.ru | No |
| №25 | gismeteo.ru | No |
| №26 | kinopoisk.ru | No |
| №27 | gi-backoffice.com | No |
| №28 | searchengines.ru | 1C-Bitrix |
| №29 | slando.ru | No |
| №30 | habrahabr.ru | No |
| №31 | zeekrewards.com | No |
| №32 | auto.ru | No |
| №33 | sbrf.ru | RBC Contents |
| №34 | yahoo.com | No |
| №35 | userapi.com | No |
| №36 | googleusercontent.com | No |
| №37 | sberbank.ru | RBC Contents |
| №38 | acesse.com | No |
| №39 | yandex.net | No |
| №40 | sergey-mavrodi.com | WordPress |
| №41 | microsoft.com | No |
| №42 | ebay.com | No |
| №43 | cy-pr.com | 1C-Bitrix |
| №44 | drom.ru | No |
| №45 | subscribe.ru | No |
| №46 | qip.ru | No |
| №47 | hh.ru | No |
| №48 | smartresponder.ru | No |
| №49 | fotostrana.ru | No |
| №50 | adobe.com | No |
| №51 | taobao.com | No |
| №52 | taobao.com | No |
| №53 | radikal.ru | No |
| №54 | ria.ru | No |
| №55 | gogetlinks.net | No |
| №56 | rutor.org | No |
| №57 | 3file.info | No |
| №58 | wildberries.ru | No |
| №59 | depositfiles.com | No |
| №60 | pr-cy.ru | No |
| №61 | afimet.com | Amiro.CMS |
| №62 | ozon.ru | No |
| №63 | mts.ru | No |
| №64 | tiu.ru | No |
| №65 | letitbit.net | Drupal |
| №66 | seopult.ru | No |
| №67 | linkedin.com | No |
| №68 | wmmail.ru | No |
| №69 | directadvert.ru | No |
| №70 | vesti.ru | No |
| №71 | newsru.com | No |
| №72 | qiwi.ru | 1C-Bitrix |
| №73 | ucoz.com | No |
| №74 | xhamster.com | No |
| №75 | ultimatepowerprofits.com | No |
| №76 | my-hit.ru | No |
| №77 | gazeta.ru | No |
| №78 | biglion.ru | No |
| №79 | beeline.ru | Actis WebBuilder |
| №80 | goodvin.tv | Drupal |
| №81 | wmtransfer.com | No |
| №82 | worldoftanks.ru | No |
| №83 | championat.com | No |
| №84 | marketgid.com | No |
| №85 | wikimedia.org | No |
| №86 | fastpic.ru | No |
| №87 | miralinks.ru | No |
| №88 | amazon.com | No |
| №89 | sportbox.ru | Drupal |
| №90 | nic.ru | No |
| №91 | apple.com | No |
| №92 | bannersbroker.com | No |
| №93 | irr.ru | No |
| №94 | xvideos.com | No |
| №95 | kp.ru | WordPress |
| №96 | live.com | No |
| №97 | mamba.ru | No |
| №98 | ixbt.com | No |
| №99 | nnm-club.ru | No |
| №100 | webalta.ru | No |
As we can see, only 13 out of 100 sites work on a packaged CMS, i.e. in the ranking, only 13% of high-load projects use a CMS. In addition, 3 projects use studio developments, which can be assembled specifically for their needs and, most likely, are very different from the usual boxed CMS. The bottom line is that we see that only a few projects are running on a boxed CMS.
Below are data from a study of the top 100 Runet sites by traffic (according to LiveInternet) and their analysis for signs of the use of boxed CMS:
| Place in the ranking | Site URL | CMS used |
|---|---|---|
| №1 | vk.com | No |
| №2 | odnoklassniki.ru | No |
| №3 | go.mail.ru | No |
| №4 | my.mail.ru | No |
| №5 | marketgid.com | No |
| №6 | ulogin.ru | No |
| №7 | avito.ru | No |
| №8 | qip.ru | No |
| №9 | foto.mail.ru | No |
| №10 | rbc.ru | No |
| №11 | rutracker.org | No |
| №12 | directadvert.ru | No |
| №13 | liveinternet.ru | No |
| №14 | fotostrana.ru | No |
| №15 | gismeteo.ru | No |
| №16 | kinopoisk.ru | No |
| №17 | video.mail.ru | No |
| №18 | slando.ru | No |
| №19 | www.smotri.com | No |
| №20 | wildberries.ru | No |
| №21 | mgid.com | No |
| №22 | kp.ru | No |
| №23 | vesti.ru | No |
| №24 | all.biz | No |
| №25 | lady.mail.ru | No |
| №26 | auto.mail.ru | No |
| №27 | irr.ru | No |
| №28 | auto.ru | No |
| №29 | drom.ru | No |
| №30 | ria.ru | No |
| №31 | citycatalogue.ru | No |
| №32 | m.my.mail.ru | No |
| №33 | 2shared.com | No |
| №34 | lenta.ru | No |
| №35 | hh.ru | No |
| №36 | lice-mer.ru | No |
| №37 | games.mail.ru | No |
| №38 | icq.com | No |
| №39 | pogoda.mail.ru | No |
| №40 | mediafort.ru | No |
| №41 | flirchi.ru | No |
| №42 | woman.ru | No |
| №43 | smi2.ru | No |
| №44 | tiu.ru | No |
| №45 | deti.mail.ru | No |
| №46 | livetv.ru | No |
| №47 | afisha.mail.ru | No |
| №48 | loveplanet.ru | No |
| №49 | myvi.ru | No |
| №50 | ruhelp.com | No |
| №51 | blog.mosmedclinic.ru | No |
| №52 | gazeta.ru | No |
| №53 | babyblog.ru | No |
| №54 | postimage.org | No |
| №55 | radikal.ru | No |
| №56 | fastpic.ru | No |
| №57 | dmir.ru | No |
| №58 | shockodrom.com | WordPress |
| №59 | agent.mail.ru | No |
| №60 | utro.ru | No |
| №61 | championat.com | No |
| №62 | korrespondent.net | No |
| №63 | fishki.net | No |
| №64 | minigames.mail.ru | No |
| №65 | lib.rus.ec | Drupal |
| №66 | povarenok.ru | No |
| №67 | sportlemon.tv | No |
| №68 | slando.ru | No |
| №69 | newsru.com | No |
| №70 | gismeteo.ua | No |
| №71 | sportbox.ru | Drupal |
| №72 | sberbank.ru | RBC Contents |
| №73 | 24smile.net | No |
| №74 | ntv.ru | No |
| №75 | softportal.com | No |
| №76 | svyaznoy.ru | 1C-Bitrix |
| №77 | rg.ru | No |
| №78 | chatovod.ru | No |
| №79 | 1tv.ru | No |
| №80 | prom.ua | No |
| №81 | pulscen.ru | No |
| №82 | ru.redtram.com | No |
| №83 | tutu.ru | No |
| №84 | playground.ru | No |
| №85 | superjob.ru | No |
| №86 | poiskm.ru | No |
| №87 | canliradyodinle.com.tr | WordPress |
| №88 | say7.info | No |
| №89 | sport.rbc.ru | No |
| №90 | echo.msk.ru | No |
| №91 | readme.ru | No |
| №92 | pravda.ru | No |
| №93 | galya.ru | No |
| №94 | aif.ru | No |
| №95 | 4pda.ru | WordPress |
| №96 | hi-tech.mail.ru | No |
| №97 | 24video.net | No |
| №98 | jobs.ru | No |
| №99 | worka.ru | No |
| №100 | rt.com | No |
So, we see a completely logical picture, the same as in the Alexa rating: among the first fifty sites there is no CMS at all, in the second half there are 7 boxed CMS, one of which is studio-based, while, interestingly, sites based on CMS are not They are distinguished by fast operation, braking is noticeable. In this rating, the total traffic to sites is significantly higher than in Alex and CMS, fewer projects are used.
What then do big projects work on?
Usually, for such projects, the functionality is written from scratch, frameworks, different algorithms, and often even several programming languages are used, but this is the topic of a separate article.
Why aren't high-load websites built on a CMS?
There are several reasons for this. First, let's define what a CMS is: essentially, it is a set of ready-made modules linked into a single system that is suitable “for all occasions.” From here, logical conclusions immediately appear that prevent the use of a boxed CMS for large portals:
- A system without specialization.
Almost all CMS have no specialization, they are designed to create any website (some systems position themselves as a CMS for a certain type of website, for example WordPress for blogs, Magento for stores, etc., but the essence does not change, just more modules for a certain type of site), from here it is impossible to achieve maximum efficiency. - Standard architecture.
Any large site has an architectural design stage, it’s like a project when constructing a building: if you design it well, it will stand for a long time, but poorly, it will immediately fall apart. In this case, the architecture has already been specified by the CMS developers, which means it is not possible to take into account the features of the new project. - Lots of redoing.
Any large project has a lot of different functionality with different requirements, so it’s impossible to simply take standard modules and launch a high-quality website: each of the modules will most likely have to be redesigned to meet specific requirements, and delving into someone else’s code, even well-documented, is time-consuming and ineffective , it is often faster, and therefore cheaper, to write from scratch. - Problems with revision.
Often we need to add something that is not in the CMS, and this sometimes turns into hell: not only do we need to figure out how everything works, but there are also technological limitations; the CMS may use outdated technology or not the most optimal one for our project. And in general, any CMS for a developer is a strict framework that is extremely difficult to go beyond. - Problems with loads.
Since we are talking about highly visited projects, each of them must be optimized for loads so as not to spend large resources on maintaining performance, and the site must remain operational no matter the traffic. Hence, each of the modules must spend a minimum of computing power, which the CMS cannot provide, because it was created as a solution “for all occasions”, and it has a bunch of everything that is either difficult or even impossible to throw away. By the way, some projects for this purpose make a website entirely in pure HTML (for example, Opera or the website of our SECL Group), due to this, the websites can withstand heavy loads with minimal resources, and the page loading speed is amazing. True, pure HTML can be used only for those sites that are rarely updated: every update becomes a problem.
This is not a complete list of disadvantages, which is why large websites are not built on boxed CMS. Content management systems are well suited for simple solutions: corporate website, online store, blog, etc., but they cannot be used for large portals, and the rating of the top 100 sites illustrates this in practice.
- The more traffic to the site, the less likely (or rather, the possibility) of using a boxed CMS,
- All sites that run on a CMS have performance problems
- CMS is a framework; projects created on its basis have significant shortcomings in architecture and functionality.
CMS (popularly called engine) is a website content management system. This is the backbone on which everything is built. The ease of filling the site, its “friendliness” for search engine promotion, and the ability to connect additional services depend on the engine.
We gathered specialists from the WebCanape Development and Internet Marketing Departments and passionately interviewed them about the good and bad of different CMSs. This article will help you choose an engine so that it won’t be excruciatingly painful later.
Universe of engines: variety of species
All existing CMS can be divided into 4 large categories:
- Self-written
- Boxed
- Constructors
- Studio
1. Custom CMS
A self-written CMS is a content management system that is written from scratch for the tasks of a specific business. This is a non-serial solution. It is created for one project and is not replicated.
☺ Full compliance with your business objectives
Boxed engines and designers have sets of modules to expand the functionality of the site, but ready-made solutions always have limitations, and you will have to make compromises.
A custom control system will fully meet the tasks specified in the technical specifications, because it is not being developed in order to then be sold to a diverse audience. The developer keeps only your needs in mind.
☺ Integration of the latest achievements
Technology is constantly outpacing the market. Even if you buy the latest version of a boxed CMS, you cannot be sure that all the achievements available at the moment have been implemented into it. By creating an engine for you, the developer has access to the latest programming technologies and, if you are lucky, will use them in working on your project.
☺ Exclusivity
You can brag that you are the owner of an exclusive solution, unique functionality, and breakthrough development. You are guaranteed the honor and respect of your colleagues, the indignation and envy of your competitors, and the bewilderment of knowledgeable people.
× Unproven technology
Serial solutions are being tested on thousands of sites (for example, more than 2,000 projects have already been created using Canape CMS). In each subsequent build, bugs found in previous versions are eliminated. This means you don't have to deal with your own problems.
If your site is created on a custom (that is, non-serial) CMS, you will be a pioneer. Setting up processes, adjusting algorithms and programming the necessary modules from scratch will fall on the shoulders of your developer. And he will have to deal with mistakes himself.
× No technical support
All problems will have to be solved on your own. And the forums will most likely not help.
× Difficulties with SEO promotion
Usually in such systems, if there is any SEO functionality, it is presented rather sparsely, because programmers and SEO specialists are creatures from different worlds. A lot will have to be added in the process.
× Complete dependence on the developer
By agreeing to a self-written engine, prepare to be with the developer for centuries, in sorrow and in joy, until death do you part, and further in the text... We categorically do not recommend quarreling, since the viability of the self-written site depends on the author of the code.
Usually there is no regulated technical documentation for such engines, and if you suddenly decide to change the development team, there is a high probability that the site will have to be rebuilt on a different engine. Digging into someone else's code is a dubious and expensive pleasure.
2. Boxed CMS
A boxed CMS is a ready-made software product. Such a system can be downloaded (in the case of free solutions) or purchased (commercial engines). It would be incorrect to compare free and commercial products, since they have fundamental differences that are important for business.
Free engines out of the box
Examples: WordPress, Drupal, Joomla, Opencart, Magento and others like them.
☺ Open relationship with the developer
Thanks to their free nature, many people know about such products. This means that it will not be difficult for you to find a developer. And it won’t be a problem to replace it if your paths diverge.
☺ Cheap (if you make compromises)
Creating websites on such engines is relatively inexpensive. Basic functionality is usually free. You can find a huge number of plugins to solve a variety of problems, and many of them are also free.
☺ Change design in 2 clicks
Boxed engines have the ability to add design templates - if you are tired of the design, you can download/buy a new one and put it on the site. Sometimes this is done in 2 clicks.
× Lack of a uniform standard
Open source solutions do not have a single development standard, so even despite the huge army of WordPress developers, every next specialist will want to remake your CMS for themselves.
× Module selection problem
A large selection of modules can also turn into a problem. Since they can be created by completely different people, the network produces a huge number of solutions for the same problems. It can be difficult to determine which module is suitable for a particular task. When connecting, it's best to cross your fingers; it may not be compatible with your version of the engine.
Scary story for the night:
Sometimes free modules are created solely for the purpose of spreading viruses. That is, the plugin seems to be useful, but is essentially a loophole for infection. This is the problem with many free templates for WordPress and Joomla; template developers use them to post links and even viruses to make money. Here Joomla-Master.org, they say, has especially many templates with links.
× Vulnerability
Vulnerability is the price you have to pay when choosing a free, open source engine. Thanks to (or because of) the popularity of such solutions, sites using them are hacked much more often. Although there are no viruses in the source code, it costs attackers nothing to hack the site and infect it. We have to develop countless patches to get around the problem.
× Non-compliance with the requirements of the laws of the Russian Federation
Free boxed products, as a rule, are not produced in Russia. Nobody adapts them to Russian realities, and the requirements of Russian legislation are also not taken into account.
× No technical support
But there is a large community of developers, and the forums will most likely help you. But there is no technical support. That is, finding a solution may take a lot of time, and the effect is not guaranteed.
Exit: enter into a technical support agreement with a contractor company that developed the site using a free engine.
× SEO restrictions
Promoting such sites is difficult. Either there is no way to edit meta tags (you need to connect a plugin in WordPress), or rel="canonical" cannot be written on some templates.
Joomla, for example, is famous for its dirty code. It creates several duplicates for each page of the site, so it will be extremely difficult for you to get to the top of the search results. That's why Joomla sites are poorly indexed. And they load slowly for the same reason.
Drupal also generates a lot of unnecessary stuff. If you finally figure out which modules you need for SEO, then be prepared to rack your brains about how to get rid of the extra technical pages that the system will produce.
× Inconvenient to edit content
In many free CMSs (hello, Joomla), in order to make minimal modifications to the display of one page, sometimes you cannot do without the help of a developer, not free of charge.
Commercial boxed CMS
Examples: 1C-Bitrix, NetCat, HostCMS, UMI.CMS, CS-Cart, etc.
☺ Easy to select and change developers
To work with popular paid solutions (as well as popular free ones), you can easily find a developer.
☺ Specialization
Many commercial serial engines are tailored to solve specific groups of problems. For example, there are CMSs that are convenient for building online stores (Amiro CMS, CS-Cart).
☺ Compliance with Russian realities
Popular paid engines in Russia are adapted for Russian business. And 1C-Bitrix is generally a Russian development, which a priori takes into account all the requirements.
☺ Serious technical support
You will not be left in the lurch if you have questions about service integration, problems connecting modules or software bugs.
× Annual license fees
You will have to renew your license. Without purchasing a license for the next year, you will not be able to update the CMS to the latest version and, for example, it will be much more difficult to comply with the requirements of search engines.
× Need for improvements
If you change the developer, you will still have to update it.
× Unfriendly content editor
Typically, such CMS have problems with content; it’s difficult to figure it out without a developer. Content managers scare children with tales about sites on 1C-Bitrix.
A riddle for the little ones: which button needs to be pressed so that your three-hour work on the layout will be saved.
And here you will have to think hard to find the right page to edit.
× Paid technical support
They will help you, but not for free.
3. Website builders
Builder is an online platform for creating websites. To build a simple website using a website builder, you don’t need to bother with code, databases, or hosting. There is no need to download or install anything. You register on the platform, specify the necessary settings, select a template - the site is ready. This is a cheap and often beautiful solution for one-page and simple sites.
Examples: Tilda, Nethouse, Wix, uKit, Weebly, etc.
☺ Fast (and on your own)
The designer allows you to quickly (and on your own) create a landing page or a simple website.
Most often, no special knowledge is required. You can make a website to run advertising on it in a day.
☺ Popular
If you don’t want to do it yourself or need to tweak something, you can easily find a developer for a website using a popular website builder.
True, improvements are possible only in terms of the front end and content. Don't worry about functional improvements.
☺ Cheap
On Wix or Tilda you can cheaply put together a beautiful one-page website or a simple website that can collect applications.
× Forget about complex functionality
If complex software modifications are required, compromises will have to be made. For example, using Tilda it is not possible to ensure that notifications about applications are sent to additional email. The technical support service will answer that such functionality is not available, but may be added in the future. Or it won't.
× Captive of someone else's hosting
By choosing a SaaS solution to create a website, you become dependent on someone else's hosting. The ability to transfer to another hosting is only available in rare designers, and if there is, it costs a lot.
In addition, if the pricing policy of the designer suddenly becomes unsuitable for you (the subscription fee, say, increases 4 times), you will have to redo the site in another place, either on a different designer, or on a CMS.
× Incompatibility with Russian realities
Many designers are foreign-made and are not adapted to Russian realities. There is a recent story about how Yandex stopped indexing sites on the Wix builder due to javascript errors.
In addition, usually the offer agreement from the owners of the constructors is drawn up in such a way that the company does not bear any responsibility to you:
- not for hosting downtime,
- not for system failures,
- nor for non-compliance with the law,
- not for “sudden” updates,
- not for blocking.
- These are all your risks, reputational and financial.
× Subdomain name
On many website builders (for example, Tilda) with a free plan, you will be asked to register a site name on a subdomain like site.tilda.ws. This will not add trust to the site on the part of users, although search engines hardly care about such trifles.
4. Studio CMS
Many web studios develop their own engines to build websites for their clients. Some of these control systems are sold as an independent product, that is, any third-party developer can buy such a solution to implement their own projects. However, such cases are rare.
Examples: Canape CMS, UralCMS, Argilla, MediaPublisher, etc.
☺ Detailed technical documentation
Unlike self-written CMS, when working with a studio engine, a third-party developer can easily understand the code, since for Canape CMS, for example, there is a detailed technical manual. documentation that is supplemented and updated from release to release.
☺ There is a support service
Web studios usually have closer contacts with clients, which is why technical support for studio CMSs is usually more responsive. They will always answer you, help you, and advise you if problems arise.
How Canape CMS Help Desk Works
☺ SEO-friendly functionality
If the studio that developed the engine provides search engine promotion services, it is highly likely that the CMS meets all the requirements of search engines and has the necessary functionality for SEO. When developing a website on Canape CMS, basic SEO parameters are configured by default, and all opportunities for further promotion in search engines are provided.
☺ Customization for business tasks
Working with engines out of the box is like turning a sculpture out of a block of stone. You take a rigid product, cut off unnecessary things, and mold additional modules. Things don't always work out as originally planned.
With studio CMS, everything is different - the necessary functionality is collected according to your business requirements with the possibility of expanding and scaling it.
☺ Test sites
This is a design standard that is not always followed, for example in constructors. Canape CMS has a test platform where developers can test the implementation of a particular solution on the studio engine. This is safe for a “combat” site and useful if outside developers are involved.
☺ Customer-oriented, not developer-oriented
If boxed solutions are aimed at the developer, who is their target buyer, then studio solutions are created with an eye on the end consumer - the company for which the site is being created.
Studio CMS take into account individual business needs to a greater extent, and usually have a specialization (online stores, information portals, etc.)
Different types of websites built on Canape CMS
☺ Security
The security of such engines is many times higher than free or popular paid solutions. Not many people are familiar with the code of studio CMSs, so they are hacked much less often.
WordPress, for example, gets broken quite often. An attacker can easily gain access to the admin area if the user is not very experienced. Websites are usually hacked to extort money from the owner or to attach malicious code to it. The same situation occurs with OpenCart and MODX.
× Difficulties for third-party developers
Such solutions are less widespread, and a third-party developer has to understand someone else’s code (Canape CMS has test sites and technical documentation, and the code is open and standardized, so the problem is not too big).
× Dependency on studio services
There may be no integration with popular services, as studios usually have their own alternatives. Therefore, if you need to implement a popular CRM, the site will have to be slightly modified programmatically.
× No one is safe from untimely death
If the studio closes or abandons its CMS, the engine will stop updating.
However, users of popular engines are not immune to this. Although the likelihood of such an outcome is lower for them.
The easiest way to avoid making a mistake in choosing an engine
The mistake many business owners make is hyper-involvement. If you don’t understand programming or SEO at all, entrust the choice to someone who will promote the site. At the same time, it is very desirable that development and promotion be carried out by one contractor or contractors who work in conjunction. Anyone who does not promote sites themselves will hardly be able to foresee everything at the development stage, but a company working with specific CMSs has precisely studied all their capabilities and will certainly be able to use them to your advantage.
If they write a website for you in one place, and then you decide to take it to another web studio for promotion, be prepared for unexpected expenses:
- You will have to pay for connecting additional modules or third-party development of the necessary functions in order, for example, to be able to edit meta tags. Typically, these expenses are unexpected for a business owner.
- You may be asked to move your site to another CMS that is more suitable for promotion (or that your new contractor is more familiar with). The cost is often comparable to the development of a new website.
- Promotional activities will be less effective and will require much more than if you did everything in one company. That is, again, spending.
- Some CMS have extremely inconvenient tools for editing content. If you are “lucky” to have a website on one of them, you will have to attract developers, even to change the phone number on the pages.
Regardless of the engine you choose, the easiest way to save money is to avoid hassling with the developer. Even the most popular CMS does not guarantee that the site will not need to be modified when changing the contractor. Therefore, you should not be afraid of less popular studio engines. In addition, implementing improvements, for example, on Canape CMS will not be a problem for a third-party developer, since the code is standardized and all technical documentation is available.
For a manager, it should not matter what CMS the site is built on if it occupies the top positions in search results and brings you applications. Choosing an engine is the task of an SEO contractor, from whom you will require specific KPIs for promotion. By imposing your preferences on the CMS, you complicate the work of specialists and, most likely, increase your own costs for Internet marketing.