The Merits of the Mini-CMS

Posted on 2009-12-10, 12:51 pm, by , under Web Development.

construction-worker-with-planIn today’s world of readily available, fully-featured, open source content management systems, it can be argued that every website should be built using a CMS (content management system). Many of our counterparts in the web development industry use Drupal, Joomla, or WordPress for their website builds. This is a formula that works well in many situations, and for many clients, but is WordPress the answer to every project?

We find that it is best to ask some key questions before planning a site build around a CMS software package:

  • Will a large portion of pages on the website be updated regularly?
  • Is the client comfortable making their own updates?
  • Will the client maintain the SEO work that has been implemented when they later edit the website?
  • Will sections of the site require customization and features that require special edits in the CMS back-end code?
  • Will the website benefit from options like a built in blog or widgets, or would they remain unutilized and end up being dead weight?

We have found that in a majority of situations, a full CMS package is overwhelming, and unnecessary for the project requirements. Often the client only wishes to regularly update one page out of 15 (e.g. a news page), and doesn’t need the extra overhead that a package like WordPress imposes. For example, if one page on a site is being updated every two weeks, should the client pay for the extra time it takes to install, setup, search optimize, and customize a CMS installation, just for this functionality? Additionally, using a CMS package requires occasional software updates, and can expose a website to security holes that wouldn’t otherwise be an issue.

As an alternative, we have had great success using a custom-coded “mini-CMS” implementation for many of our clients. Not only does a custom-coded CMS keep things simple, it eliminates exposure to widely known security exploits, keeps costs down, allows for easy implementation of special features, and allows for direct control of all search optimization efforts.

Often a mini-CMS is as easy as a MySQL database connected to a password-protected WYSIWYG editor, allowing the customer to edit a desired page without having to learn and navigate a CMS backend. We have also used other creative mini-CMS solutions quite regularly, for example, allowing the client to add images to an SEO-optimized image gallery or add entries to a company news page, etc.

Using these customized CMS solutions, we are able to implement functionality requests without having to rely on plugins and widgets that may only accomplish part of the desired result; instead we are custom coding features exactly as required.

Sometimes it is easier to keep web development projects simple and custom – and we often find that customers are happily surprised by how easy it is to add to and edit their content with a custom mini-CMS solution.

Share:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • email

Related posts:

  1. Modern Web Browsers and Extension Suggestions
  2. Quick PHP Script: Random Image Selector
  3. Why Recode an Existing Website?
  • http://www.IAmNickArmstrong.com Nick Armstrong

    Kevin, you’re a web genius but I couldn’t disagree with you more.

    Mini-CMS options have their place, but the “overhead” you’re talking about inherent in WordPress is just good common-sense web design. I know I beat the WordPress drum – a lot – but I really do believe that a half-and-half solution brings about more problems than a 100% dedicated CMS solution.

    Especially when you integrate both. Now, instead of one set of log-ins, you have two. Not to mention the extra programs needed to edit two sources of content (ie, HTML/Dreamweaver and WYSIWYG in WordPress or another CMS).

    I push WordPress almost exclusively because it’s secure, the SEO is built in, and the client isn’t stuck with me to make their changes, update the software, perform SEO, or any other task. They can do it themselves, or there’s a myriad of other developers out there who can help them. In addition, plug-ins almost always exist to do exactly what you want, and if they don’t, modification or creation is just as easy as building out a micro-widget elsewhere.

    Is WordPress right for every project? Maybe not – but I’ve yet to see a situation where using it has led to more problems than its worth (beyond bad theming or bad web design practices inherent to any web project, WordPress or no).

    Anyway, definitely a thought provoking subject – thanks for writing!

    -Nick

  • http://www.IAmNickArmstrong.com Nick Armstrong

    Kevin, you’re a web genius but I couldn’t disagree with you more.

    Mini-CMS options have their place, but the “overhead” you’re talking about inherent in WordPress is just good common-sense web design. I know I beat the WordPress drum – a lot – but I really do believe that a half-and-half solution brings about more problems than a 100% dedicated CMS solution.

    Especially when you integrate both. Now, instead of one set of log-ins, you have two. Not to mention the extra programs needed to edit two sources of content (ie, HTML/Dreamweaver and WYSIWYG in WordPress or another CMS).

    I push WordPress almost exclusively because it’s secure, the SEO is built in, and the client isn’t stuck with me to make their changes, update the software, perform SEO, or any other task. They can do it themselves, or there’s a myriad of other developers out there who can help them. In addition, plug-ins almost always exist to do exactly what you want, and if they don’t, modification or creation is just as easy as building out a micro-widget elsewhere.

    Is WordPress right for every project? Maybe not – but I’ve yet to see a situation where using it has led to more problems than its worth (beyond bad theming or bad web design practices inherent to any web project, WordPress or no).

    Anyway, definitely a thought provoking subject – thanks for writing!

    -Nick

  • Kevin

    Hey Nick, thanks for the comment.

    I don’t want to give the impression that I’m advocating the use of more than one CMS on the same site build – if we have a client that would like to blog with WordPress and also edit their own content, we will definitely set them up with WordPress as their only CMS solution. On the other hand, if we have a client that has no need for a blog, and only wants to edit their “About Us” page, we may use a mini-CMS. More specifically, we will use a customized mini-CMS most often when the client wants to manage a more complex aspect of their site, like a photo gallery. This allows us to control all the finer points of the gallery search engine optimization, and keeps things simple for the client.

    I can understand how you would advocate WordPress as a package for the independent website owner, but we find more often than not our clients are thrilled to have a developer who not only offers to provide ongoing development support, but recommends it. I think there’s an important distinction to make between a search engine friendly website (which WordPress provides), and a search engine optimized website – SEO isn’t a one-time project, and if we are building search optimized websites, we like to stay involved in the project, and help maintain that optimization. Whether clients realize it or not, there is definitely a difference between having your developer add/update/optimize content, and handling it yourself, and most clients would rather not invest the time required to get it right themselves.

    Also, I think it’s interesting to note that most of our clients don’t opt for the full CMS, and a majority of those that do end up not utilising it at all – if (our) statistics show that our clients don’t use WordPress, is it worth the development time to implement it?

  • Kevin

    Hey Nick, thanks for the comment.

    I don’t want to give the impression that I’m advocating the use of more than one CMS on the same site build – if we have a client that would like to blog with WordPress and also edit their own content, we will definitely set them up with WordPress as their only CMS solution. On the other hand, if we have a client that has no need for a blog, and only wants to edit their “About Us” page, we may use a mini-CMS. More specifically, we will use a customized mini-CMS most often when the client wants to manage a more complex aspect of their site, like a photo gallery. This allows us to control all the finer points of the gallery search engine optimization, and keeps things simple for the client.

    I can understand how you would advocate WordPress as a package for the independent website owner, but we find more often than not our clients are thrilled to have a developer who not only offers to provide ongoing development support, but recommends it. I think there’s an important distinction to make between a search engine friendly website (which WordPress provides), and a search engine optimized website – SEO isn’t a one-time project, and if we are building search optimized websites, we like to stay involved in the project, and help maintain that optimization. Whether clients realize it or not, there is definitely a difference between having your developer add/update/optimize content, and handling it yourself, and most clients would rather not invest the time required to get it right themselves.

    Also, I think it’s interesting to note that most of our clients don’t opt for the full CMS, and a majority of those that do end up not utilising it at all – if (our) statistics show that our clients don’t use WordPress, is it worth the development time to implement it?

  • http://fiveringswebdesign.com Lindsay Ogden

    I can see both sides of this…

    On one hand, it often makes sense for a client who is not very technically savvy or who simply doesn’t have much time to be able to maintain a couple of pages independent of the web developer/maintainer. They can’t break the site, they can’t get confused and overwhelmed by all of the available options.

    On the other, a plan like this seems inherently inflexible and well, static. They may tell you they only want to change their About Us page, but please remember what Dilbert has to say on the subject: http://dilbert.com/2009-12-07

    With a Drupal site (hehe), they can fire me or I can get hit by a truck (I hope not) and they can easily find another developer or maintainer to make changes to their site because it’s all pretty standard. Also, I can train them or a member of their staff to do most of the obvious stuff like editing and adding nodes, add/remove/change menu items, even create their own webforms and analyze the stats collected. I’ve had great feedback regarding the manuals I provide for each site.

    -Lindsay

  • http://fiveringswebdesign.com Lindsay Ogden

    I can see both sides of this…

    On one hand, it often makes sense for a client who is not very technically savvy or who simply doesn’t have much time to be able to maintain a couple of pages independent of the web developer/maintainer. They can’t break the site, they can’t get confused and overwhelmed by all of the available options.

    On the other, a plan like this seems inherently inflexible and well, static. They may tell you they only want to change their About Us page, but please remember what Dilbert has to say on the subject: http://dilbert.com/2009-12-07

    With a Drupal site (hehe), they can fire me or I can get hit by a truck (I hope not) and they can easily find another developer or maintainer to make changes to their site because it’s all pretty standard. Also, I can train them or a member of their staff to do most of the obvious stuff like editing and adding nodes, add/remove/change menu items, even create their own webforms and analyze the stats collected. I’ve had great feedback regarding the manuals I provide for each site.

    -Lindsay

  • http://www.probatcontrol.com Bat Man

    I have been thinking of putting a blog on our site but dont know if it is needed, I read all the time that it is somthing that will keep content fresh but since I do the brick and mortar part of the work on top of the web site it is hard to keep up on the site content until winter. Thanks for the post and Happy Blogging.

  • http://www.probatcontrol.com Bat Man

    I have been thinking of putting a blog on our site but dont know if it is needed, I read all the time that it is somthing that will keep content fresh but since I do the brick and mortar part of the work on top of the web site it is hard to keep up on the site content until winter. Thanks for the post and Happy Blogging.

«
»