DecapCMS vs Keystatic

Decap CMS is praised for its straightforward installation process and its fast, web-based UI that includes rich-text editing and real-time preview capabilities.

The product offers a git-centric workflow that is ideal for static site generation, which helps in tracking, versioning, and managing content changes.

Decap CMS is recognized for cross-platform capabilities, allowing integration with various static site generators and meta-frameworks.

Users can create unlimited custom content types, which adds a level of flexibility not available in many other CMS platforms.

The platform supports multiple languages, making it a good option for international websites.

It provides a simple interface for managing content, which is helpful for developers and content creators without extensive technical knowledge.

Offers first-class CMS experience with TypeScript and support for Markdown, YAML, and JSON.

Integrating Keystatic into an Astro blog is straightforward, and it allows coexistence of new and old content formats.

Rich text editing experience right out of the box with minimal setup.

Supports creating custom fields and components, enhancing the content management experience.

Allows connection to GitHub repositories and local file system for easy content management.

Markdown and JSON support simplifies the content workflow, appealing for technical users.

Decap CMS may not be ideal for larger or more complex projects due to its feature limitations compared to traditional CMS platforms.

The lack of built-in support for advanced content workflows is seen as a drawback by some users.

Some users note that a solid understanding of Git is necessary to get the most out of Decap CMS, which could deter non-technical users.

Documentation can sometimes be difficult to follow, which may hinder new users during setup and operation.

Continued development and improvements are needed, with bugs that might need addressing as it is still evolving as a platform.

The CMS is less equipped in terms of various integrations compared to more established CMS solutions, making it less versatile in certain scenarios.

Limited support for MDX content, which may hinder those with existing MDX setups.

Users may encounter difficulties when setting up environment variables for GitHub integration.

As it is still in experimental phases, users may face bugs or limitations.

The admin UI can become complex when trying to integrate with existing layouts.

Users have mentioned that not all features are fully developed, leading to missing functionalities.

Some advanced features may require more configuration than initially expected.

Users appreciate the rich-text editing capability and real-time preview feature, enhancing the editing process.

Achieved high user satisfaction scores, indicating a positive reception of its intuitive interface and extensive features.

Highlighted the CMS ability to work seamlessly with various static site generators, enhancing usability for developers and content creators.

Users mentioned ease of configuration and deployment when setting up Decap CMS for Hugo sites, appreciating the flexibility it offers.

The integration with Astro is seamless and allows for custom components.

Users appreciate the simple markdown interface that provides flexibility.

Markdown and JSON management allows for easy content updates without confusion.

The ease of managing content in markdown is highlighted.

Keystatic frequently saves drafts, which is helpful for users.

Customizability of the admin UI is frequently appreciated by developers.

Users experience difficulties with the initial setup, indicating that it can be complicated for non-technical users.

Some users reported a lack of polish in the UI, indicating a need for improvement in user experience design.

Concerns over the interface's complexity were raised, suggesting that not all features are intuitive for new users.

Users noted that content management can become cumbersome without clear navigation, leading to frustration during editing.

Limited support for MDX format caused migration challenges for existing content.

Users faced difficulties with integrating images correctly in their posts.

Keystatic lacks some advanced features expected by users migrating from other CMS.

Users encountered issues with validations on the datetime field.

Simple installation and setup with YAML configuration.

Integrates seamlessly with static site generators like Hugo.

Offers easy integration with static site generators.

Lightweight and minimalist, great for developers.

User interface is easy to navigate for developers.

Version control and Git integration facilitates workflow.

Integrating Keystatic with Astro was straightforward and didn't produce installation errors.

Keystatic successfully managed Markdown content without major issues during setup.

Users find Keystatic easy to configure, especially compared to alternatives like Tina CMS.

It is seen as a good git-based CMS with simple integration.

Keystatic allows simple content organization based on user-defined structures.

Requires understanding of Git which may be a barrier for non-technical users.

Less user-friendly for non-technical users compared to traditional CMS.

Lacks built-in support for complex content workflows.

Customization can be cumbersome without coding knowledge.

May require additional integration efforts for digital marketing tools.

Limited templates may hinder some users.

MDX support was initially lacking, causing a shift to other content types.

Encountered difficulties when converting existing content formats and managing schema.

Users reported validation issues when using the admin UI, indicating potential schema misconfigurations.

One user encountered issues with accessing posts in the admin interface due to schema conflicts.

Some users expressed frustration with limited documentation and encountered initial setup issues.