Framer CMS vs DatoCMS

Framer combines UX design capabilities with staging and publishing features, making it an excellent web design tool.

Framer is particularly well-suited for small teams and freelancers focused on design-centric projects.

Offers a simple, intuitive design interface that’s similar to tools like Figma, making it easy for designers to adopt.

Users appreciate the design flexibility and user-friendliness for creating visually appealing websites.

The community aspect of Framer is growing, providing ample resources for users to learn and collaborate.

Framer’s CMS allows for a variety of dynamic content management capabilities.

DatoCMS integrates seamlessly with Next.js, allowing for efficient SSR apps and easy localization based on user location.

User-friendly interface and effective image optimization, leading to significantly reduced page load times.

Highly customizable and offers a better rich text editor model compared to competitors, allowing for effective content management.

Offers a generous free plan for basic usage, making it accessible for small businesses and projects.

Flexibility in handling JSON models which aids in content creation and management.

DatoCMS offers strong performance and user satisfaction from a large array of successful case studies.

Users find the pricing structure to be restrictive, especially with limited CMS collections for lower tiers.

Framer lacks relational database capabilities, making complex content structures difficult to manage.

Framer lacks advanced features found in competitors like Webflow, which has a significantly higher CMS item limit.

The lack of re-usable components can lead to redundancy and inefficiency in design.

Users report issues with slow updates and functionality, leading to frustrations with the platform.

Framer's basic analytics and SEO features are less comprehensive compared to competitors, limiting performance tracking abilities.

The platform is prone to technical issues that can disrupt project progress, causing dissatisfaction among users.

Expectations for e-commerce solutions are unmet, as Framer does not currently support this functionality.

Requires a paid add-on for features like bot detection and caching, increasing costs unexpectedly.

Complex setup for new users, particularly in creating the initial models needed for content management.

Some users mentioned high costs when scaling, which makes it less appealing for smaller businesses or projects with tight budgets.

Lacks some advanced features that other CMSs offer, which can limit flexibility in complex use cases.

Some features are less intuitive, causing frustration during the first use for editorial teams.

Certain functionalities are not clearly documented, making it challenging for users to optimize workflows effectively.

Users have expressed some difficulty with customer support responsiveness, especially in urgent situations.

Users appreciate the ease of creating and managing collections and items in the CMS.

Framer’s interface is noted as snappy and makes web design enjoyable.

Framer allows easy scalability of designs through its CMS, making it suitable for repetitive content.

The user interface is regarded as superior for interacting with items in the CMS compared to competitors.

Users find it easy to link and create detailed pages from collections.

Importing data into the CMS is user-friendly, enhancing the overall experience.

User-friendly interface streamlines content management without deep technical knowledge.

Structured content editing with modular blocks enhances ease of use.

Drag-and-drop interface makes creating and managing content easy.

Quick localization setup for tailored content delivery.

Limited number of CMS collections based on the pricing tier frustrates users.

Some features lack beginner-friendly guidance, causing confusion among new users.

There are limitations in terms of advanced features like dynamic filtering of items.

Framer’s CMS still lacks the robustness and advanced field types found in other platforms like Webflow.

Users indicate a need for better support and documentation to help navigate complex features.

Some users reported sluggishness in complex edits, despite the overall snappiness.

Limited customization options hinder complex content needs.

Setup process can be complex for users less familiar with CMS.

Initial model creation can be cumbersome and complex without guidance.

Pricing may escalate quickly for projects with high content volume.

Framer allows easy sorting of CMS items by various fields like text strings, dates, etc.

CMS allows for dynamic content management with customizable fields to enhance user experience.

The CMS supports filtering collections easily, enhancing content presentation.

Users can import data from CSV files, making it easy to bring content into Framer.

Dynamic references in CMS allow linking of content across collections, making management easier.

Building a CMS page is straightforward, especially for those familiar with design tools like Figma.

Users appreciate its React integration and find it reasonably priced compared to alternatives.

DatoCMS offers powerful GraphQL API capabilities, which provide flexibility for developers.

Rich feature set with many advanced content modeling options reduces custom development time.

The user interface simplifies content creation, making it intuitive for content managers.

The platform allows for real-time collaboration among multiple contributors.

Offers a no-code schema builder that simplifies the setup process for developers and content teams.

Recent updates broke some superfields components, leading to issues in large collections.

Users reported difficulties with updating components after new Framer updates.

Support response times are slow, making troubleshooting issues frustrating for users.

Framer lacks advanced features compared to other CMS solutions, limiting user capabilities.

Integration with third-party tools is limited, affecting the user experience.

Users expressed concerns over the stability of CMS features post-update.

Customization can be limited compared to fully open-source options like Strapi, which may require developer intervention.

Initial setup can be complex and may require a learning curve for new users.

Some users mentioned a steeper learning curve when utilizing advanced features.

For large-scale projects, managing performance and security can demand ongoing attention and resources.