XM Cloud vs Keystone

Sitecore XM Cloud enables seamless collaboration between marketers and developers, improving time to market.

The new composable, headless architecture of Sitecore provides flexibility and benefits over traditional implementations.

Sitecore XM Cloud offers a streamlined visual authoring experience and flexibility for content management.

XM Cloud provides powerful marketing tools, enhancing the user experience through personalization.

The migration to XM Cloud can lead to improved site performance and scalability.

KeystoneJS allows rapid API development with GraphQL and eliminates boilerplate code, making it efficient for developers.

The platform is favored for its flexibility and ease of integrating with various frontend tools.

Users appreciate the customizability and strong community support for KeystoneJS.

KeystoneJS provides clear documentation for setting up and using the platform, which helps ease the onboarding process for developers.

The intuitive admin UI of KeystoneJS is highlighted as a significant positive by many users.

Many find KeystoneJS advantageous for creating complex relationships between data models due to its Schema design.

Some features present in previous Sitecore versions are missing in XM Cloud, such as advanced search functionalities.

Users experience limitations with certain functionalities related to internal rendering hosts and redirects.

High migration costs can be a barrier for organizations utilizing Sitecore XP effectively.

Users may feel overwhelmed by the transition from a traditional CMS to a headless architecture with XM Cloud.

Some important features related to content management are still lacking in XM Cloud, which can hinder user experience.

Users have mentioned a steep learning curve for newcomers that may hinder adoption.

Installation issues on certain setups and the dependency on external databases can be a drawback.

Some users have reported performance issues when scaling applications, especially with complex queries.

Limited built-in functionality compared to some other headless CMS platforms may require additional development work.

Integration with frontend frameworks, while possible, may not be as seamless compared to other CMSs like Strapi.

There have been various bug reports that suggest instability for certain features within KeystoneJS.

Flexible content creation with drag-and-drop tools and A/B testing.

Strong metadata capabilities allowing content reuse across multiple sites.

Built-in personalization features for better user engagement.

High scalability and performance suited for large enterprises.

Ease of use for creating and managing multilingual sites.

Good support and documentation resources available.

KeystoneJS allows customization of the admin UI, enabling users to tailor the interface to their needs.

Users appreciate Keystone's flexible API, which enables easy integration into various applications.

Many developers find KeystoneJS easy to set up and efficient for rapid application development.

The extension capabilities of KeystoneJS are highly regarded, allowing for advanced customization.

Users reported that the autosave feature is a significant advantage during content creation.

Keystone's workflow management features are praised for streamlining content approval processes.

Complex user management and role setting, which can hinder new users.

Known issues with internal rendering hosts not reflecting code changes immediately.

Performance issues reported by users, especially in heavy usage scenarios.

Certain features like redirects can be non-functional without proper publishing steps.

The need for users to invest time in understanding the platform’s complexities.

Limited customization for media URLs which can cause integration issues.

Some users find the media management capabilities lacking, particularly in comparison to other CMS options.

Developers struggle with implementing custom fields due to complexity, impacting the user experience.

Users have reported difficulties in managing image assets effectively within Keystone's current setup.

The system lacks intuitive image editing features, complicating the editing process for users.

Some users mentioned the UI feels dated and could benefit from more modern design elements.

Missing advanced media features like bulk uploads and better organization frustrate users.

Sitecore offers strong scalability and customization capabilities, making it suitable for diverse enterprise needs.

Users appreciate Sitecore's robust performance and versatility, noting its strong capabilities for managing multisite and multilingual environments.

Offers seamless content management and integration for digital experiences using advanced technologies.

Sitecore provides built-in SEO tools and easy page management which enhances user ability to optimize digital content.

Developers appreciate the flexibility and control offered by KeystoneJS for custom projects.

The crash course on KeystoneJS provides a step-by-step guide that eases the onboarding process.

The improved migration commands have made database migrations more straightforward and user-friendly.

Keystone's community support proves beneficial for troubleshooting integration issues.

Keystone allows for easy integration of various database systems such as MongoDB and PostgreSQL.

The clear installation process of Keystone is praised, allowing projects to get up and running quickly.

Difficult to implement, requiring significant investment and time, along with partner engagement.

Complex setup process and a steep learning curve compared to other platforms.

Users find the integration processes convoluted and overly complex.

Some users express frustration over Sitecore's complicated user interface, which adds to integration difficulties.

Some users reported issues with localization support in KeystoneJS.

Users find it difficult to manage many-to-many relationships effectively with Keystone.

Lack of built-in localization features complicates multi-language site setups.

Some developers encounter difficulties with complex setups and configurations for unique use cases.

Certain users found the learning curve steep due to the complexity of the framework.

Users reported issues with integrating third-party plugins without detailed documentation.