TYPO3 vs Crafter CMS

TYPO3 is described as a powerful and flexible open-source enterprise CMS.

Some users find TYPO3 has a lot of powerful features for enterprise-level applications.

Some users mention that TYPO3 attempts to follow modern coding standards like PSR.

Experienced web developers may find TYPO3's multifaceted approach beneficial for complex projects.

Some community members appreciate the unique features and extensive functionalities of TYPO3 for large-scale implementations.

Craft CMS offers robust multilingual support and a powerful Matrix field type that allows for endless customization.

Craft CMS provides a better development experience with a clean canvas for template development compared to WordPress.

Craft’s custom fields and UI are praised for their intuitive design, making it easier to manage content types effectively.

Many users think TYPO3 is very complicated and non-intuitive for new users.

The documentation and user experience of TYPO3 are described as frustrating and hard to navigate.

Users criticize TYPO3's template system as overly complex and outdated.

The extension builder in TYPO3 is commonly viewed as being outdated and frustrating to use.

Some developers feel that TYPO3's reliance on TypoScript is an unnecessary hurdle.

The Craft CMS update process is described as inconsistent and often problematic, causing frustration during updates.

Getting support for Craft and developer availability is limited compared to WordPress, making it more challenging to find help when needed.

Users cite difficulty with importing content into Craft, citing bugs that can lead to formatting issues in WYSIWYG fields.

The complexity of developing custom functionalities in Craft compared to WordPress is a common critique among developers.

Some developers express a preference for the Advanced Custom Fields (ACF) in WordPress, which they find more powerful and user-friendly than Craft's offerings.

Intuitive onboarding process for new users; easy to manage content with minimal training.

Good media management capabilities for images and files; easy reuse across content.

Support for multilingual setups out-of-the-box, facilitating easy content translation.

Flexible page assembly through modular elements allows for design control by editors.

Clear organizational structure with a hierarchical page system that feels intuitive.

Improved ease of use with recent updates; many features now available without extensive configuration.

Craft's author experience is exceptional, featuring a straightforward fields and sections structure that simplifies content management.

Craft's editor provides a side-by-side view that updates in real-time as content is edited, enhancing the authoring experience.

Craft's handling of entry relations is smoother than in WordPress, allowing for more intuitive linking of content.

Craft's built-in Feed Me component allows easy content import from various formats, simplifying data management for authors.

Craft allows for easy multi-site management and localization, which is less complex compared to other CMSs.

The database schema in Craft can be saved as a YAML file, allowing for easier environment synchronization during development.

Steep learning curve due to configurations requiring extensive knowledge of TypoScript.

Complexity increases with the need for multi-tasking; users struggle with navigating many configurations at once.

Documentation can be outdated and hard to follow, making the learning process more challenging.

Configuration can feel convoluted due to reliance on multiple files and settings across the system.

Some users find TYPO3's internal structure complex, making it difficult for beginners to navigate.

The need for continuous updates and maintenance can be a major drawback for some users.

Some marketers find Craft's rigid structure a hindrance, as it requires developer intervention for content updates.

A common complaint is the lack of out-of-the-box SEO tools comparable to plugins like Yoast on WordPress.

Craft's customization can lead to complexity, and some users may feel overwhelmed by the features available to developers.

Despite Craft's advantages, its smaller community often limits the resources available compared to more established CMS platforms.

Some users report dissatisfaction with Craft's plugin ecosystem, particularly regarding support and updates for third-party plugins.

Critics mention Craft's pricing model as a barrier, as ongoing costs can accumulate significantly, especially for teams on a budget.

Flexible plugin configurations enhance user experience while integrating.

Seamless integration with tools for content quality and compliance checks directly within TYPO3.

Users find TYPO3’s template engine Fluid easy to integrate with various designs.

Community-driven extensions like 'paste_reference' provide enhanced functionalities with proper integration support.

Development and customization options available for TYPO3 allow for bespoke solutions.

The plugin supports real-time error fixes, enhancing site management efficiency.

The blocks structure allows flexibility in building pages.

User-friendly interface for content creation, making it easier for non-technical users to adapt.

Craft allows for the integration of forms through plugins like Formie.

Customization is possible through thousands of available plugins and APIs.

High standards for plugins ensure reliability and security in integrations.

Real-time updates in the editing mode improve workflow.

The extensive feature set can be overwhelming for newcomers.

Integrating certain plugins can lead to complexity and potential conflicts.

Some users struggle with the learning curve associated with TYPO3’s capabilities.

Requires constant updates for optimal performance and security on newer TYPO3 versions.

Limited backward compatibility with older TYPO3 versions may create integration issues.

Fewer plugins available compared to WordPress leading to limited out-of-the-box functionality.

The learning curve can be steep for new users.

Dependency on custom integrations for specific features may deter users.

Custom integrations might be needed for connecting to third-party services like Dynamics 365.

Some users consider the initial setup cumbersome despite powerful features.

Some features may require extensive development knowledge for proper implementation.