TYPO3 vs Payload 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.

Payload CMS is praised for its open-source nature and fast support, allowing great customization.

Payload CMS is recognized for its end-to-end type safety ensured by TypeScript, extensive Plugin support, and intuitive user experience.

Payload CMS offers a clean and customizable user interface, making it approachable for users.

Users appreciate Payload CMS for its flexibility and powerful features suitable for complex content management.

The active community for Payload CMS helps foster enhancements and extensions, adding a layer of support.

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Users criticize TYPO3's template system as overly complex and outdated.

The extension builder in TYPO3 is commonly viewed as being outdated and frustrating to use.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

Users report missing functionalities such as bulk uploads and live collaboration features, indicating areas for improvement.

Some users find that Payload CMS lacks pre-built examples and extensive documentation, which can hinder the onboarding process.

The complexity of Payload's flexible architecture may lead some users to initially feel overwhelmed or confused.

New users who are not familiar with Next.js may find it challenging to adapt to Payload CMS's code-based customization approach.

The young age of Payload CMS means it may lack some enterprise-grade features compared to more established competitors.

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.

Payload allows full customization of the admin UI and integrates well with React, providing a clean editing experience.

Autosave feature ensures that changes are saved automatically, which enhances user confidence during editing.

Users appreciate the flexibility in creating custom fields, which can enhance the editing experience for specialized needs.

Versions and drafts features allow easy management and restoration of content, providing a safety net for edits.

Comprehensive API support (REST and GraphQL) allows for dynamic content management through custom applications.

The community offers support, making it easier for new users to learn and adapt to the platform's complexities.

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.

Beginners find it challenging to set up basic features, such as image resizing in the rich text editor, without custom coding.

Some users struggle with the lack of built-in features like component rendering which are expected in mature CMSs.

Feedback indicates that the documentation does not sufficiently support users in understanding advanced features.

Users express frustration with the time needed to implement basic functionalities, making it feel like a beta product.

The requirement to integrate third-party services for file storage can be cumbersome compared to other CMS options.

Complex hierarchies in nested fields can create confusion for content editors, impacting usability.

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.

Payload provides a clean interface and simple setup for developers, especially for those familiar with Next.js.

Highly customizable and extensible, allowing users to define schemas programmatically.

Self-hosted options are appealing for users wanting to maintain control of their backend.

API generation is automatic based on user-defined configurations, simplifying integration.

Offers a clean, customizable user interface making it easy for developers to get started.

Easy setup and straightforward for TypeScript developers, aligning well with modern development practices.

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.

The documentation is seen as incomplete and lacking depth for advanced features.

Users often face performance issues and have to restart the server frequently during development.

Users reported that integration with plugins can cause unexpected behavior and bugs.

Limited third-party integrations noted as a drawback for some user implementations.

Users mentioned needing significant technical ability to fully leverage its features and capabilities.

Users expressed concerns about support and community responses for troubleshooting issues.