Instead of an introduction: this material is almost completely copied from the CESL Group website, author Nikita Semenov.
Just... I want to keep the material for myself. The story is told in 2012. Today, 5 years later, the TOP sites are a little different, but the research results and conclusions from the articles, in my opinion, are still relevant today.
Very often, new clients come to us at SECL Group and ask to create a portal or social network on a boxed CMS, while using existing large portals from their niche as an example. And every time we have to explain that high-load sites are NOT made on boxed CMS. Today I want to justify why CMS are extremely rarely used for large projects, both with some facts and with research into which RuNet sites from the top hundred in terms of traffic use a boxed CMS.
What CMS are popular in RuNet?
As the Runet Rating tells us, among commercial engines these are: 1C-Bitrix, NetCat, UMI.CMS, HostCMS, AMIRO.CMS and among free ones these are: Joomla!, Drupal, MODx, WordPress, TYPO3. Each CMS has its own features, pros and cons, but that’s not what this article is about.
From me: in 2017, according to the Runet Rating, commercial engines: 1C-Bitrix, UMI.CMS, NetCat, HostCMS, CS-Cart. UMI.CMS and NetCat swapped places, AMIRO.CMS dropped out, CS-Cart appeared. Open-source engines: WordPress, Drupal, Joomla!, MODx, OpenCart. WP is in first place, I wonder why in 2012 it was in fourth... MODx lost one position, Joomla - two positions, OpenCart knocked TYPO3 out of the ranking.
Let's start by researching the top 100 sites, and then analyze the data obtained. For the study, we chose two ratings of the top 100 sites at once: according to Alexa data (region - Russian Federation and region - all countries). Straz should explain that these ratings are slightly different, Alexa collects data through the installed toolbar, and taking into account the fact that in RuNet it is used mainly by people connected to the Internet, then Alexa’s data is accordingly slightly biased towards sites for programmers and SEO specialists etc. That is why we also made an analysis based on LiveInternet data. The analysis included more than 50 popular CMS, including all the most popular. The CMS was determined by the location of the admin panel, by the site code, etc. There may be errors, etc. Because some site owners deliberately hide signs of using a CMS, but in any case, this error, if there is one, is small.
Analysis from 09/11/2012. Data on Alexa (less relevant, but more interesting for its IT nature)
| Place in the ranking | Site URL | CMS used |
|---|---|---|
| №1 | yandex.ru | No |
| №2 | vk.com | No |
| №3 | mail.ru | No |
| №4 | google.com | No |
| №5 | google.ru | No |
| №6 | youtube.com | No |
| №7 | odnoklassniki.ru | No |
| №8 | facebook.com | No |
| №9 | wikipedia.org | No |
| №10 | livejournal.com | No |
| №11 | liveinternet.ru | No |
| №12 | twitter.com | No |
| №13 | ucoz.ru | No |
| №14 | rambler.ru | No |
| №15 | rutracker.org | No |
| №16 | blogspot.com | No |
| №17 | narod.ru | No |
| №18 | avito.ru | No |
| №19 | rbc.ru | No |
| №20 | sape.ru | No |
| №21 | ya.ru | No |
| №22 | lenta.ru | No |
| №23 | gi-akademie.com | 1C-Bitrix |
| №24 | webmoney.ru | No |
| №25 | gismeteo.ru | No |
| №26 | kinopoisk.ru | No |
| №27 | gi-backoffice.com | No |
| №28 | searchengines.ru | 1C-Bitrix |
| №29 | slando.ru | No |
| №30 | habrahabr.ru | No |
| №31 | zeekrewards.com | No |
| №32 | auto.ru | No |
| №33 | sbrf.ru | RBC Contents |
| №34 | yahoo.com | No |
| №35 | userapi.com | No |
| №36 | googleusercontent.com | No |
| №37 | sberbank.ru | RBC Contents |
| №38 | acesse.com | No |
| №39 | yandex.net | No |
| №40 | sergey-mavrodi.com | WordPress |
| №41 | microsoft.com | No |
| №42 | ebay.com | No |
| №43 | cy-pr.com | 1C-Bitrix |
| №44 | drom.ru | No |
| №45 | subscribe.ru | No |
| №46 | qip.ru | No |
| №47 | hh.ru | No |
| №48 | smartresponder.ru | No |
| №49 | fotostrana.ru | No |
| №50 | adobe.com | No |
| №51 | taobao.com | No |
| №52 | taobao.com | No |
| №53 | radikal.ru | No |
| №54 | ria.ru | No |
| №55 | gogetlinks.net | No |
| №56 | rutor.org | No |
| №57 | 3file.info | No |
| №58 | wildberries.ru | No |
| №59 | depositfiles.com | No |
| №60 | pr-cy.ru | No |
| №61 | afimet.com | Amiro.CMS |
| №62 | ozon.ru | No |
| №63 | mts.ru | No |
| №64 | tiu.ru | No |
| №65 | letitbit.net | Drupal |
| №66 | seopult.ru | No |
| №67 | linkedin.com | No |
| №68 | wmmail.ru | No |
| №69 | directadvert.ru | No |
| №70 | vesti.ru | No |
| №71 | newsru.com | No |
| №72 | qiwi.ru | 1C-Bitrix |
| №73 | ucoz.com | No |
| №74 | xhamster.com | No |
| №75 | ultimatepowerprofits.com | No |
| №76 | my-hit.ru | No |
| №77 | gazeta.ru | No |
| №78 | biglion.ru | No |
| №79 | beeline.ru | Actis WebBuilder |
| №80 | goodvin.tv | Drupal |
| №81 | wmtransfer.com | No |
| №82 | worldoftanks.ru | No |
| №83 | championat.com | No |
| №84 | marketgid.com | No |
| №85 | wikimedia.org | No |
| №86 | fastpic.ru | No |
| №87 | miralinks.ru | No |
| №88 | amazon.com | No |
| №89 | sportbox.ru | Drupal |
| №90 | nic.ru | No |
| №91 | apple.com | No |
| №92 | bannersbroker.com | No |
| №93 | irr.ru | No |
| №94 | xvideos.com | No |
| №95 | kp.ru | WordPress |
| №96 | live.com | No |
| №97 | mamba.ru | No |
| №98 | ixbt.com | No |
| №99 | nnm-club.ru | No |
| №100 | webalta.ru | No |
As we can see, only 13 out of 100 sites work on a packaged CMS, i.e. in the ranking, only 13% of high-load projects use a CMS. In addition, 3 projects use studio developments, which can be assembled specifically for their needs and, most likely, are very different from the usual boxed CMS. The bottom line is that we see that only a few projects are running on a boxed CMS.
Below are data from a study of the top 100 Runet sites by traffic (according to LiveInternet) and their analysis for signs of the use of boxed CMS:
| Place in the ranking | Site URL | CMS used |
|---|---|---|
| №1 | vk.com | No |
| №2 | odnoklassniki.ru | No |
| №3 | go.mail.ru | No |
| №4 | my.mail.ru | No |
| №5 | marketgid.com | No |
| №6 | ulogin.ru | No |
| №7 | avito.ru | No |
| №8 | qip.ru | No |
| №9 | foto.mail.ru | No |
| №10 | rbc.ru | No |
| №11 | rutracker.org | No |
| №12 | directadvert.ru | No |
| №13 | liveinternet.ru | No |
| №14 | fotostrana.ru | No |
| №15 | gismeteo.ru | No |
| №16 | kinopoisk.ru | No |
| №17 | video.mail.ru | No |
| №18 | slando.ru | No |
| №19 | www.smotri.com | No |
| №20 | wildberries.ru | No |
| №21 | mgid.com | No |
| №22 | kp.ru | No |
| №23 | vesti.ru | No |
| №24 | all.biz | No |
| №25 | lady.mail.ru | No |
| №26 | auto.mail.ru | No |
| №27 | irr.ru | No |
| №28 | auto.ru | No |
| №29 | drom.ru | No |
| №30 | ria.ru | No |
| №31 | citycatalogue.ru | No |
| №32 | m.my.mail.ru | No |
| №33 | 2shared.com | No |
| №34 | lenta.ru | No |
| №35 | hh.ru | No |
| №36 | lice-mer.ru | No |
| №37 | games.mail.ru | No |
| №38 | icq.com | No |
| №39 | pogoda.mail.ru | No |
| №40 | mediafort.ru | No |
| №41 | flirchi.ru | No |
| №42 | woman.ru | No |
| №43 | smi2.ru | No |
| №44 | tiu.ru | No |
| №45 | deti.mail.ru | No |
| №46 | livetv.ru | No |
| №47 | afisha.mail.ru | No |
| №48 | loveplanet.ru | No |
| №49 | myvi.ru | No |
| №50 | ruhelp.com | No |
| №51 | blog.mosmedclinic.ru | No |
| №52 | gazeta.ru | No |
| №53 | babyblog.ru | No |
| №54 | postimage.org | No |
| №55 | radikal.ru | No |
| №56 | fastpic.ru | No |
| №57 | dmir.ru | No |
| №58 | shockodrom.com | WordPress |
| №59 | agent.mail.ru | No |
| №60 | utro.ru | No |
| №61 | championat.com | No |
| №62 | korrespondent.net | No |
| №63 | fishki.net | No |
| №64 | minigames.mail.ru | No |
| №65 | lib.rus.ec | Drupal |
| №66 | povarenok.ru | No |
| №67 | sportlemon.tv | No |
| №68 | slando.ru | No |
| №69 | newsru.com | No |
| №70 | gismeteo.ua | No |
| №71 | sportbox.ru | Drupal |
| №72 | sberbank.ru | RBC Contents |
| №73 | 24smile.net | No |
| №74 | ntv.ru | No |
| №75 | softportal.com | No |
| №76 | svyaznoy.ru | 1C-Bitrix |
| №77 | rg.ru | No |
| №78 | chatovod.ru | No |
| №79 | 1tv.ru | No |
| №80 | prom.ua | No |
| №81 | pulscen.ru | No |
| №82 | ru.redtram.com | No |
| №83 | tutu.ru | No |
| №84 | playground.ru | No |
| №85 | superjob.ru | No |
| №86 | poiskm.ru | No |
| №87 | canliradyodinle.com.tr | WordPress |
| №88 | say7.info | No |
| №89 | sport.rbc.ru | No |
| №90 | echo.msk.ru | No |
| №91 | readme.ru | No |
| №92 | pravda.ru | No |
| №93 | galya.ru | No |
| №94 | aif.ru | No |
| №95 | 4pda.ru | WordPress |
| №96 | hi-tech.mail.ru | No |
| №97 | 24video.net | No |
| №98 | jobs.ru | No |
| №99 | worka.ru | No |
| №100 | rt.com | No |
So, we see a completely logical picture, the same as in the Alexa rating: among the first fifty sites there is no CMS at all, in the second half there are 7 boxed CMS, one of which is studio-based, while, interestingly, sites based on CMS are not They are distinguished by fast operation, braking is noticeable. In this rating, the total traffic to sites is significantly higher than in Alex and CMS, fewer projects are used.
What then do big projects work on?
Usually, for such projects, the functionality is written from scratch, frameworks, different algorithms, and often even several programming languages are used, but this is the topic of a separate article.
Why aren't high-load websites built on a CMS?
There are several reasons for this. First, let's define what a CMS is: essentially, it is a set of ready-made modules linked into a single system that is suitable “for all occasions.” From here, logical conclusions immediately appear that prevent the use of a boxed CMS for large portals:
- A system without specialization.
Almost all CMS have no specialization, they are designed to create any website (some systems position themselves as a CMS for a certain type of website, for example WordPress for blogs, Magento for stores, etc., but the essence does not change, just more modules for a certain type of site), from here it is impossible to achieve maximum efficiency. - Standard architecture.
Any large site has an architectural design stage, it’s like a project when constructing a building: if you design it well, it will stand for a long time, but poorly, it will immediately fall apart. In this case, the architecture has already been specified by the CMS developers, which means it is not possible to take into account the features of the new project. - Lots of redoing.
Any large project has a lot of different functionality with different requirements, so it’s impossible to simply take standard modules and launch a high-quality website: each of the modules will most likely have to be redesigned to meet specific requirements, and delving into someone else’s code, even well-documented, is time-consuming and ineffective , it is often faster, and therefore cheaper, to write from scratch. - Problems with revision.
Often we need to add something that is not in the CMS, and this sometimes turns into hell: not only do we need to figure out how everything works, but there are also technological limitations; the CMS may use outdated technology or not the most optimal one for our project. And in general, any CMS for a developer is a strict framework that is extremely difficult to go beyond. - Problems with loads.
Since we are talking about highly visited projects, each of them must be optimized for loads so as not to spend large resources on maintaining performance, and the site must remain operational no matter the traffic. Hence, each of the modules must spend a minimum of computing power, which the CMS cannot provide, because it was created as a solution “for all occasions”, and it has a bunch of everything that is either difficult or even impossible to throw away. By the way, some projects for this purpose make a website entirely in pure HTML (for example, Opera or the website of our SECL Group), due to this, the websites can withstand heavy loads with minimal resources, and the page loading speed is amazing. True, pure HTML can be used only for those sites that are rarely updated: every update becomes a problem.
This is not a complete list of disadvantages, which is why large websites are not built on boxed CMS. Content management systems are well suited for simple solutions: corporate website, online store, blog, etc., but they cannot be used for large portals, and the rating of the top 100 sites illustrates this in practice.
- The more traffic to the site, the less likely (or rather, the possibility) of using a boxed CMS,
- All sites that run on a CMS have performance problems
- CMS is a framework; projects created on its basis have significant shortcomings in architecture and functionality.
New post from Mikhail about popular CMS, as they are also called - content management system.
What is a website engine? This is a website management program that is located on the server (uploaded to hosting). There are a huge number of such CMSs, some are ideal for blogs, others only for online stores, but they all have one thing in common - they simplify website management. For example, a novice webmaster does not need to know HTML to insert text into a page; just open the desired menu item in the CMS of your choice.
WordPress
Perhaps the most popular CMS and, despite the fact that it was originally designed for blogs, it is used for various purposes. Now there are many plugins for it that can turn a site into a forum, online store or even a social network. Examples: online libraries on WordPress - “Download books for free” or Andrey Voskoboynikov.
Advantages:
- Simplicity. Everyone can understand how to manage this CMS.
– Even if you haven’t figured it out yourself, there is a lot of educational information available.
– Many plugins that will simplify or decorate your website or blog in a couple of mouse clicks.
- Free.
Flaws:
– To be honest, WordPress has no shortcomings as such. It is weak in security, but there are many plugins that will help protect against password guessing, IP blocking, etc. Also a little standard functionality, but again, that's why plugins exist.
Conclusion: WordPress is the best engine for both experienced and novice bloggers who still don’t understand much about programming. Although many bloggers who use Joomla will probably argue with me.
Joomla
Good representative of CMS. This engine makes it much easier to implement projects that are far from a blog structure. This is a more complicated version of WordPress, with more powerful functionality.
Advantages:
– Many useful extensions.
– It’s much easier to choose a beautiful and high-quality theme for Joomla than for the WordPress engine.
– There is authorization via Google, OpenID, etc., which makes it more secure.
– Also free.
Flaws:
– It will be a little difficult for beginner bloggers.
Conclusion: if you need a business card website or a personal blog, it is better to choose WordPress as the engine, and if you need a more serious project, it is better to spend time learning Joomla, which can provide a little more functionality.
Drupal
This website engine will seem very good only to advanced users; its structure, in my opinion, is too complex. Therefore, there is no point in using it on simple sites, but it will be very useful for many commercial projects.
Advantages:
– Many modules (extensions) that will increase the already huge functionality.
– Good support for developers and communities, but English-speaking.
- Free.
Flaws:
– It’s almost impossible to choose a topic. Firstly, there are few of them. Secondly, those that exist have already multiplied a long time ago. You only need to prepare to order a unique template.
– Difficult to manage.
Conclusion: An excellent CMS for serious projects that requires special study, and it’s also free.
DLE
Quite a popular website engine. Despite the fact that it is paid, it is still actively used in RuNet.
Advantages:
– Ideal for “online cinemas” and other video resources.
– Suitable for small news sites.
– Suitable for online libraries and literary portals.
– Large and varied functionality, which can only be fully appreciated by those who have at least thought about creating a more or less decent video resource.
Flaws:
– Not suitable for all projects.
– This content management system is paid.
Conclusion: extremely useful for solving certain problems CMS.
Bitrix
This is a paid engine for the site, which boasts security, reliability and stability. Has excellent developer support. And of course, among the domestic CMS, it is best suited for creating online stores.
Advantages:
– Integration with 1C.
– Good protection and stable operation.
– Constant updates and support.
Flaws:
- Expensive license.
– Demanding on server resources.
Conclusion: Perfect for online store sites and many other commercial projects.
This is where I will probably complete the review of the most popular CMS.
Which engine should you choose for an online store? This is the question most aspiring entrepreneurs ask. There are so many platforms that it can sometimes be quite difficult to navigate. This review will look at the best CMS. The user will be able to choose the most suitable engine for his web resource.
The best CMS systems
Most companies offer websites on platforms that are more familiar and easier for them to work with. Often these engines do not meet customer requirements. In order not to encounter platform limitations, you need to know the best CMS for creating a website. Choosing the right engine ensures the success of the web resource. There are 2 categories of platforms: commercial and free products.
The first type of engines was created with the aim of making a profit from the sales of licenses and add-ons. These systems lead in quality of work and popularity. Almost all useful modules are paid. Beginning entrepreneurs cannot always afford to purchase the best CMS on a commercial basis. Free engines were created for them.
System "1C-Bitrix"
This platform is the best CMS for an online store. Why did she get so popular? The engine works with an extensive 1C database. If desired, the user can set up bonus programs for buyers and specify different rates for legal entities. The platform is used to create large portals, information resources, as well as other services.
Websites made on this CMS stand out among other websites due to the quality of their work, a large number of additional modules, reliable protection against hacker attacks, and the ability to share rights between several administrators. The system requires considerable investment. Therefore, it is recommended to use the 1C-Bitrix platform exclusively for creating large projects.
Magento
This system is the best CMS for an online store among free products. More than 150 thousand websites on the Internet have been created using this engine. The platform is provided in three editions. The community edition is free. The admin panel is very convenient.
If desired, you can differentiate user rights. Interface in Russian. Answers to your questions can be found in the developer community. The user has access to options for generating detailed reports and adding discount coupons. The client can work with the 1C database.
Products are imported into Yandex.Market. There are various product filters. If desired, you can send advertising messages to customers and connect social networks. The developers offer clients to create an affiliate program for their online store. An administrator can manage multiple projects from one account.
Disadvantages of Magento
The disadvantages include the lack of integration with Russian payment systems and delivery services. This problem can be solved by installing paid modules and editing existing ones. When launching an online store, you will need to use the services of an experienced programmer.
The engine consumes a large amount of server resources. The platform should only be used to create large online stores. Modules useful for e-commerce are paid. Some of them are greatly overpriced.
Joomla
The platform ranks third in the ranking. The product is distinguished by its quality. If a user is looking for the best CMS engine, then he should pay attention to Joomla. The client can expand the extensive toolkit with the help of additional modules and plugins. High security of working with the service is ensured.
The user has access to options for connecting multi-level authorization for administrators and dividing the rights of moderators. Changing the appearance of the site is carried out by using a ready-made template from an extensive catalog. If desired, you can create a custom layout. Many clients believe that this is the best CMS for a store because it allows you to customize many elements. Websites based on this engine have a flexible structure.
Additional components for Joomla
Developers are constantly releasing updates. Initially, the platform was created for corporate web resources, blogs, and business card pages. Now the engine works with online stores and social platforms. To add products to the site, you need to download an additional component. The most common scripts are VirtueMart and JoomShopping.
If necessary, additional modules are installed. Using VirtueMart, the user can integrate the site with the 1C database, connect popular payment systems, and configure the import/export of products. The additional component is suitable for launching small and medium-sized online stores. VirtueMart is not used when creating large portals, since it does not have the necessary functions and a proper security system.
Drupal
This platform is aimed at complex websites and professional programmers. Working with the software requires experience and appropriate training. The system synchronizes with partner sites. The user can choose short addresses, use template themes, and create web resources with similar elements (a single user base). Multi-language translation function available.
The engine is suitable for large online stores and communities. In other cases, the costs will not be justified. To use the platform, you must install Ubercart. This additional component is practically no different from the VirtueMart script. The best free CMS Magento and Joomla took first place in the ranking only because they are slightly more common and less difficult to learn and customize than Drupal.
MODX
This platform can run on almost all servers and interact with different browsers. The software is distributed under a license. The engine is used to create websites of various types. The platform is also an application development environment. It is not demanding on server resources.
Installing and configuring the engine is not difficult. Disadvantages include low prevalence in the CIS countries and the lack of necessary functions to launch a full-fledged online store in these territories. Many users indicate that when working with the engine, problems arise with the security of web resources.
OpenCart
Commercial or absolutely free CMS - which is better? The OpenCart platform is an example of how free software can exceed customers' wildest expectations. This engine is the most suitable solution for small projects. The platform is easy to install and configure. The engine is not demanding on server resources.
Using a huge number of modules, you can add almost any required functionality to your online store. Developers from the Russian-speaking community will help resolve any issues that may arise. If desired, you can use the built-in module installer. Initially, the platform was not focused on the CIS market. Now you can find assemblies with additional functionality.
The developers have updated payment and delivery methods and added various filters. The most popular assemblies include ocStore and MaxyStore. The client can always create his own version from the necessary add-ons. The user has access to the function of specifying keywords and meta tags for each product separately. Disadvantages include system freezes when there is a large number of products, as well as the high cost of many modules.
PrestaShop
The developers created this platform in 2007. The engine is suitable for small and medium-sized online stores. Just like OpenCart, the PrestaShop platform has impressive functionality. To work with Russian payment systems, you will have to add additional modules. The engine is absolutely not demanding on server resources.
In 2011, PrestaShop was voted the best free e-commerce platform. Unlike OpenCart, the engine does not have official developer support. Therefore, there are not as many additional modules as users would like. The basic version of the platform uses more resources than OpenCart. The cost of additional modules is much lower than in Magento.
UMI.CMS
The platform features a responsive design and cost-effectiveness. The client can choose the language to work with, set template themes, and track statistical information such as data based on the average bill.
WordPress
Continuing the topic of “the best CMS”, we should mention this engine. The platform is simple, understandable, but at the same time functional. No technical knowledge is required to operate the engine. Even professionals will be satisfied with the simple interface. Answers to your questions can be found in the instructions.
The platform was created for blogs, news resources and other portals where you need to quickly add information. Plugins to expand functionality can be purchased at an affordable price. The developers offer more than 10 additional components for creating an online store using the WordPress engine. The most popular is the WooCommerce plugin. It is very difficult to launch a full-fledged online store based on it.
You can add no more than 100 product cards that do not require updating. The platform is easy to learn. The system is suitable for beginners who have a blog on a WordPress website. Among the shortcomings, it should be noted the lack of integration with 1C, Russian payment systems and delivery services. After installing the plugin, a conflict with the template may occur.
NetCat
The platform provides the opportunity in a mobile version. Responsive design supported. The best CMS should have good functionality for search engine promotion and website integration with useful services. This engine meets all the requirements. The interface is intuitive.
The platform works with the 1C database and electronic payment systems. When working with the platform, there is no need to use complex technological solutions. The interface can be divided into two: for users and developers.
HostCMS
The engine is not demanding on hosting and servers. This platform is the best CMS for SEO. The user has options for creating short page addresses, specifying meta tags, etc. The engine works great with web resources with high traffic. The platform works with the 1C system.
The license cost is 6 thousand rubles. The client receives a fairly functional platform with the ability to expand functionality by installing additional modules.
CS-Cart
When choosing the best CMS, many users note the advantages of this engine. Software creators offer clients a wide range of tools. The platform is distinguished by its convenient organization of Internet marketing, good form of working with orders, SEO optimization of resources, integration with 1C and the Yandex.Market service. The user has access to options for creating adaptive design and simply adding material.
Amiro.CMS
This platform is called universal. The engine is suitable for creating professional resources of varying levels of complexity. The developers offer more than 60 additional modules that expand functionality. The user can launch a high-quality website of almost any type.
LPgenerator
An online web page generator is a great solution for beginners and experts. Using the engine, you can create a business card website or a small store. Some users simply add materials to present a product/service. Clients can take advantage of a convenient editor, as well as hundreds of templates in LPStore.
The user has options for connecting a new domain and synchronizing the site with useful services. If desired, the layouts can be redone. The developers also provide tools for SEO optimization.