Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tina is not a CMS

tinacms.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 58 posts

Re: Tina is not a CMS

#21

Post by jpatters »

r_singh wrote: post #6

I'm currently using Netlify CMS on my Gatsby site for the blog bit. Any reason I should switch to this?

Tina is designed to give editors the live editing experience they want (similar to a site builder like squarespace) while developers maintain control over the project. NetlifyCMS is missing the former. They have their preview templates but it is not an exact representation and requires extra work from the developer.

Tina is also designed so that you can create the editing experience that your customers/clients/coworkers need. Instead of a one-size-fits-all solution, you can give them something that is tailored to their needs.

As well, at the moment Tina only works with git (similar to NetlifyCMS) but we are working on other data source plugins as well (think Contentful, Headless Wordpress, etc).

Re: Tina is not a CMS

#23

Post by netsharc »

mistersquid wrote: post #16
hapidjus wrote: post #3

Napoleon Dynamite reference?

At risk of stating the obvious, "TinaCMS" is a recursive acronym similar to GNU. This doesn't necessarily prevent "Tina" from having another referent except then "TinaCMS" wouldn't a recursive acronym.

Interesting.. it works for every letter does it not? [_]ina[category]?

For 2 random examples.. LinaPhone, UinaBag

Re: Tina is not a CMS

#24

Post by puranjay »

andretti1977 wrote: post #10

I love static sites and made some using Hugo. A year later i've started working with WordPress and its ugly/nice (it depends) Gutenberg editor and to be honest, having a look at the quality (yes, there are a lot of excellent plugins and a lot of bad ones) and the availabilty of plugins,i think WordPress is the only platform to go for business oriented websites where seo, caching and other things matters a lot. I've b…

I agree. The one problem is that static sites are uniformly faster than even the best configured WordPress installation. I've found that the extra fast loading time can make a difference in conversions.

Re: Tina is not a CMS

#25

Post by dageshi »

stickfigure wrote: post #17
andretti1977 wrote: post #10

I love static sites and made some using Hugo. A year later i've started working with WordPress and its ugly/nice (it depends) Gutenberg editor and to be honest, having a look at the quality (yes, there are a lot of excellent plugins and a lot of bad ones) and the availabilty of plugins,i think WordPress is the only platform to go for business oriented websites where seo, caching and other things matters a lot. I've b…

A few years ago I did some emergency consulting for a friend whose WordPress site had been hacked. Moving it (to cloud hosted WP) wasn't just "back up the database, restore it" but also copying a dizzying array of files haphazardly strewn across the local filesystem. Performance was atrocious no matter the hardware. Even if the core is (finally?) reasonably secure, installing plugins is like playing Russian roulette.…

"I bought this cheap car, ran it for 20 years without any maintenance and suddenly it's falling apart, I blame the car."

Wordpress unless it's very conservatively configured needs a mechanic every so often.

And before the inevitable question is asked "Why use it in the first place, why not just use X", it's because wordpress is the easiest thing to build out while being user friendly to edit and being flexible enough to add extra functionality too.

Sites rarely stay the same, clients always want random 10-20% of business specific functionality tacked on and they don't know what that looks like till potentially years after the site is built. With wordpress you can typically always add that extra functionality on without rebuilding the site in something new, that's why it's so massively popular.

Re: Tina is not a CMS

#26

Post by ahbyb »

puranjay wrote: post #24
andretti1977 wrote: post #10

I love static sites and made some using Hugo. A year later i've started working with WordPress and its ugly/nice (it depends) Gutenberg editor and to be honest, having a look at the quality (yes, there are a lot of excellent plugins and a lot of bad ones) and the availabilty of plugins,i think WordPress is the only platform to go for business oriented websites where seo, caching and other things matters a lot. I've b…

I agree. The one problem is that static sites are uniformly faster than even the best configured WordPress installation. I've found that the extra fast loading time can make a difference in conversions.

"WP Super Cache" by the creators of WordPress can make any WordPress website as fast as a static website. When properly configured, it will be nginx serving html files.

Re: Tina is not a CMS

#27

Post by auxym »

netsharc wrote: post #23
mistersquid wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At risk of stating the obvious, "TinaCMS" is a recursive acronym similar to GNU. This doesn't necessarily prevent "Tina" from having another referent except then "TinaCMS" wouldn't a recursive acronym.

Interesting.. it works for every letter does it not? [_]ina[category]? For 2 random examples.. LinaPhone, UinaBag

LAME: LAME ain't an MP3 encoder

Re: Tina is not a CMS

#28

Post by amelius »

glaberficken wrote: post #20

>"using a CMS feels more like filing your taxes than editing a website" Loved this quote. I've recently realized this when trying to get a family member (millennial generation) to understand how to edit the simple website she had created using wordpress.

To add a bit of realism: there may be a time when you wish to add something that was not foreseen by the creators, and then you're back at filling tax forms again. It might even be worse because there's no big community yet to provide help. Every CMS out there started with the goal to make things simple, so why should it be different this time?

Re: Tina is not a CMS

#30

Post by codegeek »

andretti1977 wrote: post #10

I love static sites and made some using Hugo. A year later i've started working with WordPress and its ugly/nice (it depends) Gutenberg editor and to be honest, having a look at the quality (yes, there are a lot of excellent plugins and a lot of bad ones) and the availabilty of plugins,i think WordPress is the only platform to go for business oriented websites where seo, caching and other things matters a lot. I've b…

So much this. We work with WordPress where our non tech savvy cllients have to build a lot of content using page builders. I wish there was an easy way to auto deploy most of the content as static while keeping the power of CMS capability. We either have very User oriented CMSs including WordPress or developer oriented tools like Gatsby/gridsome etc. Sorry but my B2B client is not going to run a "gatsby build" on every new page or post creation.

The sweet spot worth billions would be WordPress type.CMS that auto deploys static content while keeping dynamic features as needed. Caching plugins are just too cumbersome even though they are an option.

Post reply on HN