Methodology

So far as Flash CMS become more and more popular, we decided to compare the most reputed ones to bring out its features, strengths and weaknesses. Here we publish the results of our research. We have reduced the set of Flash CMS using several criteria:

• CMS works on-line¹
• CMS allows end-user to move and resize blocks on the site page²
• CMS allows user to make unlimited number of pages³
• CMS has a release version⁴

So the next four systems were chosen:

• Wix.com (SaaS)
• Yooba (SaaS)
• Fuzzle CMS (Installation)
• FlashMoto (Installation)

We compare CMS using 26 parameters divided into four categories:

• User functions
• Design development
• API for developers
• Other parameters – SEO, Google Analytics etc.

Marks

We estimate the parameters using two scales: +/- and 1–5.

• +/- scale was used in case where we can clearly say if the CMS has definite function or service. For example CMS has or does not have the “Catalog of components”
• 1–5 scale (1-the worst, 5-the best) was used when we observed a large number of small parameters, and we needed in some complex mark, estimating the set at all. For example, the “Base set of components” was evaluated using this scale, because each CMS has their own set of components, but the components can be evaluated at all using their number and complexity.

Rarely we use mark ?? when it was difficult to find any concrete information about definite characteristic.

¹ This condition excludes desktop programs like Adobe Flash, Aurora Flash, SWiSH etc.
² This condition excludes Silex, Royale CMS, Saffron CMS, fCMS etc.
³ This condition excludes XML-based systems like fCMS and others.
⁴ This condition excludes SpryFlash (now in beta) and some other systems.