Over the last few months I’ve been involved with testing different publishing tools to replace what we currently use for intranet content. This is for what we call formal, verified, content rather than collaborative, user generated content.
Using a set of user stories to explain business and users needs I could consistently assess each tool and compare with more confidence.
Now I’ve completed the testing I think:
For larger sites Oracle UCM could be a better choice than Confluence. It may be more complex but it has powerful site-wide control features. For smaller sites Oracle has said the set up and publisher training overheads require too much effort for the benefit to be gained.
For smaller sites WordPress could be a better choice than Confluence for its ease of use and rapid deployment advantages. WordPress has limited site-wide control features but these are less likely to be required on smaller sites. I feel WordPress’ more straightforward template control ability can overcome these.
I think Confluence is a good collaborative tool but maybe not the ideal choice for publishing formal content.
I’ve used some criteria for the size of a site. If any site meets the 5 points below then I believe it is more suited for WordPress. If it doesn’t then I think it is more suited for Oracle UCM:
- One site owner and ten or less publishers.
- Usage below 1 million views per month
- Would benefit from the use of RSS (incoming and outgoing)
- Initially below 200 pages until I see how the templates cope, then and I might increase this.
- Does not have complex requirements for third party access
I need to agree this with my colleagues in BT. It may be the recommendations are not affordable with the current economic climate. There are technical or security reasons for choosing a different solution.
Whatever happens, I’m sure BT will continue to use Confluence for collaborative content.