Robin Good has published an extensive (93 page) review of group blogging software. He very clearly identifies the features and functionality that is important to group blogging as well as several scenerios where group blogging is used. He clearly understands the field and is in a good position to make meaningful comparisons. His review of Drupal is mostly positive and his criticisms are, in my opinion, very just. It is also important to read his reviews of the other software presented to see what is being done better elsewhere.
Despite the fact that the prose section of the review is favorable, the numerical rating he gave Drupal in the end has it tied for last place, while software like Silkblogs, which had comments like the following, got more points:
- No plugin support
- No blog portal aggregation
- No approval workflow
- Poorly documented
It seems unfair, looking at the final points chart, that Robin gave Drupal zero points in the following categories:
- Simple multi-blog support
- Automated blog sign-up
- Archiving
- Blog aggregation
In fact, now that I think about the disparity between the prose section of the review and the points table at the end, I'm sure that these are mistakes.
What I take away from the review, as a Drupal developer and enthusiast, is this: our good work is being recognized and a person like Robin Good, with all of his technical skills, may well choose Drupal over the other software he reviewed. However, we have lots left to do if we want to be best-of-breed when it comes to useability and ease of configuration.
Thankfully, lots of smart people in the Drupal communitiy are working on precisely these things, so this analysis is not news.
The Drupal version reviewed appears to be a 4.5.x variety.
UPDATE
Here is the link to the story:
http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2005/05/16/group_and_multiuser_blog_p...
And here is a link to the PDF of the report:
http://fiskbooth.com/report-full.pdf
Comments
This is what is Robin says
Clearly the points table at the end is a mistake. Drupal would have easily been near the top of the list with these three extra points. His analysis of Drupal's archiving mechanism is also faulty (he simply says "N/A" and then gives Drupal zero points). Either Drupal doesn't need an archiving system (in which case it should at least get points for that) or it should be recognized that the archive module, once activated, does in fact provide this type of functionality.
Oh well. Maybe he'll update the review with a better points table.
- Robert Douglass
-----
http://www.hornroller.com/French_Horn_News
www.robshouse.net
more
there are more small errors, no ping functionality, no WYSIWYG editer or no tracebacks is simply wrong, 3 day stats on hits etc is not complete true (it's configurable).
No, this things smells indeed that the results and they party paying for it, are a bit too close. On (nearly) all the criteria 21publish scores (high). Hence, no criteria were added where 21publish would score bad (for example: opensource code available, free as in beer and speech, no google ads etc)
Just because it's format is PDF, doenst make it more true or less FUD.
I wouldnt like to step in this PDF ...
--
groets
bertb
--
groets
bert boerland
How independent?
Just who is this Robin Good?
The footer of the report says the review is independent.
The report is copyright 21Publish Inc.
The winner is 21Publish Inc.
What a surprise.
Let's see if we can make this guy reconsider.
Gunnar Langemark
http://www.langemark.com
This is what 21Publish says
- Robert Douglass
-----
http://www.hornroller.com/French_Horn_News
www.robshouse.net
I saw that too...
I saw that too...
Microsoft does the same thing.
Robin confirmed that the scoring is wrong
I contacted Robin Good and he confirmed that the scoring for Drupal was wrong and that immediate action was being taken to correct it.
- Robert Douglass
-----
http://www.hornroller.com/French_Horn_News
www.robshouse.net
my two cents.....drupal puts the com in community...
Interesting post Robert and interesting link.
I didn't read the full report, I just read the drupal review and the 12publish review and I came away from the document with a feelgood factor for choosing drupal as the way to go for community plumbing.
Just my humble opinion, but I don't see drupal as a blogging tool. I see drupal as putting the COM in COMMUNITY. The best tool on the web for enabling a non-techy person to build a scalable, vibrant onilne community.
In many respects, it could be described as "the community for community builders". Most of the positives the guy waxed lyrical about in the Drupal review were associated with the support, forum, documentation and add-ons. Which are all community maintained.
In the same breath taking those positives from drupal side by side with 12 publish knocks 21publish into the same realm as geocities and the other business models based on "irritable ads in return for free" - 21publish offers a free version, limited to 100 users, that has google ads (revenue goes to 21publish) forced on the installation.
The report in general and the final analysis table in particular is obviously loaded in favour of 21publish, but, I think it's a fundamentally flawed document.
Drupal shouldn't even be in the same report. If one was to list the features of drupal up against the same packages chosen for that report...the guy would have needed another 93 pages just to cover the sheer depth and scalability of drupal...
As a mini disclaimer: the above is just my independent opinion and drupal did not fund that opinion.
Dub
DUBLIN DRUPALLER
___________________________________________________
A drupal user by chance and a dubliner by sheer luck.
Using Drupal to help build Artist & Band web communities.
Currently in Switzerland working as an Application Developer with UBS Investment Bank...using Drupal 7 and lots of swiss chocolate
My score is wrong. Apologies
Thanks to your prompt comments and contact I have spotted something that I would have not been aware of otherwise.
The data in the final score are indeed incorrect for Drupal and I had personally overlooked the archiving feature. I honestly didn't see this module at the time of review. I just re-looked for it again after being alerted by your thread, and I found it this time.
The score for this item will be corrected at least to a 0.5 as after my initial review it appears as the feature is there indeed though quite limited in scope and with little built-in flexibility. From what I can gather it simply allows the ability to see previous posts, with no option of taking old posts offline, for example.
In any case, I am just now in the process of rechecking the data to make sure that by tomorrow these scores can be corrected and reposted online.
I wanted to make sure that this post reached you before you got too enraged with me.
I wish to say that you are comments are all welcome and to the point.
I am not offended by the negative phrases and I do take responsibility for my overlook.
I would also like to acknowledge that 21Publish had no influence whatsoever in my writing, editing or scoring of this report, as it was my required condition to them not to edit or change any of my evaluations in the final report.
Therefore all errors are mine and if I didn't verify the transcription of all my final scores to the final PDF that should also be my fault.
thanks
thanks for your prompt reply
just a couple of questions
1) who made up the criteria?
2) honestly - whoever made them up - never *never* ever thought about how 21p would rank with them?/ I know a bit about multi criteria analysis and statistics and investigations like these in general, and you would not win an academic reward with this PDF. It really smells like the criteria (and the lack of weight) were made up with 21p in mind. Whenever I advise a customer to use a tool for hosting or blogging, non of these criteria are relevant. Might differ per target adience but still. A big thumbs down here
3) Say 21p would rank as the lowest, would you still be able to publish the data? Really?
4) Would you mind to redo the test with some real data, criteria, weighting of criteria and score-ing? Would you mind to redo the test with knowlegde of all the used products present? I would like to help out for the drupal community.
--
groets
bertb
--
groets
bert boerland
That's nice Robin
That's nice Robin,
Good to see some qualified damage control here.
I'm afraid that the onslaught has left your trustworthyness a little shattered, but that is probably to be expected when you write such independent reports with what seems like a "fixed" outcome.
Good luck with your future clients....
BTW: Be sure to recheck your facts thoroughly - as You're being watched now..
;-)
Gunnar Langemark
http://www.langemark.com
Seems wrong up and down the line
In the review and comparison table, Robin seems to have missed a whole lot of things:
Of course, we live in a day and age now where "independent" means corporate funded. The US FDA drug tests are funded by the pharmaceuticals, and that is called "independent." Business as usual in the old-style economy.
.:| Laura • pingV |:.
_____ ____ ___ __ _ _
Laura Scott :: design » blog » tweet
perfect 10
following the (lack of) logic from the report and given enough knowlegde about the products used -as shown above-, I would say drupal would rank #1 with a perfect 10.
--
groets
bertb
--
groets
bert boerland
good points Laura..
I agree with everything you have posted...and to add to it, I tend to subscribe to the notion that it's guys like Robin Good who give journalism and the notion of "independent reviews" a bad name.
Fair enough, he has posted an apology on here and openly admits his unprofessionalism but ironically, perhaps, goes onto claim the review is still "independent"!!! despite one of the products being reviewed paying for the report.
I think most self-respecting reviewers/critics/journalists, even amateur hacks would cringe at the thought of calling a report about a product, paid by the product maker, independent..
It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall when he next meets 21p.... they are coming out of this looking very bad...
Dub
DUBLIN DRUPALLER
___________________________________________________
A drupal user by chance and a dubliner by sheer luck.
Using Drupal to help build Artist & Band web communities.
Currently in Switzerland working as an Application Developer with UBS Investment Bank...using Drupal 7 and lots of swiss chocolate
Score will be updated
I just wanted to add that I don't really care who financed this review. I found the prose part of the review to be highly accurate. Maybe every detail of what was written wasn't the absolute truth. Maybe there were factual errors. I attribute this to the daunting task of taking on seven pieces of unknown software and attempting to write about them at an expert level. It took me a long time to know all about Drupal's full feature set (I'm still learning, in fact), so I don't expect it to be different for Robin. Anyway, I read the whole report and learned a lot about how we compare to other software with similar functionality.
Here's an update from Robin about the scoring:
If he updates the scoring table, I think this will make Drupal rank #1, above the sponsor's software. Would everybody have complained so bitterly if this had been the initial result?
- Robert Douglass
-----
http://www.hornroller.com/French_Horn_News
www.robshouse.net
Better ;)
I think it is only natural that we get a bit angry when Drupal receives a low score: we know Drupal supports the criteria that were given 0 points. As for the other software, most of us don't know it well enough to judge it.
But I think the review is good and thorough. I read all of it, not just the Drupal parts. It was also very noticable to me that the scoring table at the end didn't seem to match the conclusions in the text.
--
If you have a problem, please search before posting a question.
some might argue..
you have a point Robert, but, some might argue that a 10 from Robin Good might mean just as much as 21P putting a big star on their boxes with a 9.5. in it...with very small text declaring "we paid someone to give us a 9.5!".
to answer your question. Obviously not. but the response from other drupallers is interesting and encouraging. Especially alongside the dries thread for contributions and ideas for the Drupal advert. there seems to be a depth and strength in the drupal community that goes above and beyond just "users".
To be frank, I too was okay with the text Robin Good wrote about drupal. but I took exception to the "independent report" stuff. I'm not naive enough to think that we're not surrounded by advertorial a lot of the time, dressed up as "independent" and some BS radars are better than others.
And in that context, do you think people will see a "10/10 from Robin Good" as a positive or negative?
Some might argue it might be better if drupal didn't appear in the 21p sponsored *cough* independent report on 21p and other products, at all.
just my humble opinion. and thanks for flagging it.
Dub
DUBLIN DRUPALLER
___________________________________________________
A drupal user by chance and a dubliner by sheer luck.
Using Drupal to help build Artist & Band web communities.
Currently in Switzerland working as an Application Developer with UBS Investment Bank...using Drupal 7 and lots of swiss chocolate
Quite OK
I'm quite satisfied with the corrected score.
I don't consider it a crime to sell reviews/reports for sponsors to use. I would not go as far as to call them "independent", but the consultant may be independent of any and all of his clients anyway.
His business however, is dependent on the perception of his ethics being untouchable.
I think the report is useful for those who want to compare Drupal capabilities to specific community blogging tools.
Regarding the interpretation of the data gathered I think it is fair to say that even though Drupal now gets the top spot it may not be the better tool to solve the problem. Sometimes the feature list is not what gets the job done. Sometimes a familiar interface is what does it for a client.
The critisism in the report about Drupal being too advanced for a non techie is not new to us, and the explanation offered - that Drupal is a very advanced and versatile tool - is very fair.
For chosing to review Drupal +1
For giving a fair review of Drupal +1
For being wrong in the scoring - 1
For correcting the error +0.5
For posing as independent -0.5
For insisting on it -0.5
Total score of Robin Good: +0.5
The criteria of this review are not subject to the scrutiny of the public as they are considered a business secret.
;-)
Gunnar Langemark
http://www.langemark.com
Drupal correct score is 10
from the link in the original post.
silverwing
www.misguidedthoughts.com
What is Blogging software? What is Drupal?
Come on, sure Drupal has that features, and many, many more.
But the fact is Drupal is not specifically a 'Blog platform'. You can do blogs or whatever, sure, but the trick is: You need to configure it. And the drawback is: yep, you need to configure it.
Drupal is -correct me if I'm wrong- is:
1. A General Purpose CMS.
2. A powerful CMS engine.
So, agreed the more you score in each cathegory the better, sure, but you wouldn't want to be classified as "Blogging software". And if you look at the report again, you may think "where is Mambo, or Xoops, or.... ? Aren't they good for blogging?
I mean good if we score a bit better. Bad if you ever hear: Drupal? Oh, yes, that blogging tool... I mean, yes, we have that and that feature. But we play in a different league, that is also to point out.
So, the big thing here was that Drupal has been considered for a comparison between blogging tools -yeah, that's 'general purpose' :-). But I wouldn't want it to score too much and I'd say it's even unfair that it scores too much because sure some of the other tools -which I dont know too much about- are just 'install and start blogging' and may not have some other options that can really confuse first time users.
I've already said somewhere else that if we want to go for other "markets" what we need are *distributions* -several pre-packaged Drupal's- and a big powerful configurable base.
But definitely, it cannot be everything-for-everyone so I think better dont try to be that.
https://reyero.net
Exactly
Exactly the fact that Drupal scores a 10 is why feature lists should never be trusted. The implementation of a particular feature is as important as its presence. Drupal can do group blogging but it is indeed not designed for that, so some assembly is required.
That is also why the report is 90+ pages long and not just one table ;).
--
If you have a problem, please search before posting a question.
mambo and xoops aren't
mambo and xoops aren't geared for blogging and really don't have good blog software. drupal is the only general-purpose CMS that i've seen built with blogging in mind. so really, mambo and xoops don't fit into the blog category even remotely. drupal does more so than the other CMSes do
Where is the report?
The link given here and on MasterNewMedia.org for the full PDF is returning a 404...
http://fiskbooth.com/report-full.pdf
Mirror
I mirrored it when I first saw it a few weeks ago, it does not have any updates that were made since May 18:
http://photomatt.net/dropbox/2005/05/report-full.pdf
Updated report available again
The revised and corrected report is now available again online.
http://fiskbooth.com/report-small.pdf
http://fiskbooth.com/report-full.pdf
The full version has 4,6MB instead of 1,7MB in the light version. Pictures are a bit lighter so for faster download it is advisable to point at the "small" version.
Thanks Robin
Thanks Robin. Your corrections are much appreciated and illustrate that you try to be both objective and accurate. All in all, this is a great report.
nope
"All in all, this is a great report."
No. A better score doesnt make this report any better.
Re-doing might be a good move for the drupal community, but what if another community stands up, disagrees with the scores, shows that they are wrong? Will the report be redone again? And again? Untill all parties are satisfied and have a "11" as score?
No, this report might be good to read to see what a "blog" is (if you want to read about this instead of experience it) but it is not a good way of comparing different products.
And it is not a good report IMHO.
--
groets
bertb
--
groets
bert boerland
Robin
Despite being sarcastic and such, I think it takes both curage and integrity to do what you just did.
Thanks.
Gunnar Langemark
http://www.langemark.com
fair play..
Just to echo what the others have said on here...and add that I too think it is very commendable that you have not only acknowledge the mistake but have addressed it as well.
Dub
DUBLIN DRUPALLER
___________________________________________________
A drupal user by chance and a dubliner by sheer luck.
Using Drupal to help build Artist & Band web communities.
Currently in Switzerland working as an Application Developer with UBS Investment Bank...using Drupal 7 and lots of swiss chocolate
Thanks for the info, this is
Thanks for the info, this is one of the more thorough resources i've found on this