When I started building websites many, many years ago (1999) the majority of small websites were what one would call static. By this I mean that the content needed to be updated by a webmaster who had access to the files on the web hosting server and updated them via FTP.
This was just a process, it was neither good nor bad but just the way it was.
Dynamic websites (by which I mean ones that retrieved and stored data from a database, now called website applications) generally served a vertical purpose around this time. For instance, I recall a client wanting their catalogue of products available online so their clients could have an electronic version. Usually the interaction between webmaster/site owner and the system was clunky, involved a lot of form filling and meant that the site was inherently inflexible.
The time and expense in creating dynamic websites was huge. Skilled people were in short supply and development was hampered by both inappropriate databases (I am thinking of Microsoft Access here) and immature database software especially in regard of concurrent users, security and connection methods.
However, venture capital was being poured into start-ups mostly in the US until inevitably the return could never match the expectation, could never support a sustainable business and the bubble burst (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot-com_bubble )
I digress.
However, there was one benefit; the internet was still small enough and hackers were rare which meant exploits were seldom found even in the most insecurely written applications.
Then in the early-mid 2000’s Content Management Systems started to make an appearance, their aim was to allow website updates without resorting to updating or replacing files via FTP and make this accessible to people who were closer to laymen than technical wizards and geeks.
Wordpress (on which over 25% of all websites live today are built on - https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=What+percentage+of+the+Internet+is+WordPress%3F&oq=What+percentage+of+the+Internet+is+WordPress ) was first launched in 2003 and there are multiple other platforms that compete with it (Joomla, Drupal, DNN etc - https://trends.builtwith.com/cms ). So the conclusion at this stage is that the world wanted and still wants Content Management Systems.
Personally and with my business I used Wordpress and Joomla both for various reasons as they had different functionality sets and different add-ons that I was interested in using. But, and this is a big but I very quickly got caught out on both platforms.
Both Wordpress and Joomla are open source, so anyone can freely download and use the platform. Fair enough and good. But both are based on an SQL database and use PHP as the scripting language. Again, both of which are open source and not really an issue (other than php being a rather restrictive language).
Come on Julian, what is the problem here? Well, put simply the problem is systematic of the very nature of open source software and the success of the platform. If you release the code that runs the website then experienced coders and more nefarious personnel (lets call them hackers from this point onwards) can inspect the code and find security issues that can be exploited.
The exploits can vary from deleting all the data on the website (so that is the website content) so SQL injecting additional content (usually in the form of links to sites you probably don’t want to visit) to distributing malware and viruses to visitors to the website that has been hacked or bringing down the server that is hosting the compromised site (and all others in the same server).
This risk is greatly reduced when the core system is kept up to date, but a huge proportion of self-installed Wordpress sites are not kept up to date (about 60% of all Wordpress sites are not up to date - https://w3techs.com/technologies/details/cm-wordpress/4/all ) and that is just the ones running version 4. That is a big, big problem…
However, I never fell in love with either platform, maybe because they were immature, maybe because I had sites that were hacked, maybe because I felt that I didn’t want to constantly look out for security issues or become some kind of open source CMS security expert.
But mostly I didn’t want to use it because I really thought I could deliver a better solution more suited to my clients needs that we could adapt, modify and improve as per their requirements.
I spent ages talking with Jake our lead developer, I managed to get a client to buy into the idea and off we went.
And so Right-Click CMS was born (for the sake on nomenclature we can call this CMS1 and it was named as such because you had to right click the area to edit). This was our first attempt at giving our clients the real ability to update the relevant content of their website with minimal training. I remember the first demonstration of an early version of the system where I was presenting to a team of 8 and after my 5 minute ‘this is how to use it’ I was met with ‘is that it?’ responses.
These were positive responses, no one could believe how easy we had made it for them, we knew that we were on the right track.
We soon dropped the right click functionality, preferring a navigate to what you want to edit, hover over the area and click an edit icon to edit approach.
CMS1 soon became CMS2 (mostly to do with the management of the sites). But after 5 years of making the system bigger, better and adding more and more functionality to it we were getting increasingly frustrated with PHP and its limitations. We also looked at the site builder market and though we could much better than some of the crap out there.
So, off we went again and build VitaminCMS – this was a much more modern CMS (it was also fronted by a ‘create your own site’ site builder, which was very cool) and introduced us to Node.js and Mongo (the database engine).
We ran out of steam, realised that we may have ran down a blind alley, mostly in the use of Mongo, and secondly because the marketing budget required to push the software to a wide market would have meant funding just for that, which would have resulted in a dilution of share capital and massive commitment on my behalf to commit to the project. Unfortunately, it just didn’t seem right. The solution was good, the software was good but within every software build decisions are made that you can’t undo and some of these can be wrong.
I feel it important to express that I never feel that we have wasted time if we throw a project away. Yes it has taken time, yes it has cost money, but if we are moving towards a better solution then so be it. Before you ask, I have of course heard of MVP, the trouble is can you easily define what the M and the VP really are when building a platform of the complexity of a CMS? Even if you can (and I have tried) you still end up with a pretty damn big piece of software!
So, stock was taken and many discussions were had to better plan the requirements, the technology (Jake takes the credit here) and the delivery path. I also found a client that was interested in what we were proposing which would help with some of the bills.
Jolojo has now been in development for a year (according to our internal billing system we first documented work starting on 7th of July 2016) and it is starting to knock the socks of any CMS I have ever seen.
I believe that a modern Web3 CMS system should have two hearts. Not quite human not quite octopus… So the first heart is there to pulse to the rhythm of Google. Specifically:
All of the above is focused on maximising what Google is wanting from the modern web, make it efficient, make if fast, make it accessible.
The second heart is the ability to use the tool intuitively with the minimum of training, with the minimum of options, with the minimum of complexity and yet deliver maximum power to enable you to publish and manage rich content that will engage your audience, sell your services and deliver real value from you main digital channel.
It is not The Grid (I will be writing about that soon), it is not AI (look, we have considered this, but AI is definitely the now future). It is your friendly CMS system with tools you can use.
Nope. The CMS is the start. What does a site manager NEED and WANT?
Add in a CRM system.
Well how about a CRM system that will automatically record enquiries and expand to allow multi-user access for full sales life-cycle management? Yes – in progress.
Add in SEO tools
How about monitoring changes your competitors make to their websites from within your website? Add in Google Analytics and Tag manager integration?
Add in Agency support tools
Got an issue, need a change, have a bug? Well why not just report it from within the website. No nasty ticketing systems, all fully traceable and designed to keep you informed and to solve your requirement quickly.
Become more than modern
Allowing integration with systems such as IFTTT and Microsoft Flow will enhance some automation tasks in future, more power to you!
There is far too much to discuss in such a small article! Suffice to say, that today as I write this the future is looking more than good. I believe that the work is not being wasted and I also believe that once we have the system live (first client sites are going live in August 2017) and polished (after that date…) we will start to compete with the likes of Wordpress as the de facto standard CMS system for the world!
Well, a man can dream?
If you would like to know how we are getting on, keep up to date with the new system or just want say hello, please contact me via the usual channels.
Find out more at www.jolojo.com