Paligo, headquartered in Stockholm, offers their component content management system (CCMS), supporting the creation and publishing of technical documentation and help systems.
$4,800
per year
RWS Tridion Sites
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
RWS Tridion Sites provides web content management capabilities, connecting people, processes, and information across teams, brands, and markets, to deliver impactful online experiences globally. RWS Tridion Sites' DPX platform enables the use of either traditional or headless publishing. It includes advanced features such as automated personalization, multilingual capabilities and Semantic AI. The BluePrinting® technology at the core of RWS Tridion Sites simplifies reuse and…
I was working with 10+ CMS:es (list here is not possible choose them from) “all my active work life” and Paligo GUI is unique: No or very few systems of this complexity have a rational GUI. Paligo stands out here and is very user friendly! When it comes to style sheets and …
Paligo gives you the benefits of a fully integrated XML content database, making the whole package much easier to setup and use than a system using Oxygen. It's much easier to set up and far less expensive than Adobe's XML offerings. The cost is comparable to MadCap, but all …
I was not part of the selection process / did not evaluate other tools. I had previously been authoring my content in Google Suite or directly in our Learning Management System. Both of those were hells of information duplication.
We were using our own, custom management scheme - relying on tools like Sharepoint to store and collaboratively edit. But we were lacking the reusability feature and content control features that Paligo provides.
Compared to Author-It, Paligo is a godsend. It's so much more performant, the output quality is much higher, and the user experience is unmatched. Before we switched to Paligo, I had to spend multiple working days just fixing the broken output that Author-It has given me, …
We moved from Flare to Paligo. One of the main reasons was the fact that Paligo is a cloud product. Collaboration with anyone outside of our team was more difficult with Flare. Also, maintaining a server for Flare content was going to become an issue, and overall I felt the …
They are both good documentation options, but the cloud-native capabilities and intuitive UI of Paligo, plus it's ability to produce excellent output for both PDF and HTML5 were the main reasons I chose Paligo. I am very satisfied with my choice.
We selected Paligo over the alternatives for a variety of reasons: It was cloud-based (usable on a Mac) It had the features we needed: Content reuse Variables Easy restructuring and maneuverability of content
Better Support than any of the others; Ability to migrate at cost (unlike AIT and Flare); Teamwork and centralized variables (unlike Word, Google Docs, FM); Diff and Revert (must-have feature); L10N features (better than all others).
I trialed a version of Oxygen XML editor, but the fact that Paligo is cloud-based and integrates directly to Zendesk sold me, even though Oxygen XML is essentially the de facto standard for most structured authoring.
Interwoven teamsites, Documentum, Adobe - teamsites and documentum are old and limited. Adobe rocks but I like where I am and Tridion does a lot of the same things. No need to reinvent the wheel or move to a lateral product.
It is a nuclear missile compared to the other handguns and knives on the market today. But it also requires nuclear technicians and expertise that a handgun doesn't require. Do you need to decimate your competition and you have the investment capabilities necessary to put a …
Tridion is much better for multi-site installations, though Sitecore is a bit easier for content editors to know content types are being used based on visual icon indicators. We've had content editors pick the wrong templates by accident, but Sitecore's visual indicator …
Adobe CQ is SDL Tridion main competitor. Sitecore is designed for smaller companys. Adobe CQ is all java and thus has limitations. Sitecore is also all .net and has limitations. Both use a dynamic model and everything is compiled at runtime. SDL Tridion can be published in a …
Tridion again seemed to be more enterprise level then EpiServer, EpiServer allowed for faster ramp up time of a intuitive .NET framework, but Tridion seemed to have more tools and overall functionality once the CMS was customized towards the needs of the customer.
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
I did not play a role in selecting this product so I can't say how it stacked up. I do know that Tridion is an improvement over the last CMS.
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
I feel that SDL Tridion's User Interface is to difficult for content authors to understand. I worked with a client that used Tridion for years and she still would get lost in the UI and had to ask questions. There was close to 30% of continual time spent on the project simply …
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
SDL Tridion is far superior to CommonSpot. It is much more user friendly and increases efficiency.
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
I believe the biggest selling factor for SDL was its customer service and it ability to be responsive. We knew that it was a company that was going to be around for a long time and would continue to provide the support that we would need in the long term.
Tridion's strength is really hosting multiple websites across development, test stage and production.
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
The decision to purchase Tridion was made at a corporate level removed from the technical teams. Against our previous open source solution, this has been wildly expensive, impossible to find experienced developers for, and has required completely retooling our organization.
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
SDL has a better API and also handles high server load much better. Also, the built-in integrations for translations are more suited for performing lots of translations for many sites. However, Umbraco, like Tridion, has a great community and finding solutions with both …
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
We didn't chose WordPress because can't handle the traffic we generate. Sitecore is what we are currently looking at and it looks like a much better alternative to Tridion.
Adobe does a great job in managing sites. Its user interface for authors is intuitive and leaps and bounds better than SDL Tridions new 2013 UI. The ease of install and management makes Adobe CQ a much better product. However, Adobe CQ (AEM) has limitations. It cannot scale as …
Features
Paligo
RWS Tridion Sites
Security
Comparison of Security features of Product A and Product B
Paligo
-
Ratings
RWS Tridion Sites
9.0
Ratings
11% above category average
Role-based user permissions
00 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Platform & Infrastructure
Comparison of Platform & Infrastructure features of Product A and Product B
Paligo
-
Ratings
RWS Tridion Sites
9.1
Ratings
18% above category average
API
00 Ratings
8.30 Ratings
Internationalization / multi-language
00 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Web Content Creation
Comparison of Web Content Creation features of Product A and Product B
Paligo
-
Ratings
RWS Tridion Sites
8.5
Ratings
10% above category average
WYSIWYG editor
00 Ratings
8.00 Ratings
Code quality / cleanliness
00 Ratings
8.00 Ratings
Admin section
00 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Page templates
00 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Library of website themes
00 Ratings
8.20 Ratings
Mobile optimization / responsive design
00 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Publishing workflow
00 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Form generator
00 Ratings
8.30 Ratings
Web Content Management
Comparison of Web Content Management features of Product A and Product B
Paligo is particularly well suited for developing similar document sets for multiple products or product lines. It is not a page layout application, so don't expect the same capabilities as popular applications for graphics-heavy documentation. With some up-front time developing good layouts, however, Paligo does manage to create very usable PDF output for customer-facing documents.
SDL Tridion works well for organizations with a large website with a lot of content to continuously create and manage. The use of page templates and component presentations makes creating new pages fairly straightforward. It can be a little cumbersome when it comes to trying to "break from the norm" and build web pages that are outside of the template-driven format; however, there are ways around this to create pages that break away from the normal page-template format of the website. In this regard, SDL Tridion can be pretty flexible, allowing us to create a lot of custom functionality to keep up with constantly changing web trends.
The review mode is super convenient. Comparing a snapshot of the previous versions with the current one clearly outlines the respective changes and reduces the necessary content to review tremendously.
The option to reuse text fragments is another handy feature. Text fragments will be updated whenever the original text fragment is altered is also extremely helpful.
Managing a content's structure was never easier. An intuitive drag & drop functionality allows you to design your document's structure however you like.
You can also fork content, in addition to reuse text fragments. This is another helpful option that no longer requires you to create repetetive chapters over and over.
The amount of CSS/JS required to customize a site's appearance can be cumbersome
Product documentation can be lacking, specifically with integrations; in some cases, support offered no real help when trying to solve a problem with an integrated service
Some features require extensive development experience to use, which can sometimes be an obstacle to less-experienced team members
If you are hoping to orbit the planet with a CMS, Tridion is built to leave the solar system. It is a very very powerful solution built for very serious enterprise businesses in hope of robust capabilities, which could be good or bad.
Supporting business users is a hefty lift and requires significant training and regular retraining, and support.
It's a niche solution that originally came out of Europe and was largely unknown in America. But today it's growing in popularity across the United States.
Finding capable support, and developers specializing in Tridion capabilities isn't always easy. And 8 years ago it was nearly impossible, involving finding European developer support shops in order to get the assistance needed. This is changing though and American developer firms are becoming more widely available.
I am giving this a semi-high rating because we have already got Tridion up and running and we are still in the process of moving the sites over to Tridion. It is unlikely we will be moving things to a new CMS AGAIN in the near future as the cost to get Tridion was high.
Generally, I'm very happy with Paligo and the productivity gains that I get from using it. There are a few arbitrary limitations on structure, and when applying conditional formatting, that I don't really understand. Unlinking / editing reused text uses this broadly inscrutible colour-coding that I just hate. It would be nice to double-click a component, make edits, then respond to a popup asking if I want to confirm the edit for all linked content, or unlink this instance. Likewise converting from an informal topic insertion to duplicates of its raw contents.
The editor user interface is very user friendly and in-site editing makes simple updates fast and easy. The extensibility of Tridion is a big plus and the ability to add our own options into the default Tridion interface helps us integrate with external systems. Finally, the user permissions and security system helps us deploy it within our large organization.
So far, support has been excellent. They reply very quickly and give in-depth replies. Solutions advisors and account managers have also been very responsive and clearly focused on creating the best experience for implementation. And that's only when the answers can't be found in excellent product documentation. The online training class and tutorials are also very good.
Paligo gives you the benefits of a fully integrated XML content database, making the whole package much easier to setup and use than a system using Oxygen. It's much easier to set up and far less expensive than Adobe's XML offerings. The cost is comparable to MadCap, but all our content was already in Docbook, so the transition to Paligo was nearly seamless.
Interwoven teamsites, Documentum, Adobe - teamsites and documentum are old and limited. Adobe rocks but I like where I am and Tridion does a lot of the same things. No need to reinvent the wheel or move to a lateral product.
Positive - has allowed us to create templates for integration documentation. this has greatly sped up our process for creating articles for each of our integrations, which we haven't had up to this point.
Positive - has created greater alignment between the self-service content team and the marketing team.
Positive - has introduced a review and feedback workflow for our content creation that was not available in ZenDesk. The feedback directly in the app allows me to pinpoint comments about text and other elements so my writers can address them directly and become better writers in the long term.
Negative - long ramp up time due to a completely different approach to creating content. My team was training in early August and we have not yet published our new help center (though, to be fair, it is a lot of content that had to be completely rewritten)
Positive - any UI updates only require updating a single image, which has saved us dozens of hours of updating already.