Skip to page content or skip to Accesskey List.
Search evolt.org
evolt.org login: or register

Work

Main Page Content

Macromedia Introduces Content Management Tool

Rated 3.86 (Ratings: 6) (Add your rating)

Log in to add a comment
(14 comments so far)

Want more?

 
Picture of wb38

Bill Barrett

Member info | Full bio

User since: August 22, 2001

Last login: August 22, 2001

Articles written: 1

Macromedia has released a “technology preview” of Contribute, a client-side-only content management tool that allows web developers to maintain the control they need while providing content editors the freedom to make changes to web content without assistance. Contribute is an extremely simple-to-use, relatively robust, and inexpensive alternative to other costly or unwieldy content management systems.

How It Works

Contribute requires no server component; it uses FTP and saves utility files on the server (which adds a bit of clutter, but the tradeoffs may well be worth that inconvenience). All you have to do is install Contribute on an internet-enabled PC (or a Mac with OS X in early 2003), add sites (just as you would in an FTP application), and set up users for each site. An administrator can dole out privileges as lenient or as restrictive as necessary. Users then also install Contribute (which is being introduced at $99 per user) and gain their privileges by receiving a special file from the administrator with an encrypted password. (Users don’t ever see the FTP settings, so if you decommission a user, that user can’t reconnect to your site.) Once the users click on that special file and enter their password successfully, they can edit pages in a nicely refined browser-like user interface. Macromedia did a nice job here: on first use, I encountered no major usability obstacles.

Main Features

In fact, the smooth usability of its editing interface seems to be Contribute’s strongest feature, whether an edit involves only text or everything from links, images, and table content. Even in its most restrictive editing environment (viewable text only), Contribute will save web developers — especially those who work with one or many content editors — tons of time, since probably 85 percent or more of post-publish edits are textual. For an administrator, Contribute might be a better alternative for making quick edits than either connecting through FTP via an HTML editor or working offline and uploading a new file. Unpublished drafts can be saved and reviewed, too. With a single command, Contribute will conveniently generate a “please review” email with a direct link to the draft page. Contribute’s rollback capability (which saves up to three previous versions of a page) is a solid and welcome feature. What about database-generated content? Only static portions of the page show up in Contribute’s editing screen, and the underlying code is untouched.

Contribute can also allow editors to delete pages, change text styling, add or delete images, or add new pages based on templates (which are either existing pages or previously-defined templates). Though I haven’t yet had a chance to test these more advanced capabilities with actual content editors, it seems to me that they could work well with seasoned editors who have some sense of design and information architecture. However, I can see how too much editorial control over site architecture and design elements could cause disarray and inconsistency if pages are added or styles changed willy-nilly. Still, at least the options are there if administrators decide they want to use them.

A Big Score For Macromedia — and Web Developers

This kind of tool has been in the minds of developers for a long time, and Macromedia seems to have scored a major goal against its competitors. There is practically no barrier to the adoption of Contribute, except perhaps the cost if many licenses are needed. It’s a snap to administer and use. But the biggest win is that web developers will be unshackled from the requests of zealous, well-intentioned content editors who can drive us crazy. Conversely, content editors will be ever so happy to have a tool that is easy to use and empowers them to really “own” their content.

Bill Barrett is a web developer based in New York City.

similar to other stuff out there

Submitted by indiechild on November 12, 2002 - 07:23.

This reminds me of a product called "eZ publish desktop edition" that I've come across: http://shop.ez.no/trade/productview/25/2/

I'll be very interested and eager to see the final product from Macromedia.

login or register to post comments

very informative

Submitted by magic1 on November 12, 2002 - 08:51.

I am eager to try this out for myself. I am BAFFLED by the price though, how can they be selling a CMS at $99 per user?! I hope the final release will be similarly affordable.

login or register to post comments

FTP required on web server? This is secure?

Submitted by agraetz on November 12, 2002 - 16:35.

Am I understanding correctly that in order to make use of Contribute, you will need to have FTP set up on the web server?

login or register to post comments

What's wrong with FTP?

Submitted by indiechild on November 12, 2002 - 16:54.

Yes, from what I understand Contribute will work through FTP.

login or register to post comments

FTP is the only way Contribute will work

Submitted by wb38 on November 12, 2002 - 20:35.

Client installations interact with the server via FTP because there is no central server software. The only thing I can find from Macromedia about its security model is that Contribute "automatically adheres to all existing file server, website, and network security protocols." I guess for those who are not comfortable working with FTP or maintain sensitive information may not want to use Contribute. It could be used for intranet development, however.

login or register to post comments

What does this mean to the small developer?

Submitted by dshea on November 12, 2002 - 21:19.

I work for a small company that has developed its own content management software. While still immature and light in focus, I've seen it grow into something that is actually rather good.

Without even playing with a demo copy of Contribute though, I can tell it will offer more than we can, for much less than we charge. I don't expect this to break the company, but I do see it as a commoditization of the support and development necessary to keep a CMS competitive, especially with the name 'Macromedia' stamped on it. It's certainly a consideration for change of focus, to say the least.

More of my thoughts in a post I made earlier today: http://www.mezzoblue.com/ (11/12/02, 3pm)

login or register to post comments

A Couple Quick Answers from Macromedia

Submitted by ringosaurus on November 13, 2002 - 13:48.

Hi All, I'm the product manager for Macromedia, just wanted to drop in and answer a few questions. First, Contribute can transfer files via FTP or LAN connections...we've received a lot of requests for support of secure file transfer methods, and it's in the plan. The product really does cost $99 per user, baffling as that may be ;-). Regarding dshea's post, we believe that Contribute is part of the answer to the web content problem, but in some cases dynamic systems are required, for things like syndicated content, product catalogs, etc., and they are definitely required for true applications like shopping carts or comment apps like this one. We hope that Contribute will let firms focus on activities where design and development sophistication will provide more value to their client sites, true interactive applications as opposed to just using database-driven systems so content owners can make simple changes to their pages once in a while. Plus our beta customers have found that Contribute opens up entirely new opportunities and helps get their clients more involved in the websites they build...which is definitely better for business. I'll reply on mezzoblue as well. Cheers! -e Erik Larson Sr Product Manager Macromedia Contribute

login or register to post comments

Contribute at first glance

Submitted by wordsilk on November 13, 2002 - 17:48.

Easy updating has become quite an issue here as the number of active websites we build and manage has grown. Some clients want to be able to do their own content updating, and some want us to do it all. So I downloaded Contribute as soon as I got Macromedia's message and began kicking the tires. I managed to clean out a backlog of updates in short order -- there was a very flat learning curve to Contribute, which sold me on it, from a developer's perspective, right away. I suspect it will be easy for our clients to learn to use as well -- probably not so much for changing tables and images, but for the text content -- which is what most clients want to be able change anyway since most want nothing to do with changing anything remotely "technical." The price is a little on the steep side for most of our clients, however (most are micro businesses), for something they won't use every day, or even every week. And there is no incentive for us to push our clients to buy it and use it since it would remove a small but steady income stream for our business. Given the current state of the economy, we're busy but not exactly swamped. So, as a tool for saving us time and effort as developers, yep, we'll buy it. But as far as us promoting it to our clients -- give us an incentive.

login or register to post comments

Promoting to clients

Submitted by MartinB on November 14, 2002 - 08:25.

And there is no incentive for us to push our clients to buy it and use it since it would remove a small but steady income stream for our business.

Fair enough - it's your business and it's a reasonable income stream. But that won't be the case for everyone as many agencies find that content updates are high risk and (compared to development) low reward. What you may find is that Contribute - like most full-blown CMSs - lowers the skills required to update the site accurately. And if you can give the work to lower-skilled (therefore cheaper) staff, your margins improve. Plus you won't need to splash out on so many copies of DW, reducing your capital outlay.

login or register to post comments

Don't be fooled

Submitted by AlexQ on November 15, 2002 - 06:07.

While Contribute does seem a reasonably priced content management tool, don't be fooled by the comment in the article that it is an "inexpensive alternative to other costly or unwieldy content management systems". It is basically a glorified version of Dreamweaver with some permission management. After all a true content management system, separates the content layer from the presentation layer and doesn't ask authors to suddenly become designers.

login or register to post comments

Not a CMS?

Submitted by MartinB on November 15, 2002 - 06:49.

Alex, you're right. Contribute is not a CMS, but then again, I don't think Macromedia would claim that it is (actually, they explicitly don't).

However, some of the reasons why you'd consider a CMS - in particular distributed publishing by non-web skilled staff - are addressed by Contribute.

If you lock down the User permissions to style-based formatting (rather than allowing hard-coding font sizing and colours), enforce the accessibility options and lock down the editable regions of templates then you strongly mitigate the risk of users wanting to play designer and breaking the site.

It does what it does, it does it well (I'm particularly impressed with the Word/Excel integration), and the price point is right - assuming of course that non-US customers aren't discriminated against. If Macromedia have thought through integration with a range of standard CMSs and volume licensing, I would expect to see it popping up in increasing numbers of enterprise installations.

login or register to post comments

point of clarification

Submitted by wb38 on November 15, 2002 - 08:06.

Points well taken. I specifically used "content management tool" to avoid branding Contribute a CMS, which it most definitely isn't. MartinB is also right: it addresses many of the needs an organization might need without having to lay out the (very often prohibitive) cost of a true full-functioning CMS—which most likely would be overkill, at least in the many small- and medium-sized organizations I've been involved with.

I am indeed wary of the ability for content editors to become "designers," and that's why I will be cautious about what permissions I give as I test out the product with real content editors.

login or register to post comments

Awaiting the final product.

Submitted by haidary on November 20, 2002 - 18:55.

Does anyone else find this preview extremely slow? It was ok on DSL but when I tried connecting with it via 56k it took about 10-15 minutes to update a single page of text. Far to long to be practical for updating clients sites. Not to mention it crashed a few times too. Great, easy to use customizable interface, but I’ll definitely have to wait and see how the final product looks before I even mention it to my clients or peers.

login or register to post comments

New title, but old conception

Submitted by marry on January 15, 2008 - 08:54.

New title, but old conception, it is not fully new idea, many software in market can do the same, I had used some called <a href="http://www.softsea.com/review/KnowledgeTree-Document-Management-System.html" rel="nofollow">knowledgetree</a>, it can allow your organization to secure, share, track and manage its documents and etc. As I see, many of these software can work fine about this feature, it is old conception.

login or register to post comments

The access keys for this page are: ALT (Control on a Mac) plus:

evolt.orgEvolt.org is an all-volunteer resource for web developers made up of a discussion list, a browser archive, and member-submitted articles. This article is the property of its author, please do not redistribute or use elsewhere without checking with the author.