A client-friendly CMS for static websites

get it
#3 Product of the DayFebruary 24, 2017




You need to become a Contributor to join the discussion - Find out how.
Stefano VernaMaker@steffoz · CEO @ DatoCMS
Hi guys, creator here. We started building DatoCMS as a side-project a year ago as Contentful was way too complicated for our web agency average brochure website client. We quietly launched the product 4 months ago: Since then we are getting steady signups and paying customers through organic traffic. Customer feedback has been an invaluable tool so far to route our development roadmap. Eager to receive some more feedback here!
Wasim Shaikh@wasim117 · Sr. UI Engineer, TNM Media Pvt Ltd
@steffoz Thanks. I have tried contentful but not fully used it. Will try this and provide feedback.
Jevin Sew@jevinsew · Rails / iOS developer
As someone who inherited a serverfull of brochure websites, I can fully appreciate what you guys are doing. Hosting thousands of badly coded (PHP 😵) websites on a server is just asking for trouble. Static websites are the way to go for smaller websites.
Stefano VernaMaker@steffoz · CEO @ DatoCMS
@jevinsew we're an agency ourselves.. so we definitely feel the pain :)
André J@eonpilot · Swift dev @ eon.codes
@jevinsew ...and for complex sites. Like healthcare.gov see: https://developmentseed.org/blog...
Andres Gutierrez@andresgutgon · FullStack developer at FactorialHR
Amazing produt. I better world is posible where non technical people can have a Wordpress admin experience and developers can work on plain-old-simple static sites. Awesome implementation
Stefano VernaMaker@steffoz · CEO @ DatoCMS
@andresgutgon thank you Andres! :)
Joshua Pinter@joshuapinter · Product at CNTRAL. Maker of ntwrk.
Really like what you're doing and offering a generous free tier no less. I was looking at using Forestry as well, care to comment on how the two might differ: https://forestry.io/ Many Thanks.
Stefano VernaMaker@steffoz · CEO @ DatoCMS
@joshuapinter the main difference is that Forestry is Git-based (that is, the actual content is stored as Markdown files within the repo), while we're API-based (the content is stored in a DB on our side and gets dumped as local Markdown files during build time). Obviously there are pros and cons with both the approaches.. with Git-based products there's less stuff to learn and you can start using them with existing static websites right away. With an API-based approach the content of your website, while being used during the build phase of the site to produce the static HTML files, can also be queried using client-side AJAX calls: this allows a whole set of new dynamic functionalities (ie. search pages), that would be otherwise impossible to achieve with static websites. Also, with an API-based approach, pretty much any present (and future) static website generator is compatible. You are also free to switch to a different static website generator at any time, simply editing the configuration files that map remote content to local Markdown files.
Joshua Pinter@joshuapinter · Product at CNTRAL. Maker of ntwrk.
@steffoz Interesting. Thanks for the in-depth response. Looks like the perfect combination of an approachable CMS mixed with the benefits of a static site. Great job. Will try it out for sure.
Filippo Mursia@mrdobelina · Digital PM @ Gabriela Hearst
It's always cool to see great Italian products. Daje!
Stefano VernaMaker@steffoz · CEO @ DatoCMS
@mrdobelina haha, grazie Filippo :)