My personal, biased and completely unabashed opinion - if Radiant's not like 
Drupal, then everyone on the Radiant core team is definitely doing something 
right. I'd rather switch careers than make another go with Drupal. 

The way I look at it - Radiant gets out of my way and let's me get things done. 
That's all I need. 

Just my opinion. 

On Jun 26, 2010, at 2:24 PM, mgutz <> wrote:

> I'm trying to grasp what Radiant CMS is. I went through the demo. My
> initial impression is that Radiant a page management system more
> concerned with structure than content. In contrast, a CMS like Drupal
> is focused on content. That is the basic unit of management is content
> be it an artricle, product, blog entry, video clip, a recipe ...
> Radiant is focused on the developer who thinks in pages instead of the
> end user who thinks in types of content. The markup supports this.
> Most end users would be confused with liquid templates. In general,
> the Ruby CMS I researched do the same thing with their own twist. I
> wonder if any Ruby CMS will ever reach the status of Drupal because of
> the difference in approach. That is not to say Drupal is the ultimate
> CMS.
> There are times when I want to create a page in Drupal and life would
> be easier if Drupal behaved like Radiant. Is the lesson learned to not
> put everything in one admin and mix concerns? How about a separate
> admin area  for end users where, for example, a blog entry is nothing
> more than one or more paragraphs. The existing admin would be used by
> developers and designers to create layouts and page prototypes which
> can be selected by end users.
> Does this make sense at all?

Reply via email to