Evoq Content Reviews & Product Details

Evoq Content (DNN as its known by for its open-source counterpart that it is based off of) is a very powerful open sourced CMS solution for anyone that is familiar with the .NET stack. Extending the framework through modules is straight forward, skin creation is relatively easy and aided through the use of skin objects, and a healthy user community base to reach out to for guidance or support. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Evoq has been becoming slightly more bloated over the years, and uses a lot of system resources on the server side even when idle. It can also be very chatty with the database. The development team has been working as of late to improve the performance and hogging of resources though. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like how easy it is to use. The interface looks good. Building skins is very easy. We are able to host an unlimited amount of portals. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Lots of bugs are constantly discovered and added to the product through upgrades. We have used it for many years and have never had a bug free experience. Features are often broken or not working correctly in every update. Their tech support is very responsive though. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The support that the online community and Microsoft offers is good. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Getting the site up and running, and then learning the back end interface is not as easy as other CMS systems such as Wordpress. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Other than the fact that it is a CMS, there isn't much to like. It is just better than hand-coding.

I suppose because you can add and edit content using their rich-text window, that's something to like. But when you compare it to other CMSs on the market vs the price, that rich-text entry and edit is just a barrier to entry in this segment. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

It is very hard to use, and features and capability are always behind the CMS pack, let alone the user interface. It is hard so say what I dislike the most because I dislike almost all of it. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The user interface and UX as a whole is easy to use, even from a beginner's level Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Some features have long loading times and require a lot of clicks to get to, but overall does not affect the experience much Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like the simplicity the best because it makes it incredibly easy to upgrade content. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I dislike the simplicity just as much if not more than I dislike it. The way it is set up does not allow for the use of certain modules that are not approved by their network. It also does not like to always save your work when you finish. Also, when copying and pasting from a word document into the website, it completely messes up the formatting making one go back and spend more time reformatting the text. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

1. Very modularized. Easy to build modules and deploy.

2. Most of enterprise CMS features are already built in.

3. Good for Dotnet based companies Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

1. Very hardware intensive.. does not work on most of the SHared hosting. Requires VPS hosting. Minimum startup RAM is 1500MB.

2. Steep learning curve

3. Would have been great if the text editor was more powerful Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Easy to switch to source code editor. Editor UI makes sense and is easy to understand. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Templates and modules can be cumbersome to work with, compared to other CMS. WYSIWYG editor is finicky. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

1) The ease with which I can make a custom type. I was previously making modules using Christoc, which was fine, but now I specify a content type and make it instantly in the cloud.

2) This is a truly headless CMS, though using it as such takes a bit of setup. By making API calls, I will be able to skip making visualizers and keep my content completely separate from having to make pages.

3) For when I do need to make pages, the visualizers are a nifty way of showing this content - they are using the Shopify Liquid Content templating system which is a fully featured (if at times slightly odd) templating engine.

4) The DNN support is amazing, so different from other CMS' I have used in the past. I have bothered these poor people with so many questions and they have always been great.

Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

These dislikes are temporary, solved by the product maturing to the stage where they allow unwashed peasants like myself into their content by direct API call.

1) Cost of being bleeding edge, I do not have an API key so I cannot use the EVOQ content without a visualizer right now. That ability drops with the 9.1.1 release, due out this week.

2) No inherent way to import content out of the gate. They have an import export tool coming but because of timing I will have to whip up something myself. When I get the key they have an example made with excel that I can use.

3) Minor gripe. I want objects to be able to reference themselves. As an example, if I was building a menu, I do not want a content type for level 1 another for level 2 etc - I want a content type menu-item which can have children of itself. Then I can easily build a menu. As I say, minor gripe but it has made me use the old DDRMenu module instead because I don't want a splattering of Content types for different menu levels. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

note: the likelihood of recommendation is dependent upon the size of the environment in question. I have a "leaning" towards DNN being more applicable to smaller, one node(web head), environments. A very capable content management system for smaller environments, for sure.

It's quite easy to manage modules and specific page content. I have to admit, from a systems administrative perspective, I do not manage the content as other departments do, however. I deploy code through DNN and perform basic operations through the DNN portal, in conjunction with deployments, but our marketing team is much more involved in day-to-day management of the DNN content. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

From my perspective and past experience, DNN management of a web farm of IIS servers is, to put it simply, a bit buggy. We have had, and still do have, consistent issues with having massive syncing between web heads after making small changes on the DNN portal. These result in negative customer experiences. To DNN supports credit, we have worked quite extensively on this issue, and I need to pick that case up again, as I set it aside some time ago to move onto other "fires". Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.