XP is very powerful and yet flexible. It is really fast, it scales. It's also a breeze to setup locally. That it is built and documented to be molded into your liking is something that helps us adopt it across a broad team of developers with different preferences. It's JavaScript core makes it just a matter of reading about the APIs to understand how things work. You can use the CMS for rendering, go hybrid (my preference), or all headless. The docs are solid and gets you up and running, the community is there to help. Enonic as a company feels more than willing to implement feature requests and bug fixes, its always been a very fast and pleasant communication with the core team. The core developers are active in the community, you get first-hand insights and advice. Frequent releases with each having a rather big impact for both editors and developers. A small but feature-full ecosystem, you'll find stuff on the market for most things you'll need. The Page Editor is nice, you edit parts of your page with drag-and-drop and editors love it. For developers the way you built apps feels solid, each file and folder has a meaning and you need to config next to nothing as long as you learn the structure. Enonic CLI is a great addition for developers. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

As all big platforms there's an overwhelming amount to understand and know about the platform to use it best. Feels like people tend to start using it in an odd way, making them gain less from the full potential. Docs can sometimes be too brief in some areas, or contain small errors that are hard to detect for the untrained eye. Getting expert developer help for longer times on the platform is very difficult. The Html-editor feels outdated where even Wordpress has been a smooth editing experience for many years, Content Studio's editor have very limited features in comparison. The Nashorn engine will be removed soon, it's been a pain point that everyone works around anyway. Also some long-missing features: you still can't do custom input types, custom html styles/classes in the editor, control where uploaded media goes, image handling is sub-optimal, can't schedule publishing of modified content, co-edit content. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.