Contentful vs. Movable Type

Contentful is well suited for folks who want a simple, clean, easy-to-use interface for a JAVASCRIPT website. If you do not want a javascript website you should look [elsewhere].

Incentivized

Is your business an enterprise level business that has more than a half dozen different content types? If so, then you might want to use a dedicated CMS rather than Movable Type. Movable Type is best used on small / medium sized businesses and is not the best solution for a full-fledged CMS. If you're using your content for something other than just displaying a website, then it's probably not for you. Movable Type works great for news/blogging sites. In fact, Daring Fireball, one of the most popular Apple-centric blogs is using Movable Type as its publishing platform.

• Clean, modern interface (not clunky and outdated, like WordPress)
• High degree of flexibility (I can structure data any way my clients need)
• Enables headless frontend (i.e. I can build any frontend I want without having to change my CMS)

Incentivized

• Easy to use straight out of the box, very user friendly with an intuitive interface.
• Great for team use where there are multiple editors and writers fixing and editing each other's works. It's easy to track who last made the latest edits.
• Stellar support team and system. I've found that Moveable Type's support system is generally more responsive and helpful than WordPress.

Incentivized

• The new Contentful "branches" feature looked promising (it appears to mirror a git-like repository) but it requires the CLI, which isn't necessarily practical for teams that aren't current CLI users. It would be nice if the management of this feature were available via the UI (without that it causes more confusion than anything).
• The Contentful data modeling method makes for a bit of an awkward SDK developer experience in some strongly typed languages like Java. Most things that you might need can be accomplished, but it feels like the experience could be smoother.
• It would be nice if there were a way to migrate data between spaces (e.g. from your staging space to production).

Incentivized

• Especially on the older versions, the limited number of well-developed third-party plugins is problematic for efficiently developing a well-functioning website.
• Versions of movable type which didn't allow pages to be constructed were difficult to create continuity in design and easily editable pages for our editors.
• The installation process could be simplified to make it easier for those new to a CMS to install.

I think there are still improvements to be made. I haven't tapped in to the full functionality of the CMS yet but the rating I give it now is only based on what I've been able to use it for

Easy to use and much more organized as a single platform versus multi. The layout is clean and easy to read and we don’t have to worry about certain users safe guarding data or content then losing it when they leave the company. It’s a one stop shop for imagery

Incentivized

Movable Type can be compared to WordPress. It's easy to use, and I would say Movable Type is actually more user-friendly.

• There was no negative impact as such.
• Positive impact is increase in sales.
• More work is delivered due to reusability and other features within a time and less manual effort.

Incentivized

• Provided a blogging platform when we needed one.
• Helped us compare other blogging platforms as a baseline for what minimums we require and what we don't want.
• Users often refused to use Movable Type and would go around our official system in order to use my more friendly software.