OpenSourceCMS is ad supported. The above banners are not included in the official download.
If this demo is broken use the form below and we'll send you a link to re-install the Website Baker demo. We do not save your email address.

Your Email Address:
Thank you. You have been emailed. Check your inbox for instructions on how to proceed.
3123 votes cast

Contact OpenSourceCMS.com
Problems? Praises? Questions? Concerns? Let us know. Provide an email address if you want a response.
Your Name:
Your Email Address:
Your Comment:
 
Thank you for your email.
Website Baker Comments
post your comment
Posted By: Klaus on July 27 2014 06:15 pm
When I startetd woriking with CMS few years ago I was looking for a system for medium pages. Important to me was a system which is easy to learn for me (some PHP-Knowledge and only experience with static pages up to than), design-oriented (so a customer can design the content and severeal sidebars per page) and easy to handle for the customer. I compared different systems and I ended up at Websitbaker. Up to lnow I managed a lot projects with this system. And also I am as an interested user was looking if there are some alternatives I came back to Websitebaker every time. Today I am not only working on medium projects with this system but built big international webpages too with it. The way I'm excited up to today of this CMS I can only say: try it out. It's worth.
Posted By: John B on May 5 2013 03:24 am
Over the past five or six years, I've developed many client sites and during that time tried most of the large CMS[s (Joomla, Mambo, Wordpress, Drupal, CMS Simple, etc.). I would say Website Baker is the easiest CMS to learn and implement. I can install it on a server in less than five minutes and have a website up and running in a few hours.

First, it's structure of pages and blocks of data is very intuitive and easy to understand. There a lots of templates available which can be quickly modified to fit your client's needs. If you're creating commercial websites for clients you will find Website Baker straight forward in terms of creating content and once developed, the client can easily do their own updates. In circumstances where there's a unique requirement, I can usually find a module that extends the core cms functions to accommodate my clients needs. If you're the least bit proficient in PHP you can create your own program and use the "Wrapper" page type to incorporate your own unique solution into your website. Also modifying templates is really easy.

I believe Website Baker is the best all around solution to most website development. I don't do blogs so if you're developing a blog, Wordpress might be a better for this one type of website.
Posted By: Peter on February 24 2013 05:40 am
Very easy to use and extremly easy to learn. I made two projects up to now with it and will go on. Great job guys. I like it very much.
Posted By: Sim Kamsan on October 30 2012 06:09 am
Website Baker is the best for me. I use it from my website project clients in Cambodia. It easy to customize template with easy back-end manage site. So I recommend for all CMS user.
Posted By: Gregg DesElms on July 19 2012 11:26 am
NOTE: As I get ready to post this long -- but necessarily so -- comment, I am remembering that this web site's comment section has a nasty habit of sometimes inserting line breaks where they don't belong. So if my below is weirdly broken-up, it's not, trust me, the way I typed it. Anway, to my post...


Back in September of 2011, I posted, here, a response to "alex" who suggested that anyone "annoyed of the slow progress of WebsiteBaker Development and the harsh sound in the Forum" should check-out Website Baker's fork, the LEPTON CMS. So, what the heck, I did...

...and the first thing I noticed was that LEPTON hid the fact that it was a Website Baker fork... didn't mention it on a single page of its site. And that struck me as disingenuous. So my September 2011 posting, here, really took LEPTON to task for it; and I recommended, in fact, that no one use LEPTON because of its bad behavior.

Two months later, in November of 2011, someone named "Kurt" (whom I suspect is -- or at least was -- somehow connected with the LEPTON CMS... more on that in a moment) posted here suggesting that it was "nonsense" that LEPTON's web site didn't fess-up to that it was a Website Baker fork; that the front page of the LEPTON site, and two other pages on it, all acknowledged that LEPTON derived from Website Baker. He then chastised me, writing: "You should open up your eyes before you post something like you did," followed by an equally disingenuous smiley face, as if that could somehow soften the criticism.

I'm no child. In september of 2011 I had just turned 55 years old, and had been in IT for over 35 years. I'm a programmer. I used to be a newspaper reporter. I've run big companies. I've written legislation and have testified before House, Senate and Assembly committees. As a management consultant, I analyze entire companies and write hundeds-of-pages-long reports, chock full of mind-numbing (but nevertheless dead-on accurate) details. And I'm even kinda' almost a tiny bit smart. I'm certainly, in any case, careful; and there's nothing wrong with my eyes. Trust me, then: As of my writing, here, in September of 2011, no admission of being a fork of Website Baker was anywhere on any page of the LEPTON website. Nowhere. Period.

Obviously, someone from LEPTON read what I wrote, here, and then went back and added the Website Baker fork acknowledgement/admission to the LEPTON site. There was certainly plenty of time to so do between my criticism of LEPTON for not having so done in September of 2011, and Kurt's accusing me of making so glaring (and ridiculous) an error in his two-months-later posting, here, in November of that same year. In two months, LEPTON's entire web site, in fact, could have been rebuilt.

If what happened was that the first time Kurt ever looked at the LEPTON site was in November, and so the acknowledgement had by-then been posted there, then I ask him to consider the possiblity that it wasn't there when I first posted, but got added later BECAUSE of it; that I'm not an idiot; that nothing was (or is, even now) wrong with my eyes or my ability to open them.

On the other hand, if Kurt is (or at least was, back then) somehow connected with LEPTON, and was somehow involved in adding the Website Baker fork acknowledgement to those three pages of the LEPTON site; and, that having by then been done, if he then he came here and pretended that it had always been there, and that I was just a buffoon for not noticing, then to Kurt I say: Please don't pee on our legs and then tell us it's raining.

That the LEPTON site now acknowledges that its product is a fork of Website Baker is wonderful. That it didn't so acknowledge as of September of 2011, and had to be told, here, how wrong that was in order for the pressure of that to make it finally fess-up and do the right thing is sad. However, having one of LEPTON's minions come in here and accuse me of making it up is downright shameful...

...er... I mean... you know... if that's, in fact, what Kurt both was and did. Again, if he's just an end-user like most others around here, and he simply noticed when he visited the LEPTON site in November that it did, indeed, acknowledge its Website Baker base, and so came back her to chastise me for saying that it didn't without stopping to consider that someone at LEPTON had changed it in the intervening two months, then, fine. He obviously, in that case, made a mistake, I guess. People do that... even me.

But I'll tell you what makes me suspect that ol' Kurt is (or at least was, at the time), indeed, somehow connected with the LEPTON site, and that's the final words of his November posting, to wit: "...is it really important what the base of LEPTON is? Is it good for joomla that it is based on mambo or the other way round?"

Back to the peeing on our legs thing: Some questions, in life, aren't really questions; rather, they're really statements, but with question marks forced at their ends. And such questions, in contexts such as this one, nearly never come from mere innocent bystanders. Rather, they tend to only come from those with skin in the game, somehow.

And the answers to those questions, in order, are "yes," and "no."

Yes it really is important for the user of a product that's forked from another product to know what said other product is/was. And the reasons, c'mon, should be so glaringly self-evident that I shouldn't even have to enumerate them, here. Plus, I kinda' already did that in my September 2011 posting.

However, the answer to precisely how Kurt asked that second question is "no" because whether or not it's "good for joomla" that it's based on Mambo (or even the other way around) is irrelevant to the point I'm trying to make; and so the answer to precisely how Kurt worded his second question is, necessarily, categorically "no." But the fact that Kurt worded the question that way shows that he has no concept or understanding of the importance of things like transparency, and full disclosure... the end-user's right to know what is the breeding of the product s/he's being asked to use. That's the issue.

It matters not, for our purposes, here, whether Joomla's "better" because it came from Mambo. Rather, what matters is THAT it came from Mambo.

It's a full disclosure sort of thing; a transparency sort of thing; a "the user being fully advised in the premises" sort of thing. Mambo is part of Joomla's heritage, and the potential user of it has a right to know it; and to make his/her determination about whether or not s/he even wants to use it based, in part, on that information. That's the very thing that full disclosure and transparency are about.

If LEPTON is good (and I have no idea whether or not it is... but I'm just saying that IF it is), then at least PART of the reason is because of its Website Baker heritage; and I'll even go one step further and add that if LEPTON's bad, then it's because it squandered said heritage. LEPTON's not, in any case, fully disclosing said heritage deprived Website Baker's developers of credit where credit was rightfully due... possibly even illegally, pursuant to what I suspect was Website Baker's licensing agreement.

Those of us who have written commercial software in life, only to see our code hijacked by some bona fide thief, and then put into a copycat product with someone else's name on it, recognize LEPTON's at least initial behavior in all this as the very sort of thing that such thieves do.

That Kurt has to have the wrongness of that both called to his attention, and then explained to him, is a pity, indeed.

_____________________________
Gregg L. DesElms
Napa, California USA
gregg at greggdeselms dot com
Posted By: Apple on June 25 2012 06:45 pm
I agreed with last comment. I dont really understand why this CMS has low rating. It is by far the simplest and best CMS I have used so far. I have tried others and they tend to be quite complex and harder to customise. Designing template is so easy and flexible with WB. It is ideal for web designer or granny learning CMS and developer to write sophisticated plugin!
Posted By: Knert on May 21 2012 01:27 pm
Working and testing all kinds of CMS since 2004. (Drupal, Joomla, CMSMS, Lemon, Typo3, Wordpress you name it) And I don't understand the low rating of WB. This is by far the best working CMS on the market. Not only for webdesigners but (more important) for end users it's a new world of simplicity once they met the admin.

As a webdesigner you can build custom templates and insert WB with both eyes closed. It's easy, fast and reliable. Over 160 websites with WB (small companies to big international ones) and no sweat at all.

Keep up the good work.
Posted By: Rose on May 7 2012 11:24 am
WB 2.8.3 - our first choice. With WB we like to work - we can create our own Templates - sometimes special moduls - it depends on demands/wishes of our customers. Time for developing websites - even with special demands is much lower as with other CMS. We tried of course other cms...
So we decided working with WB also in future. Only one customer works with typo 3 - costs has been at least 7 x more..Reason for typo3 was only the wellknown of this system and recommandation of one programmer. At least: now there are always problems with working because system is to complicated.
Special changes costs a lot. For new projects the customer wish now WB!
Posted By: X-Rayden on March 2 2012 04:33 am
Love to dev on WB.

Been on it as a web dev from v.2.6

I've done more than 100 sites with it, some very big (millions of views/moth) and some very small.

Main problem is core unicity. There is no rounded easy code definition and it may be messed up sometime. Plus no hooks/listener so you need to allmost implement all in the template, but who cares? that's the EASIEST of template convertion system in any cms today. And we've done sites in Joomla/Drupal/Xoops/Wordpress and othe less knowed CMS.

btw: the new FTAN security sucks for developpers, but most user wont get the "security offence" red box.
Posted By: Martino B on February 26 2012 03:27 pm
I followed WSB since Spring 2010, but have now given up on this CMS with good base and potential (reason: slow development, undemocratic and uncooperative core dev etc.). I have changed to a flat file CMS (no more MySQL needed, that can do almost the same (+ good plugins): GetSimple. For small projects I feel much more comfortable.
Posted By: Apple on January 28 2012 09:45 am
I am surprise this cms is voted lower than it deserves. I have used websitebaker for 4 years and in my opinion is one of the best around. If you are looking for a fairly stable and easy to use cms, I recommend Websitebaker.
Posted By: kurt on November 4 2011 07:06 am
@Gregg DesElms

This is nonsense.
The homepage of LEPTON says right from the start that it's a WB-Fork, see here
http://www.lepton-cms.org/english/about/backstage.php
here
http://www.lepton-cms.org/english/about/lepton---websitebaker---amasp.php
and even here
http://www.lepton-cms.org/english/download/upgrade-wb.php

You should open up your eyes before you post something like you did :-)

BTW: is it really important what the base of LEPTON is?
Is it good for joomla that it is based on mambo or the other way round?
Posted By: Too bad, could be a winner on October 30 2011 05:58 pm
Great website system, if we wrote 1998.

The add-on are mostly poorly programmed, buggy or in alpha or beta state, last updated years ago).

Too bad. It could be a winner.
Posted By: Michael on October 23 2011 07:33 am
Websitebaker is really a good tipp for everyone, who is looking for an easy cms an has no experience with cms-systems at all.

When I was looking for an easy cms a year ago I tried:

Joomla (first)
For small projects for me it was to complicated.

Wordpress
Easy to handle if you use a template. But developing a template on (you have to cut the template-file into several files) my own was not as easy as using the cms itself.

GetSimple and gpEasy
Great solutions for very easy pages but a little bit to simple for my projects an just very small comunitys (on year ago!)

CMS made Simple
Seems to be very similar to Websitebaker to me. CMS made simple has an bigger comunity than Websitebaker and has been my first favorite thatfore. But the problem was: I didn't find structured Infos about the development of templates. This (for me) was better and easier on Websitebaker. (But if you compare take a look at CMS made Simple ... it's the same size as Websitebaker.)

Please understand right: All the named cms-systems are good systems an you can build good pages with them. All the systems has their advantages. Other has other experiences an decided to use the other systems.

So this reasons has been my personal reasons when I came to Websitebaker a year ago. And today I have to say: Websitebaker is a small an easy system, which helps me to develop my projects on a very easy way.

And today I know: There are some really big projects, which uses this system too. But it's not a Blooging-System (thatfore I would use Wordpresse) and it is not an editorial system (thatfore I would use Joomla) and it is not a syocial system (thatfore I would use drupal).

Unfortunately Websitebaker has not so many free templates like Joomla or Wordpress. And some friends use Wordpress oder Joomla thatfore. But I learned: developing my own Templates or transforming the templates of Wordpress or Joomla to this system for me is easier in Websitebaker.

Just my two pence after one year experience with this system.

---------
Last I would like to say thank you to this page (opencourscms.com). It helped me a lot to find and compare the different cms-systems. It's a very good overview for everyone, who is looking for a new system (even if he is a beginner too).
Posted By: Kullah on October 12 2011 08:26 am
This is the best CMS I ever found.
You can manage a website and go live within hours (literally).
Nice and easy to extend, growing community, consistent help forums in different languages.
Easy to install and extendible - nice template learning curve, good for designers, developers and end users.
Posted By: Luc Fournier on September 28 2011 12:29 pm
I've been using Websitebaker for 3 years now and after trying dozens of CMS this one actually WORKS.
It is very easy to create a good looking site and while there may not be as many addons as some other CMS I do not miss them.
Development may be slow, but really I do not need an update very often.
As for Lepton, I do not like the methods they use to promote their software. When Joomla forked from Mambo, it was clear and upfront.
Posted By: Gregg DesElms on September 10 2011 04:57 pm
alex wrote: "Those who are annoyed of the slow progress of WebsiteBaker Development and the harsh sound in the Forum, may want to give the forked project: http://lepton-cms.org a try."

MY REPLY: I have no idea if Lepton is better or worse than Website Baker, but I'l tell you (everyone, actually) one reason not to use it, no matter HOW good it might or might not be...

...and that's its disingenuousness. Nowhere on the Lepton site does it actually admit that it's a fork of Website Baker...

...yet it puts, words like "baker" and phrases "website baker" into two of its pages' META "Keywords" tag area, as evidenced by this Google search...

http://bit.ly/nRijqX

...and then a quick look at the source of those two pages, obviously in the hopes that those searching on "Website Baker" will stumble-onto it, but without owning-up to that it's a fork thereof.

Any CMS that's a fork of another CMS of which I've ever heard, or about which I've ever known, has been very up-front and open and honest about what it's a fork of; and doesn't refuse to mention it on its pages, but nevertheless hope to snag those looking for it by META tag cleverness.

Fortunately, Google doesn't reward this sort of thing by giving higher ranking to pages which include all META keywords down in the body of the page. In other words, if a keyword is in the page's META "Keyword" tag, but isn't also down in the main body area, on the web page itself, then the page is ranked lower... often, for that reason alone, not even on the first pageful of 10 search results (though sometimes other factors can make the page rank highly despite its attempt at keyword cleverness).

In any case, the people who make Lepton need to behave more honorably in order to get most people's trust; and I hereby implore it to so do.


____________________________________
Gregg L. DesElms
Napa, California USA

Posted By: jona-li on September 3 2011 05:00 pm
Great CMS with modules and styles even with forum systems to build in - not at all like the name Baker and self made buns and rolls .....
Posted By: Andy Sim on September 2 2011 11:27 pm
This CMS is very easy to customize template for front & back end. I love it so much, since i use this WB CMS it save my time a lot.
Posted By: MikeW on August 30 2011 02:19 pm
If you must extend your CMS with your own scripts, layouts, templates: use Website Baker...it's the best choise, if you want modify your CMS !
Posted By: Hugo Z. Hackenbush on August 12 2011 04:07 pm
This is the most easy to use CMS I ever worked with. There are lots of free modules to add to the site from picture gallerys to a complete shop module.
It's easy to learn and fun to work with. You only need to know a little HTML to transform your existing homepage to a template for WebsiteBaker.
Posted By: Konrad on August 8 2011 10:51 am
I've built numerous sites (40+) using WB over the last 6/7 years and would struggle to find abything that is easier to understand, use and tailor to the client's needs. It just makes sense. A page is a page, not a node, channel or entry. Blocks are used to build pages or add extra features to them. Templates can be built in html/css, then simply replace the content with code snippets and save it as a php template, zip and upload. No special training is needed for you to understand the CMS and build a site and most of my clients did not require any help with modifying thei site.

I've always found the forum to be helpful and friendly (especially Ruud and Argos for instance) so no problems there.

Most important to me is that the search engines seem to love sites built using WB - I ALWAYS get good results. Perhaps it's the strict hierarchy or the fact that the pages are actually real files (no mod rewrite needed).

Yes, I too am slightly worried about the stories I hear about the contributors and yes, this CMS is probably not very suitable for huge sites where a vast number or features are required. But I would say that for 90% of the web, WB would make a good solution.

Hope this will be of use to some of you out there!

Konrad
Posted By: alex on July 13 2011 10:08 am
Those who are annoyed of the slow progress of WebsiteBaker Development and the harsh sound in the Forum, may want to give the forked project: http://lepton-cms.org a try.
Posted By: Apple on June 10 2011 07:06 pm
Those who complained please contribute your expertise. This can be one the best cms. Its very easy to install and use. Thats the whole point of a cms. Just need more contributors.
Posted By: Moha on April 16 2011 01:58 am
From a developer perspective, I can´t recommend this CMS. Quite outdated code base, no easy way to overwrite, extend, decorate core classes without touching core files and the need to redo all the changes with the next update. Very limited APIs, modules and a awefull backend media manager.

In contrast to the large team member list, it seems the CMS is driven by one or two people only, leading to quite long and irregular update intervalls. Fixing known bugs and/or security problems tooks ages.

From a end user and template designer perspective, the CMS is quite straight forward and easy to use.

Just my two cents.
Posted By: alex on March 10 2011 10:01 pm
i totally agree with Doyle Hargraves. great cms but the support/forum people suck arse.
Posted By: AlanG on February 24 2011 11:01 pm
We've used Website baker on several dozen custom design projects, and almost all clients love it. It's easy to use, and I use it on our local neighborhood Website myself. It's a piece of cake to log in and make updates - which is the main point of having a CMS in the first place.
Posted By: Intraz on February 14 2011 04:21 pm
I like WB. It's very logical and easy to use. I especially like the group/user access management to content. Tweaking/altering templates is easy too.

But: Modules are few and many are stucked i Alpha or Beta status. The backend editing of pages is a disadvantage if you want real WYSIWYG web editing.

Also, Wb seems like a dying project :-(
Posted By: Sina on January 25 2011 05:10 am
Until now we have no problems with attacks. Some peole seems to forgot to change backup moduls and so on. We works since 3 years with websitebaker and are really satisfied - also our clients. For most of them, they need a cms for very easy using. Many cms are not really comfortable - and needs a lot time for developement.
Posted By: Holger on January 20 2011 04:47 am
Just review the latest repository changes in the 2.8 branch and you will see some options for possible attacks. Our issue was related to the WB session handling which exists since the first release of WB.
Posted By: John on December 27 2010 11:56 am
I've had great success with WebsiteBaker.
In response to the negative comments, can you suggest a better CMS for simple sites?
And what was the method used to hack your site(s)?

It's quite possible that those who were hacked hadn't bothered to secure their site properly. My main site has reported repeated attempt to hack using the tinymce module - was that the source?
Posted By: Marc on December 20 2010 01:40 pm
After the latest kludge in the Website Baker support forum I decided to move all my sites to another CMS. Sad, have used this CMS for 4 years. Since the founder left the community this project is about dead wood.
Posted By: LukeG on December 13 2010 04:52 am
Website Baker 2.8.1 is a real good solution for small to medium websites. But it looks like the 2.8.x code will not be maintained. Instead a small core developer team is "baking" on the 2.9.x-dev, making some crucial code replacement. The module-developers and the comunity is not really integrated in this process and this is no good sign for the near future.
Posted By: Holger on December 11 2010 03:26 am
We used Website Baker 2.8.1 for a intranet solution of our business. A yearly security audit revealed some vulnerabilities, why we didn´t role out the CMS driven intranet yet.

As main focus seems to be on v2.9 of the CMS, I doubt that the security issues in the 2.8 series will be tackled in reasonable time.
Posted By: Bjoern on November 21 2010 07:30 am
I have previously worked with Drupal and Joomla and I must say I am thrilled by the simplicity and intuitivity of Website Baker. Had the new site up and running within hours! Great CMS!
Posted By: Tux on October 9 2010 03:56 am
Website Baker was our first choice for the last 3 years for setting up and running small to medium customer projects. As several customer sites with Website Baker 2.8.1 were hacked this year, we did some research and finally decided to port all customer projects to some other open source CMS systems.
Posted By: Doyle Hargraves on September 23 2010 10:04 am
I have used it for 5 years, and there isn't any more straight forward efficient, effective cms in the world. Nasty support people, nasty forum people, and limited modules.
Posted By: Willy on September 16 2010 12:35 pm
Agree, the core code is really outdated and needs rework. What concerns me even more is the continuous leaving of engaged community members and the sometimes impolite and harsh tone especially in the German sub forums.
Posted By: Uhai on August 25 2010 03:03 am
At a first glance an easy to use CMS with a very intuitive backend interface. Diving into the core code revealed a differnt view. Some code fragments are quite dilettante and outdated leading to security issues, a clear lack of APIs ...

My fazit. Ok for private pages but a no go for business pages - at least with the current stable version.
Posted By: Martin B. on August 23 2010 05:01 pm
One of the easiest systems (front- and backend) i tested in the last months.
PROs
+ very fine Image Galleries with the module Foldergallery
+ good Group/User-Administration
+ simple/good Guestbook
+ Random-Image Droplet
+ simple include with "global blocks"
+ many usefull Modules and Droplets
+ good jQuery support
NEUTRAL
* Multi-Lingual Support
* Calendar & Events is relatevily fixed in the design
* Modul Members for administration of member info
* Listing with Dirlist
CONS
- No core Short Url support (Hide Extension and hide of the CMS-folder "pages"
- News-Module without explicite image of the Preview-Content and no simple customization
Posted By: eid on August 18 2010 05:58 am
I used website baker to set up a small business website for my mom, and even she understands the backend of this software. Great!
Posted By: JP on June 24 2010 10:52 am
If you're looking for a CMS which thinks the way the average person thinks, this is the one. There's no glossary needed to figure things out. It lays out a page in a simple way with a quality editor. It doesn't work well when you have hundreds of news stories to post and organize; leave that to other systems. But for a small to mid-size website that can be easily managed by non-technical people, this is unbeatable! And don't forget about the group permissions in the editor. This is great when you have multiple people editing and you only want to give them rights to certain pages. In one case, this feature alone decided in favor of WB for us.
Posted By: tanihatoe on June 15 2010 11:15 am
I've used many cms. Compared with other cms, Website Baker is the best I have ever used.

A Great... CMS!

Highly recommended!

tanihatoe - Indonesia
Posted By: Jean-Benoit on May 30 2010 06:16 am
Website Baker is my favorite CMS among the 10 that I used. With Getsimple is the only I currently use.
Posted By: Mike @ Forshock on May 8 2010 01:16 pm
I have been using WebsiteBaker to create websites for my clients for over 3 years.

It provides a simple, yet powerful system that allows me to rapidly develop the website my users demand.

Easily expanded and very flexible. Using the include functions we have embedded custom applications for real estate and ecommerce.

Highly recommended!

Mike
Forshock
Posted By: SuperUser on March 16 2010 03:28 pm
After 5 years of using WB, it is still the best I have found.
Posted By: A web designer on March 9 2010 11:36 am
As a web designer, what I look for in a CMS is something that is both robust and intuitive i.e. something that is stable and easy for my clients to use. With this CMS I get exactly that. I have used Joomla to build many sites in the past for clients, and whilst it delivers pretty good results, I'm fed up with constant phone calls from them asking 'how does this work?' or 'how do I do that?' as the Joomla admin can be somewhat confusing for the inexperienced user. However, since switching to Website Baker, this no longer happens thank goodness! It's solid, and very, very easy for my clients to understand and use / update. If you need to build a CMS based website for a large company with complex functionality, go for Joomla but... if you want to build a small to medium sized site that loads quicky and and works just fine, I'd thoroughly recommend giving Website Baker a try. Oh, forgot to mention the friendly and helpful forum community is an added bonus as well!
Posted By: Eric Lachance on January 19 2010 07:46 am
While Website Baker is functional, easy to install and easy to use, it lacks a lot of the "polish" you would expect from a CMS system of this calibre. On top of this a lot of the plugins I tried to use did not work "out of the box" and a lot of adjustments were necessary in the PHP source code in order to get them to work properly.

In my opinion, WB gives the impression of having been cooked up quickly and never really fixed correctly. It still needs quite a bit of work to be useable. However, on the surface it's very workable for someone who wants a few "static" pages that are set up and created quickly and it remains a viable option unless you want something a bit more evolved (or you're willing to tinker with the recipe).
Posted By: mlt on January 16 2010 01:40 pm
This CMS is simply the best!
It is so difficult to find a system that combines rich features and easy implantation like this.
WB is not a simple CMS! Combine it with the modules (that have automatic installation from the backend) and you'll have thing like:
- User authentication (login/signup boxes, private or
public pages, very detailed permissions settings.
This is a core feature, not module)
- News, blog modules (with the possibility to show the
latest in the home page and more.)
- Powerful menu system (the best I have seen, you can
implement virtually any kind of "ul" menu, add many
pages and subpages)
- Very easy tempating.
- Forums (2 modules I think...)
- Photo galleries (Over 20 modules!)
- eCommerce (A simple eshop system but with many fetures.
An Amazon affiliate shop also)
- Frontend editing (module that gives you the possibility
to switch on a wysiwyg editor in your front pages.
History feature is included to switch back to older
edits)
- Uploader module (form with progress bar to receive
big files from your clients/visitors)
- File browsers/editors to access and edit your html/php etc
files of your server from the backend.
- Many others like faq/form makers,mp3 players,celendars...

Just wanted to mention this features for people who
don't know website baker. This system's name doesn't sound
very serious but I think it should be more popular.


Posted By: Geir on December 7 2009 08:13 am
After playing with various CMS's for years now, Website Baker has finally made me leave my long time relationship with Mambo and Joomla. Baker is very easy for my customers to use, so they using time to add information instead of figuring out how the CMS works. The result is more visitors, simply because the information is the main reason for any who visit a commercial website. I find Baker to be very easy to create easy and good looking webpages for designers. I give Website Baker 9 out of 10!
Posted By: jolly lama on November 30 2009 07:51 am
Website Baker is the best. Easy for the developer. easy to skin and ridiculously easy for end users. you cannot say that about any other CMS out there!
Posted By: Danville on November 24 2009 06:22 pm
This CMS does what no other CMS does, givrs me the freedom to create effortlessly. WB is designed to be intuitive and simple to make absolutely stable. I have tried many, many CM systems and I cannot find a reason yet to stray from WB.
Posted By: robertH on November 23 2009 11:41 am
It's easy. It's safe. It's absolutely flexible. It's amazing! The community is very active and gives nice, quick and helpful support.
Posted By: webixi on November 13 2009 04:15 am
Websitebaker is my favourite. I tried other CMS- but working with Websitebaker is the best solution for me and my clients.
Posted By: Dan on November 12 2009 11:09 am
Amazing. (Although I'm still searching for a comprehensive list of WB tags to use in templates).

Having looked through all these WB reviews, it seems no one has a bad word to say about it and I agree.

Pros:

Doesn't need cron jobs to update newsfeeds
Includes database backup feature.
You can put any code in any page. Wrapper is fantastic.
You can literally throw up a decent looking website in 5 minutes!
10 level heirarchical page structure and firendly URLs.
Search searches the whole site including Feeds which Drupal doesn't.
Less time spent looking for answers as to why this or that isn't working as it should therefore, much more time available for making things look pretty.


Cons:

function show_menu and associated css is a pain to work with - until I have had time to understand it better, it's pretty much a trial and error affair - also different themes call different classes - it would be easier if maybe show_menu didn't parse a class parameter but instead used standard classes for text links, active page and buttons. You would know automatically which classes to edit for the navigation them. It would also be better if the navigation css was in a separate file or even better, a module which allows you to edit them from with admin (I might have a go at that if someone hasn't done so already!).


Summary:

A great CMS for designer and developers alike 9/10

basnet.co.uk
Posted By: arnout on November 5 2009 02:02 pm
I work with website baker and I love it. I am using it for simple websites.
Posted By: Susie Myers on October 24 2009 04:42 pm
I love website baker. I wish they would make more modules. It is very easy to train clients to use it. FAQ modules doesn't work for me in the new 2.8 version.
Posted By: Olivier Labbé on October 18 2009 11:59 am
Let's put it frankly : WebsiteBaker have the potential and polyvalence of Typo3, but easyer to use than Wordpress.

It's a an agregator of modules, modules and templates are SO easy to make / use.
Posted By: JB on October 7 2009 02:39 am
This one's my favorite. The backend looks a little dated, but it's so easy to use and modify.
Posted By: WEBSAM on September 30 2009 12:38 pm
I've used and tried a bunch of CMS before. And have no idea why I have not tried Website Baker sooner. It is a great CMS. Especially for a static semi static website.

Easy to set up, heaps of features, and just a good all round solid CMS, if you haven't checked it out yet make sure you do. Very good, keep up the good work.
Posted By: billy on September 11 2009 03:51 pm
I always hear about all the other CMS' people are using, and when I test them out, I always come back to Website Baker. It's so freaking easy to use!
Posted By: erwan on August 23 2009 11:32 am
Great CMS, super easy to use, love it very much.
Posted By: Dan on August 11 2009 09:19 pm
This CMS is so easy for customers to use. They pick it up in minutes.
Also it's easy to get form submittions directly into Sugar CRM by adding a trigger on the form data table.
Posted By: D. Morffol on August 11 2009 03:59 pm
The best cms ever cause it's simple, easy to learn and with many gadets. See also the new version 2.8 (actually v.2.8 RC2).
Posted By: Alex on June 24 2009 09:36 am
The best opensource CMS i have ever tried! Easy and does what i want it to do.
Posted By: crash on June 2 2009 04:46 pm
Although I've tried *many* other CMSs - including Drupal and Joomla - as well as other specialized programs for custom installations - Zen Cart, WordPress, phpBB - the one clients enjoy using the most is, without a doubt, Website Baker.

Is is easy to customize and extend, and clients are extremely happy. Nothing else compares.
Posted By: Yihaa on May 19 2009 12:37 pm
I've tried about 15 CMS:s en things claiming to be CMS:s (when they are blog programs).

None of them are so easy and right to the point as WB! Why noodle around with stuff when you donät have to? That's the case in many progs like, Drupal, jooblma, geeklog etc, etc.

Website comes to the point right away, but leavy you the opportunity to noodle if you want to.
Posted By: Mohamed Ali Maher on May 14 2009 05:02 pm
easiest cms i have ever seen !
Posted By: mr-fan on May 5 2009 10:58 am
there is no alternative for Website Baker....;)
Posted By: TheMaskedCrusader on April 28 2009 05:51 pm
I have tried every CMS and Website Baker takes the cake. out of the box, it's very easy. Even though it might not do everything you want it to do out of the box, it does provide access to PHP code in the "Pages" section, allowing you (the admin) the ability to make the application do whatever you want it to do. Granted, most casual users won't be able to make it do what they want, but anyone familiar with PHP can make this CMS to everything from aggregate news, syndicate feeds and even manage other databases, all through use of addons or custom php code. IMHO, this is the best cms out there!
Posted By: Moklet on March 17 2009 09:08 am
It might not be as powerfull (lots of addons)as some of the well known names. But it is easy to design a template and even easier for you nobrain customer to maintain
Posted By: Konrad on March 4 2009 02:52 am
Well, here's an other similar comment from a web designer (not a programmer / developer): if you're after a cms that's easy to install, redesign and use (even for the novice client) and with a friendly and helpful community, then this is the one for you! Can't recommend it enough for brochure style websites, just ignore the name and go for it!
Posted By: Kerrod on January 28 2009 02:19 am
Awsome CMS which is so easy to set-up and even easier to use.
Posted By: Anis uddin Ahmad on November 2 2008 02:43 am
The simplest and easiest CMS of the world. Very easy to customize and extend. Provide all generic needs of a minimal CMS including template system, news module, form generating module, multiple blocks and much more.
Posted By: teks on September 19 2008 11:35 pm
Absolutely perfect for semi-static sites - ie., sites that don't require heavy dynamic content, such as blogs, forums or e-commerce catalogues. It has the friendliest admin interface around, and users feel confident using it. Extremely easy to customise and extend - code is simple and easy to understand. Templates are extremely easy to build, and the community support is excellent. Looking forward to version 3.
Posted By: Mr.Byrd on September 7 2008 09:03 pm
I have used many CMS software packages and I found them very good Drupal, Joomla, Mambo etc., but to hand that over to someone like a customer to oogle over with no clue is sensless. Website Baker is not only 'CUSTOMER' friendly it is user friendly. It is as extensible as you want it to be. The lack of MODS for a decent php coder or plain ole good designer is not a problem. If you figure out the templates you can pretty much do anything you want with as many bells and whistles as the other so-called POPULAR CMS's.
Posted By: Lehrerfreund on July 15 2008 05:08 pm
It's a very easy to use CMS; I for one love the easy way to build and manage your site-structure. On the other hand you are very limited with optional features (like view-count, comments etc.).
Posted By: Ruud on June 4 2008 05:01 pm
I have tried just about all Portal CMS projects here, WB is the one that does all I want. Keeping it simple for the administrator, it can do everything my demanding customers need. The very active forum helps you out with any problem every time. Installing in 15 minutes, you will get a professional looking site online in an hour.
Posted By: Kevin Meza on May 31 2008 04:42 pm
The best CMS for making your organizations website, this is great open source software, to me this one has great opportunities to be one of the best open sources out there. Many thanks to the WB team, great job as soon as start making money with my business, I'll give you a donation! many thanks and Regards, Kevin Meza CEO Internet Guru Pro
Posted By: Hinch on May 1 2008 06:00 am
Website Baker is very good. It is quick to setup and use and non-technical users like it. it is starting to show it's age but version 3 should be very exciting. It's still worth a look and a little time updating the interface and HTMLarea.
Posted By: aimeeish on April 29 2008 08:55 pm
Website Baker is one of easiest CMS's I've ever used. I use this CMS for people who know little about HTML and PHP, and they all love the WB. For me, however, there are downsides to this CMS which is why I've been scouting for another CMS. First of all, there are very little add-ons...add-ons are very basic and not very full. The templates suck, however, it is easy to integrate WB into a new template. But overall, very customizable and the community is helpful although most of them do not know English.
Posted By: Premium Rate Numbers on April 23 2008 04:08 pm
I tried this CMS. Very good impressions
Posted By: Charlie on April 13 2008 02:40 am
I know little about html and even less about php. I've literally spent years looking for an easy way to create professional websites. I've installed, lost hair with frustration, and un-installed Joomla about 10 times. e107, Drupal, and many many others have entered my web space only to leave with a barrage of verbal abuse. I was at the point of surrendering my dream when suddenly I noticed a new name in the 'Latest 5 Comments', Website Baker. My first thought was 'How do people come up with such names' but after reading many of the user comments I sprang on the demo like a leopard on a gazelle. To get to the point, Website Baker is excellent. In less than 15 minutes I had the basics of my first website up and running. I find the available templates a bit bland, but no problem there as they're easy to personalise, even for me. I'm even going to have a go at creating one from scratch. The documentation is in English and not Geek. I can't comment on security, coding, etc, all I can tell you is that if you don't need 1001 useless modules to bloat your site and ego, then WEBSITE BAKER is the ONE. I had to kiss many frogs before I found my prince...
Posted By: Beppi on April 7 2008 04:17 am
Easy and solid cms, you can learn it in few minutes. There are not many modules, but it's perfect if you want to quickly develop a good site, even a complex one. Forget it if you need a complex cms for an intranet or document management. The community is alive and kicking and quickly gave me help and support when needed. Personally I think that Joomla and WB are the best choices, if you just need to develop a good site, choose the second one and avoid the big complexity of the first one, that is good for other kinds of projects.
Posted By: tom on April 6 2008 08:28 am
Very good CMS, easy to integrate with any templates you found in the web, SE friendly, good documentation if you wanna make your own module!
Posted By: Paul Carmen on April 4 2008 08:25 am
I have used several CMS over the past couple years. Website Baker has always stood out as one of the best.
Posted By: Harry on March 28 2008 12:06 pm
Excellent CMS! I recently tried both WB and CMS Made Simple and decided to go with WB for its simplicity and speed.
Posted By: Renev on February 27 2008 09:50 am
A very good CMS and what a perfect documentation; even in my language (Dutch)
Posted By: friend on February 16 2008 12:20 am
The new version 2.6.7 available now ;-)
Posted By: Holy Wedly on February 6 2008 12:59 pm
Hey my company World of Products is using this CMS system and its great!! Its easy to use and very good orginased. Every body at my work cab use it!! Thank you all for this good stuff !
Posted By: GluLife on February 6 2008 06:35 am
With over 25 years in technology and evaluating over 80 CMS systems our company went with Website Baker. It is easy to use but very extensible. We can now build client websites in a fraction of the time it took us before and the client can maintain their own site. We get to do the fun stuff instead of making word changes. Everybody wins.
Posted By: JR O\\\'Crolic on February 5 2008 11:42 am
I have been using it for about 3 years now, and it is the best. I have tried about 20 others and they all will give you a headache trying to do a simple page. Most are Geekdumb gone wrong. Kind of like Walmart . . .If it doesn't have it, you probably don't need it.
Posted By: Eric on February 3 2008 10:59 am
I've mainly used Mambo, Joomla, and e107 in the past, but after reading the positive reviews here I decided to give Website Baker a try. It is by far the easiest CMS I have used. Getting it installed and setting up a few pages took very little time. I was impressed by the simplicity of the back end and the minimal steps needed to get a few pages and modules up and running. I don't think I even looked at the online documentation beyond the initial setup. Though I didn't find the amount of modules/components that are available for some of the other CMSes, I didn't have any trouble finding ones I needed. And like the rest of WB, they were a breeze to install and configure. Whether you are a CMS novice or pro, the simplicity and power of WB makes it a great choice.
Posted By: Uwe Born on January 20 2008 01:09 pm
Websitebaker is the most user-friendly, stable and safe cms I ever tested (and I had a look on many cm-systems). If you want to adapt free templates (e.g. from www.oswd.org) or to create your own template and if valid code is important for you, Websitebaker is the one and only choice. Have a look on the website-showcase [forum.websitebaker.org]and see, what is possible. The docs and the support in the forum are excellent. Give it a try!
Posted By: jahn on January 11 2008 04:16 am
Very good and easy to use for small to medium projects.. Only minus is that you can only have the whole page with https:// or not. It is not possible to configure only the admin login with SSL, due to static links in the code...
Posted By: John Jackman on November 14 2007 09:24 pm
Having now actively used 6 or 7 CMS systems, I've been using WB almost exclusively for the past year. Excellent, stable, easy install, super-easy install of modules. Most user-friendly for normal users of all I tested, only CMS Made Simple comes close. Most others the back end is a bafflement to customers and requires training. WB requires little or no training for most users who just want to edit their pages. WB stands out for me as the most usable and user-friendly for most small business sites. It has all components that the avg web site owner needs, full integration of link and pix indexes (best with Xinha). Multiple users, group permissions, you can set it up lots of ways, strongly recommended.
Posted By: Tufan Turanli on October 21 2007 12:20 am
This is simply a stunning CMS! I have been struggling with drupal for sometime now and have some fully functioning websites with it, but boy, the headaches I had to go through. OK, it works, has flexibility, blah blah, but boy, it really feels like reaching your right ear with your left hand. Anyway, my aim is not to bash drupal, it has its followers and they seem to be happy, but website baker is in comparison a total delight. Simple? yes, but amazingly I can do everything I did with drupal but without the agony. Some of the posters have noted that WB has fe w modules. Yes, they are right. But, believe me, they are more than enough; I find you simply do not need any more to do 99% of what you may need. Anyway, I strongly recommend that if you need a CMS, whether your needs are simple or complex, do yourself a favor and give a try.
Posted By: Richard Schley on September 2 2007 06:22 am
You want to have a nice website in no time which is searchengine friendly as well? Then I think there is no other CMS than Website Baker. Professionally designed free templates, working modules (there could be more...but they're sufficient). Especially for small companies who look for quick professional results and easy use WB is best. Easy custom contact form (as many as you like) with dropdwons and stuff. DB backup with one mouseclick from within the admin panel. Very intelligent CMS.
Posted By: caveman harris on July 13 2007 02:13 pm
with referance to 'gchamp' last comment i have to agree and defend Website Baker. i recently changed my hosting company from a ASP based host to a PHP based host as a resuly of the very same problem. Now setting up and getting started with Website baker is quick and painless. Previously the error i got was also not even listed in the forum as I dont think the intended this system to run of windows based php servers. i Am now only beginning to understand how website baker works and by far the most wonderfull system availible - still lacks somewhat in the modules area as no forum module exists neither does a decent links module but with what is there one can survive. In addition to all the templates availible it is the easiest CMS app that i found on this site that one can change a template to fit your own style. I cannot wait for the anticipated version 3. Regards
Posted By: Ben on July 13 2007 12:04 pm
i've been using this for a client and it works almost flawlessly. it would be great if there were more plugins already available, but customizing existing plugins is not too difficult, and has made this a very effective and easy to use cms.
Posted By: gchamp on July 8 2007 07:35 am
After reading all the nice comments here about WebSiteBaker I decided to give it a try along with many other CMS packages on my local test server. I found that trying to install it on a windows based server can be a pain. No matter what I do my installation crashes with an error message 'Field 'value' doesn't have a default value'. It would appear that there is a problem with the db (mysql 5.0.5). I checked their forum to no avail. I guess this CMS falls short for me because I have to believe that if it doesn't even install without errors it must have other problems. Too bad.
Posted By: Zlatko on June 24 2007 04:12 pm
Very elegant, simple to use, and what's more important, it has many templates prepared. For smaller sites, you can be online within one hour. Go on, fellows !!!
Posted By: Vince on June 21 2007 07:06 am
Very elegant CMS, actually the best I've come across. Easy to learn to use for my customers, they love it! All code is stored in just one index file. The forum is very helpful, friendly and alert. Applying a design to it is straightforward. It offers plenty of useful modules, which are fortunately not in the default installation - keeping it simple and transparent. My guess is that for 80% of the smaller organizations Website Baker would be the perfect tool. Small disadvantage: the backend doesn't look very slick and modern. But don't let it fool you: the output can!
Posted By: Andrew on June 6 2007 10:46 am
Website Baker is the most amazing CMS I have ever used. Even for large sites such as a ski resort informational site I use (over 450 pages and counting..) it handles it with a breeze. The ease of developing templates and changing the way things work because of the clean and logical code has to be the two best features of this CMS. Don't like something? Then change it!! Anyone with a small knowledge of PHP can make Website Baker sing and dance to their tune with no problem. Anyone without such knowledge will find the range of features on offer to be just right - not uber over complicated like other CMSs out there, such as Joomla etc and you will really like it! Give it a try, I did - and I never looked back again ;) I would agree with the previous posters that this is simply just good fun to use, you won't get frustrated with all kinds of nuances. So, enjoy!!! I guess one last thing, the community available for answering your questions is second to none. The project team must be there every day to answer questions related to problems, this shows real passion for the project imo!
Posted By: Lou on June 1 2007 09:00 am
I left Joomla for WebsiteBaker. It'a really the best CMS. I am migrating my existing site to websitebaker
Posted By: Robert on May 19 2007 09:56 am
This is hands down the best CMS I have ever installed. - The admin menus are logical - New pages are actually easy to create and can be based on any pages module easily! - Editing templates is simple and easy (much easier then any other CMS I've used!) - Some nice templates are available on the web site - Light yet still fully featured - A small but functional range of modules available In short: try it. I love it.
Posted By: Tom on March 12 2007 08:05 am
The best CMS, here's why: a) It's simple and easy to use. b) It has more features than many of the other CMS software out there. 1) Limited ACL, but you can VERY EASILY write modules and control access to them per group. 2) NICE looking templates, a lot of the other programs leave you with little choice as to what your site will look like unless you want to do extensive design, WB already has templates that compare favorably to Joomla and Mambo. If the reason for getting a CMS is to save time, the amount spent on design should be factored in. 3) Different templates can be assigned to different sections. 4) Module to link SMF (The best open source forum) to WB. 5) Easy to write additional modules. 6) PHP code allowed in site pages 7) Page wrapper allows external pages to be displayed inside WB. 8) It's FAST 9) It's light For cons I'd say that it doesn't have the same number of modules as Drupal, Mambo or Joomla. It beats Drupal on ready made design and the other two for Access Control. Mambo and Joomla have add on modules for this that either cost money or are not tested enough. WB's is part of the core. The best thing is that this CMS is FUN to use, I actually enjoyed writing modules for this to access backend data and it's nice to know that whatever comes out can be wrapped in a theme that reflects the content to be displayed. The strength of WB is that it is a solid, simple framework with all the functionality required for a basic site. It can be extended as well. Cake PHP, Zend Php and others are nice in the rapid app development sense, but they fall short for ACL. Seagull, does really well and surpasses WB for features and granularity but lacks in community support and templates. This is a brilliant bit of application design and coding. I've looked at every CMS on this site. Others, like CMS made simple compare favorably but WB is just a more enjoyable experience overall.
Posted By: mylane gutierrez on March 3 2007 08:56 am
So far so good, I just installed it, and navigating the functionality. Works like a charm.
Posted By: andiwijaya on December 19 2006 03:57 am
Websitebaker is the best cms i known ever. A lot of module, template and its could be integrated with your existing script using inline frame or link menu. I recently use website baker on my website, the gallery module was amazing. Take a look.If you looking for simple, powerfull and nice looking admin interface cms try websitebaker.
Posted By: Chris Macintosh on November 30 2006 05:48 am
Pretty slick little package! I've been looking for a while for a way to protect phpMyEdit pages with a user authentication system. This did it! The ability to add pages which process php code comes in handy. Nice job Website Baker!
Posted By: Andreas Blaha on November 28 2006 05:06 am
Simply the best. There is no more to say!
Posted By: Daniel Fuhrmannek on November 2 2006 07:14 am
Hi, i loce WebsiteBaker so much, that i've build a german community portal around and with this CMS. www.websitebaker-cms.de
Posted By: Shay on August 19 2006 07:39 am
After playing around with Website Baker I found it to be rather simple. However if you are after a quick and easy CMS solution then give it a go. A lot of people worry about the graphics of a system rather than its functionality. Don't let this one fool you.
Posted By: johndh on July 10 2006 04:19 am
I love this CMS! So simple my granny can figure out how to drive it. The one thing that the guys at WB have got completely correct is the documentation. So many other cms outfits can learn a lot from the WB approach. Ok WB is not over endowed with modules, but what it does do, it does well. In fact I might be tempted to write some modules myself. In case anyone thinks that this cms is too basic, well, I got a basic ecommerce demo up and running for a client inside two hours! They were impressed while I was staggered. I also use drupal, joomla, E107 and typo3, but when Im behind the wheel of Website Baker, its like going for a very pleasant Sunday afternoon drive in the country. 10/10
Posted By: est. on June 8 2006 03:19 am
This one is a good one :) Very simple and easy to use, I'd recommend to anyone. Actually, the best cms i ever tried.
Posted By: apple on June 5 2006 05:34 am
Website Baker is ace! I was looking for an easy to use and install csm even for a granny. After reading all about it from other posts, I thought I will give it a go. If you are looking for good support, easy to use csm, I highly recommend Wesite Baker. I will use it again my my next site.
Posted By: creativetechno on May 18 2006 05:25 am
Best CMS i ever used. I tried a lot of them, but i will stay with WB. Yes it has the safe_mode problem, just like many other CMSs. . It has a great community where people help each other.but we can develop a pocat and an videocast modules in that.and web calendar we have to impore the functionalites
Posted By: imran khan on May 12 2006 07:36 am
I can give 9.5/10 to this very simple CMS. i have built 4 sites based on it and 2 more are coming soon. This cms has been so handy, Installation is simple, and administration is as simple as managing MS word files. Many add-ons are available too.
Posted By: Hobbie on April 18 2006 05:52 am
I have just finnished configuring my first Website Baker site and I must say I am very impressed. I have a potential customer that knows nothing about HTML so I needed an easy-to-use CMS. Joomla is by far the best in my opinion but is very complicated. Then I found CMS Made Simple and I thought that was very good. Now I have found Website Baker and is from now on my choice of easy-to-use CMS. With all the addons available, I have everything I need for a full site. Very nice
Posted By: centran on April 3 2006 07:16 am
This is a very simple CMS. That is both a good and a bad thing. If you want a very easy to learn backend system that is super simple for anyone to change the content on their site, then this is for you. If you like all the news, articles, calendar, forumns section, and the then catergoize it, and then attach it to a page, and whole bunch of modules on your site, then pick something else. I picked this CMS becuase I wanted someone like my grandmother to be able to firgure it out(Click Pages, select your page, and begin editing). If you are a computer geek who loves things more complicated go with something else.
Posted By: PeterM on April 1 2006 12:06 pm
Best CMS i ever used. I tried a lot of them, but i will stay with WB. Yes it has the safe_mode problem, just like many other CMSs. But in version 3 this will be solved according to the developer. It has a great community where people help each other.
Posted By: sailman on March 17 2006 05:09 am
Simple, easy to use, and very customizable.
My system is build on WebsiteBaker.
Posted By: Julia on March 16 2006 04:10 am
It was the love from the first site but... unfortunately unlucky love. I need CMS for many small projects with dynamic content. Website Backer was my thing and i was wonderd how quickly i could create the sites, templates and whole project. BUT!!! For this CMS safe_mode must be turned on the server. I had no chance by my provider, hence i had to give it up. My favourite for small sites is now cms made simple. Bye-bye, Website Baker, i'll miss you!
Posted By: Swifty on March 6 2006 04:09 am
Easy to install and easy to use. Nice one
Posted By: Paul on March 3 2006 08:59 am
unlike alot of the comment posters on here i do actually use this amazing CMS. Its the most simple to install and use CMS ive ever found. Ontop of that the support is excellent in the WB community. This product is that good it could easily be retailed, i donated as Ryan (Mr WebsiteBaker) deserves everything he can get. To think, hes only 16 and coding like this.. check it out
Posted By: Jesper on February 20 2006 02:22 am
Easy cms, to setup and use. Our system is build on WebsiteBaker.
Posted By: Hans on February 13 2006 12:19 pm
It is a very simpel cms. Easy to install easy to handle. A lot of extra modules can be found. Great! Worth trying!
Posted By: Extilo Tienda de camisetas on February 11 2006 04:39 am
Very flexible, specially because of the sections feature in the pages. Highly customizable, simple... it's worth to test it.
Posted By: Markku on February 2 2006 03:09 am
Very easy to install and use. Logical.
Posted By: Dan Mattsson on January 23 2006 04:30 am
As a lot of comments have mentioned already: simple but efficient. My CMS of choice for clients unable or unwilling to learn a 'complicated' CMS. Slick.
Posted By: Burt on January 3 2006 02:23 am
Good basic CMS. Not as feature loaded as some but I like it as it is less confusing and is easy to work with. Here is my implementation in progress right now -includes some third party scripts easily inserted using 'code' sections and the 'wrapper' module.

Posted By: Jaume Llorens on December 28 2005 12:55 pm
Easy to use is important for clients who don't want to lose time learnig.. And WebSite Baker is one of the easiest I have seen. Thanks for your work!
Posted By: Teressa on December 6 2005 08:52 am
Ever since I discovered WB I am so grateful. It has made my life so much easier. The admin is intuitive and the app is stable and clean. I have made 3 WB sites for people who needed to maintain their own content, and I have not regretted it. They will be coming out with a major rewrite in version 3 at the beggining of 2006.
Posted By: R Law on December 1 2005 11:15 am
Who has the time to learn how to maintain a site using one of the all singing all dancing CMSes? Not my clients for sure! Here's CMS that actually allows you to simply and easily mange the content in a web site. What a novel idea! I have built three sites thus far using this CMS and cant praise it enough
Posted By: Hank on November 27 2005 03:35 am
Here is my implementation of website baker. Works like a charm, is easy to use, and I don't have to do any html. Check it out so you can see what kind of site it is good for.
Posted By: Alessandro on November 22 2005 06:55 am
If your are new to CMSs and/or just want to start being productive without studying intimidating, undocumented complex stuff for months, Website Baker may be the right choice. Everything is intuitive and makes sense. Website Baker fullfills many needs, has a nice community and some extensions/themes. Try this one! You will for sure like to use it for some project.
Posted By: bill on November 18 2005 05:37 am
This ones excellent, used it for a client, and he loved it. I will use this again for sure in the future...
Posted By: Konrad van Grinsven on November 11 2005 03:24 am
Let's face it: most of us will not be creating the next eBay but will be building smaller sites for smaller businesses. And if you're looking for a capable and handsome CMS for these websites, then this is the one! It's extremely easy to set up, has a (handsome) very user friendly interface, plenty of options for pages, users and templates and has an active developer and forum. Nothing but praise! Have tried and tested many many systems but nothing matches it. And last but not least: my clients love it!
Posted By: Gavin Holt on September 15 2005 02:51 am
Easy interface for "special ed" clients you may have. Amazed at the small size, easy setup. Quite a relief to find a solution for those 10 page mom-and-pop sites.
Posted By: MA Razzaque on August 24 2005 03:24 am
Really very nice CMS. Rupom (from Bangladesh)
Posted By: michael mckee on August 22 2005 01:08 am
Obviously, no system is perfect for everybody but this is a great CMS for most sites and has the friendliest back end I've seen. I've created 4 Website Baker sites for clients, all of whom found it accessible and non-intimidating to use. That ease-of-use is huge. While it lacks some of the bells and whistles found in other systems, there is more than enough functionality and flexibility for most needs without the confusing bloat all too common in other products. Website Baker has a responsive developer and an active community, ready to offer help. It's easier than most to install, too. Nick is right that you need an external editor to edit the templates but if you know enough to do so you will also know enough to use ftp. Duh. I would much, much rather use a good html editor than a text area for changing my templates anyway.
Posted By: Cardin7 on August 16 2005 10:21 am
Couldn't disagree more that you'd only choose this if you didn't know what you're doing. I do know what I'm doing, and have deployed RSS etc. where it's appropriate. In some situations, what you need is a straightforward CMS which clients feel comfortable with, and this fits the bill perfectly!
Posted By: snipe on August 14 2005 05:05 am
I have to say, after evaluating and using god-knows how many content management systems, website baker is by FAR the best for the average joe. It doesn't suck up a TON of resources (like Mambo, which is very mySQL intense), and its so easy to use, my clients can jump right in. More complex systems (like Mambo and many others) have such an impossible learning curve that they aren't pratical to put in the hands of a small company or organization that JUST wants to manage their website without tons of community features. This is simply put, the perfect solution, and I couldn't be happier with it.
Posted By: Nick on August 1 2005 11:42 am
You can't even edit xhtml/html and css in this CMS, what a peice of crap, only someone who has no idea what there doing would wan't to use this, my personal fav CMS is textpattern because of its flexability and usefullness.
Posted By: michael singer on July 28 2005 06:06 am
website baker is great! it's very easy to install, it's stable, has very useful features. at the moment i use it for my online notes, bookmarks and stuff, and i really like it. btw, the wysiwyg that comes with wb is the first really working one i have seen so far, even with firefox!
Posted By: Cadence on July 22 2005 01:43 am
Everyone beat me to it. Amazingly good CMS.
Posted By: Joshua Davis on July 19 2005 11:56 am
This is the easiest to use CMS I've ever seen, I just hope it will be this easy to style too.
Posted By: HaReuDaNG on July 14 2005 11:27 am
This is a very good CMS. I'm an amateur, but instantly become somekind like a great webmaster with this CMS. Very helpfull and friendly.
Posted By: Bill on July 9 2005 08:32 am
Great tool for a webdeveloper
Posted By: PJC on July 9 2005 07:46 am
WebsiteBaker is just plain awesome! Simple, customizable, easy to use, and very customizable.
Posted By: Andy on July 8 2005 07:24 am
At the moment I'm working on a new homepage for the chair of social psychology at my university and tested some CMS. Website Baker is indeed very easy to use (which is important, because the members of the chair have to submit and change articles/news/websites). User management is good, too, although it would be nice to grant or deny access to a page to individual users. At the moment you can do this only for groups. I also would like to have more than one navigation menu so I can add some more structure to the navigation. Oh, and the content of the FAQ-module is not searchable :( Beside these minor drawbacks it's a very easy to use, fast and stable CMS. Creating your own template is easy enough. Installation is as easy as it could be. User/Group-Management is quite sophisticated. Editing pages is very easy - even for people who don't like computers. I can recommend Website Baker!
Posted By: Chris on July 6 2005 05:39 am
This was the first CMS I could immediately understand and use for building a menu-driven website in 3 hours without reading any manual. Highly recommended. You will have to use an alternate templates from their download site (e.g. the horizontal template). The default templates is not nice.
Posted By: Lutsen on June 23 2005 09:09 am
I was looking for a CMS for small to medium business websites and this one is just right for that. The interface is clear and user friendly so your clients can easy make changes to their own site. It can also handle multiple users so you can give different people different priveleges and make it even less easy fot them to mess things up. There is an active user community and the cms is still being develloped further. Very nice!
Posted By: Stephen O\'Brien on June 20 2005 09:36 am
Abolutely fantastic. Although I use a homebrewed system on my site, I intend to use it in the near future. It has a great balance of features and simplicity -- an obvious but hard-to-find thing in the sea of mediocre CMS's. 10/10
Posted By: Paul Taylor on June 14 2005 09:35 am
This is a Great CMS. I love it, I have tried many others; but this is simple and clean.
Posted By: Nick on June 14 2005 08:23 am
FINALLY! Typo3 was too complex, WebGUI too demanding in system reqs (mod_perl etc.), and the rest is either too news-site heavy or just doesn't provide the BASICS in functionality. This is exactly what a small business needs for maintaining a simple yet rich site easily and on a normal shared hosting account. TRY IT!!
Posted By: Paul Sutherland on June 12 2005 10:13 am
Absolutely awesome CMS. So easy to use and yet so flexible and capable of producing very striking websites.
Posted By: Brat on June 12 2005 03:22 am
I am evaling CMS solutions for a friend who is not a techie. I personally love Mambo, and use it for my sites, but I needed something simpler for this person. I've installed this product on my test server. PLUSSES: administration is relatively simple even for a novice. It's not bloated, installed easily, and I didn't need to read anything to figure it out. MINUS: File permissions and templating. You cannot simply edit and upload individual files to the server due to how it handles permissions (a REAL pain). Also, the template structure is not intuitive, and there is no way that a novice could easily theme this CMS. Too much PHP is involved. Also, the file permissions I mentioned earlier are a real drag, as templating often requires frequent changes and tweaks to get the look just right (especially for cross-browser support). Overall, I'd say this product is
Posted By: Stefan on June 7 2005 08:00 am
Finally i found what i am searching for... an easy and ready to go CMS without complicate logic. It makes fun to fill content and to be busy with the system. Thx for all
Posted By: David La Porta on June 6 2005 02:12 am
Website Baker came recommended by one of my clients who is a complete HTML/PHP nitwit, yet he made a cool looking site. Now I use it plainly 'cuz I couldn't be bothered hardcoding my sites in HTML/PHP. If i really need to do some coding then I just wrap the coded page or plainly use the
Posted By: sheila on June 3 2005 02:22 am
I needed a simple cms to display my novels. I must have installed every cms on this list. They were too much or not enough. This is the prefect cms for beginners like me. I jumped for joy when I install it. What can I say. I love it.
Posted By: Gerrit Vermeer on May 25 2005 06:20 am
This cms installed in no time, unlike other
Posted By: Jaywalker on May 17 2005 04:53 am
It really works great, but very important to disable safe-mode on your *nix server.. If it aint possible by your hostingcompany it isn't wurthy to install
Posted By: Bennie Wijs on May 3 2005 09:33 am
I was looking for a CMS that was simple to use and tryed a lot of CMS out there. They all works but most of them are a Bitch to install or are difficult to modify, Than I found Websitebaker. It is easy to use and good to modify. Its not the holly greal, and properly never will. but it works easy.
Posted By: Tim G on May 3 2005 06:43 am
I checked out a number of CMS's. Website Baker is head and shoulders above the rest in user-friendliness. It's already got the core modules that most users will need, and the small but active user community is busy as bees. If you want a massive CMS with zillions of features, go with Mambo. But if you want a lightweight, easy-to-use CMS, this one is great.
Posted By: JMG on May 2 2005 06:14 am
I have tried a lot of CMS (50+) and still use some of them on prodution websites (especially Mambo, Spip, Xoops, Exponent), and this is definitely the best i have used. Its easy to use and have some unique fonctionalities. It also supports multilanguage sites. It is not really aimed for communities websites though (no forum,...). It has hits flaws. But version 3 should be the perfect CMS...
Posted By: Burt on May 2 2005 02:11 am
A great little CMS. Many of the CMS's are overkill in features or complexity for the average user. This one provides good core features and ease of use. It is very beginner friendly and I recommend it as a good one to try if you want an easy way to manage content on a small to medium sized web site.
Posted By: Burt on May 2 2005 02:10 am
A great little CMS. Many of the CMS's are overkill in features or complexity for the average user. This one provides good core features and ease of use. It is very beginner friendly and I recommend it as a good one to try if you want an easy way to manage content on a small to medium sized web site.
Posted By: Doyle Hargraves on April 27 2005 08:02 am
This is a buggy Beta and it will bite you. Can't depend on it. If I wanted to spend all this time testing this guy's experiment, he needs to pay me for my time. It looks good on first blush, but after you use it a little, you realize that it is feces. If you have lots of time to mess with it, go ahead. It will never provide a reliable web site for anything, but maybe a 5 page hobby site. Check back in a year. The developer will drive you nuts with his bug fixes. He averages a dozen a week which you are supposed to update with. You might as well write your own.
Posted By: Gary Stewart on April 5 2005 01:29 am
Looking for OpenSource CMS for our website. Website Baker looks interesting.. Will see if it will work on Host..
Posted By: KindredHyperion on April 4 2005 11:56 am
This is the best CMS I have ever seen. It is perfect for creating small- to medium-sized sites that do not require a community or any particularly extensive interactive features. The admin interface is quick clean and easy to use. A good amount of help is availiable from the the Website Baker Website, but in most cases it is not needed because the layout and organisation of the admin interface is so intuative. Templating is the simplest I have yet seen in a CMS. It is literally like designing a website with HTML and then just putting certain bits of PHP in the right places for content, etc. Every bit is easily customizable and, unlike some other CMSs every website made with the system does not look the same. The source code is very easy to edit, so adaption and extension to new uses is really very easy if you know a reasonable amount about PHP and MySQL. The page loading times are also very quick. All in all, a perfect CMS for content based sites, with an easy and intuitive admin backend. 15/10!
Posted By: Enthused on March 31 2005 02:20 am
I've evaluated many cms's and Website Baker is the best I have seen. Easy to use, fast, attractive and very intuitive admin section, and already there are several good templates which are also very easy to modify.
Posted By: Ronny on March 31 2005 01:10 am
Very simple CMS, absolutly stable. The best for beginners.
Posted By: jakob on March 22 2005 02:41 am
after testing serveral CMS i found WB. It has the most user-friendly admin area i found so far. WB is not the big community-tool but a fine one for portfolios or other small to medium sized sites. easy to use, good rights-management and building templates is a breeze.
Posted By: Oskars on March 21 2005 01:38 am
Just use your own template and you will get exactly the look you want to.
Posted By: Rafaelinux on March 20 2005 06:55 am
Im saying exactly the opposing as what is said. It is a nonuser friendly, noneasy and nongoodlooking CMS. Its somewhat tiny though (1mb-)
Posted By: Richard on March 15 2005 07:10 am
This is more like it. No templates of what a site should be. Just a very good tool to help you build what you want. If only Cpanel had it.
Posted By: Brad Parks on March 11 2005 10:04 am
This is a *very* nice CMS:. - It can dumb down the admin area to just letting users edit pages - It generates very search engine friendly urls - It supports modules,plugins, etc. - It's
Posted By: Oskars on March 8 2005 05:06 am
I wanted to say exactly the same. It is very user friendly cms. No need for deep help.
Posted By: feijo on March 4 2005 04:23 am
I think that this is the easiest CMS I have ever seen.
cancel
Your Name:
Your Comment:
 
Thank you for your comment. After we have reviewed your comment (to make sure it is not spam) it will be posted.