Kirby vs TYPO3 - A discussion

Folks, I’d like to talk about TYPO3 vs. Kirby a little. Because I still need to convince my boss that Kirby is a fully-fledged CMS on its own and not just a toy for small and simple sites.

Sigh… I know :smirk:

I work with both systems on a daily basis, know both codes and both kind of editors that need to work with their sites in the end. I’d like to chat a little about both systems with the community here as I’m a little exhausted that I still have to defend Kirby to my boss.

Although I don’t hate TYPO3 I think it is inflexible, has a bad back end, needs code/ settings on several different areas, puts lots of unnecessary code/ resources into a site… Customers need instruction guides for working with their sites. They usually get a cockpit full of input fields of which usually only one or two are ever needed. I never had a customer who was overwhelmed by Kirby’s back end.

What do you folks think?

Hey there,

I too developed plenty of websites with TYPO3. For almost five years. But it annoyed me that I would have to explain simple content management like text edits or image uploads multiple times to several customers. It’s simply not intuitive enough for people that aren’t digitally native. Which most of my customers are not.

When I finally found Kirby (after a lot of experimentation with other CMS) I quickly decided to become self-employed. Simply because I saw a lot of potential for smaller to medium sized websites, which were always my favorite type of customers. I don’t know exactly why, but I think they seem to appreciate it a bit more than larger companies.

Now, after 14 months of self-employment I’m still happy I did it. Some of the projects with Kirby were larger than what I thought would be the maximum complexity for Kirby, but it worked very well. You’ll learn to use structure fields/builder and some other plugins for the best outcome for bigger sites, though.

Some of my current “bigger” websites using Kirby: (This was a direct relaunch of a TYPO3 page, with unchanged design)

I think it really pays off to invest some time into Kirby, even for bigger pages. It’s very flexible, but still never more than you need.


1 Like

Do you have before-and-after performance metrics for this project? That would be some good data for a comparison. Disk space, CPU load, and webpage loading time… or maybe I’m being too optimistic :stuck_out_tongue:

Highly appreciated, especially the links and the customer experience. As said, I never had Kirby customers asking the same amount of “How to…” like TYPO3 customers.

Yeah, that’d be nice to look at. One thing that annoys me is the stuff that gets blown into the site automatically by “just” adding Powermail. Quite a bunch of scripts just for that.

realURL has to be enabled, blog/ news via tx_news…

I honestly also think that the Kirby community is more help-orientated (Can I say that in english?) than the TYPO3 community. Sometimes it feels like the IT’s smoke filled coffee room in there :grin:

That would actually be super interesting. I’m currently porting the “sister page” from TYPO3 to Kirby too:

The webpage probably loads slower with Kirby, though. Simply because we added a footer with six picture links and added responsive functionality. The TYPO3 page was relatively well optimized and cached, too.

I’m trying to get some information about the CPU load though.

The content editing was very well received by the way. Some other things work better out of the box, too. Like the search or the languages. I’ve even added a direct feed from Facebook here:

Overall the customer is pretty happy with the decision to step away from TYPO3.