Dezyon Digital

Facebook Twitter Icon-instagram-1 Linkedin

Web Development Architecture for 2024: JAMstack vs Traditional CMS

Choosing the appropriate architectural construct in the context of a fast-growing activity such as web development is of paramount importance. This can be a great threat to performance, scalability, security, and usability, or can be easily influenced to do the opposite. Two competitors in this space that stand out are JAMstack and Tradition CMS. It is crucial to point out the main differences for developers, content creators, and business leaders to make the right decisions.

JAMstack

JAMstack vs Traditional CMS features:

Architecture and Workflow:

JAMstack:

  1. Architecture: JAMstack websites are built using pre-rendered static files, hosted on CDNs (Content Delivery Networks). This decoupled architecture separates front, APIs, and markup, allowing for better modularity and maintainability.
  2. Workflow: Developers use Git-based workflows for content updates, editing offline, merging through version control, and deploying when ready. This process ensures a reliable and consistent deployment mechanism.

Traditional CMS:

  1. Architecture: Traditional CMS platforms combine content management, server-side processing, and database interactions within a single monolithic application. This integrated approach can simplify setup but may introduce complexities as the project scales.
  2. Workflow: Content editors use a web-based dashboard to make real-time updates, with the CMS dynamically generating content on each request. This live editing capability is convenient but can affect performance.

Performance, Speed, Security, and Scalability:

JAMstack:

  1. Performance: JAMstack sites are intrinsically fast because to deliver the static files these wholly rely on the CDN to work in this way to reduce the server engagements and work as they do not require any dynamic content generation.
  2. Speed: Since content is spread across CDNs, the time taken to load each one comes down and this enhances the UCR.
  3. Security: JAMstack sites have a reduced attack surface due to the absence of server-side code execution. Static files are inherently more secure, and dynamic functionality is handled by separate, often third-party, services.
  4. Scalability: JAMstack sites scale effortlessly due to their reliance on static files and CDN caching. Handling traffic spikes and adding server resources becomes a non-issue.
JAMstack

Traditional CMS:

  1. Performance: The dynamic nature of Traditional CMS platforms can lead to slower page loads, especially under high-traffic conditions. Each request requires server-side processing and database queries, which introduce latency.
  2. Speed: Data management on the server side task can slow down the implementation process and delay customers’ expectations thus affecting their satisfaction level and website positioning.
  3. Security: Monolithic Traditional CMS platforms can be more prone to threat actions if not updated and configured frequently. Server-side code execution and direct database interactions increase the risk surface.
  4. Scalability: Scaling Traditional CMS platforms can be resource-intensive and complex, especially with high volumes of dynamic content. It often requires additional infrastructure and careful optimization.

Content Management and Developer Experience:

JAMstack Content Management:

  1. Editing Workflow: Content updates are managed manually through Git or a headless CMS, offering flexibility but requiring familiarity with version control systems.
  2. Content Types: JAMstack is well-suited for blogs, portfolios, and documentation where content is relatively static and changes infrequently.

Traditional CMS Content Management:

  1. Editing Workflow: Real-time content editing through web-based dashboards provides a seamless experience for content creators and editors. Changes are reflected immediately, making it ideal for dynamic content needs.
  2. Content Types: Traditional CMS platforms excel in managing e-commerce sites, news portals, and user-generated content where frequent updates and interactivity are crucial.

JAMstack Developer Experience:

  1. Developer Experience (DX): JAMs are loved by developers for the flexibility they introduced, version control, and modern tooling. The design is quite conformant with the DevOps culture and application of CI/CD integration models.
  2. Learning Curve: That said, JAMstack is not without some caveats such as the need to adopt best working practices relating to Git, knowledge of static site generators, and how to integrate headless CMS platforms. To some, the learning curve might be slightly steep, particularly in the conceptual knowledge section.

Traditional CMS Developer Experience:

  1. Developer Experience (DX): Traditional CMS platforms provide a familiar interface for both content editors and developers. The integrated environment simplifies development and content management.
  2. Learning Curve: The less steep learning curve makes Traditional CMS an accessible choice for teams without extensive technical expertise.
JAMstack

Conclusion: Making the Right Choice

While JAMstack has been positioned as the new breed of technology that has emerged to rival traditional CMS, there isn’t a clear winner. Instead, it is about picking the architecture that is more suitable for your specific project needs, available team skills, and the type of content to be delivered.

JAMstack and Traditional CMS each have their strengths, and choosing between them will depend on what you consider your primary priorities to be. Regardless of performance, security, scalability, and content manageability, the structure’s characteristics offer valuable insights for project decisions.