http://www.unric.org

Strengths

Weaknesses

Opportunities

Threats

Technology chosen for the website development

• MySQL server
• About Joomla 1.5.  – free source CMS:

Ø  supports multiple operating systems

Ø  Creating a new functional website is very fast

Ø  Better design opportunities - best visual CMS around

Ø  The Support for e-commerce is better than the one of Drupal

• · XHTMLSuite –Highly intuitive state of the art Online HTML Editor

• Joomla is better decision for
• XHTMLSuite – additional costs
• It is not easy to develop large complex websites with Joomla
• Unsatisfactory support of Joomla SEO
• Not that satisfactory support for SSL
• It is easier to find qualified developers who know Joomla than those who know Drupal
• New developers can learn easier Joomla
• · easy to train clients to use Joomla effectively
• The Joomla interface is easy to learn for non-technical people
• You can easily migrate to Drupal or other CMS

• No content staging in Joomla

Ø  No granular privileges

Ø  No code skeletons or code templates to make it easier for new developers to write plugins

Ø  The core CMS has more bugs than the one of Drupal

Ø  Joomla’s framework makes it more difficult to extend its capabilities

Ø  Not that satisfactory quality of add-ons to enhance website functionality

Overall grade according to website performance monitoring tools

• Overall grade 21/24 (88%) (Spider simulator)
• SEO Score (domaintools): 97%
• 13.7 sec: The page loaded quickly.

13 image descriptions; one image has no description - 8% failure: A tiny proportion of images are missing descriptions.

• HTML size: 27k Not a bad size: Users might be tempted to stay around for the page to load, if the content looks good. Still room for improvement.
• The speed of page load might be approved

• Joomla is heavier – the more add-ons and extensions are implemented, the longer the page loadings will become

Traffic

• #470,759 in the world according to the three-month Alexa traffic rankings.
• Page rank 8/10
• The site has a bounce rate of approximately 78%
• Visitors to this site view an average of 1.5 unique pages per day
• Approximate time on site for the average of 3 months: 1.45 s
• SEO optimization could improve the traffic to the site – required asap
• 52 links found – up to 100 possible to be indexed on Google; so room for more!
• The interest to the website is very low; if immediate actions aren’t take this will lead to major decrease of long-term interest

Sticky?

• The website succeed in grabbing visitor attention
• Attractive design, interactive
• Simple and easy navigation
• unique product, service and information

• Poor and confusing functionality of libraries, publications lists

• The information can get lost and if it is not presented often and provoking readers’ attention enough – will get just buried

http://www.sesarju.eu

Strengths

Weaknesses

Opportunities

Threats

Technologies

• Test environment: Windows Server 2003 – nice solution for test
• Sharepoint:
  Money up front per CPU and likely future licensing fees for upgrades and significant investment in learning and supporting system: Server cost and a client access license (CAL) cost of MOSS 2007 EES: ~ $4600;
• More complex integration process of the MOSS used for the intranet&extranet with the Drupal for the internet site
• SharePoint only runs on Windows (supports interoperability with other platform, but requires Windows to run on);
• Since MOSS requires SQL server, and  Drupal – MySQL/Postgres, u need Drupal 7 driver for SQL Server – additional complexity by the configuration
• If the client decided to give up MOSS as a solution for intranet and extranet – it can develop Drupal to the needed functionalities;
• If the client decided to change the general used OS – Drupal can be used still
• Drupal can actually quite easily be modified to look like SharePoint (or any way you want). it's harder to go the other way around;

• SharePoint supports ASP.NET; Drupal supports PHP: The Mix between the 2 technologies requires a developer with deep knowledge in the both server languages;
• In case of a radical change in the upgrades of one of the two solutions –MOSS or Drupal, there might appear a compatibility problem
• The Drupal interface is not that easy to learn for non-technical people
• Production environment: 2 front-end MOSS2007 Entreprise Edition Servers: flexible Business Collaboration Platform that provides a wealth of functionality above & beyond basic CMS capabilities, very good in terms of functionality and capabilities; provides easy integration with other Microsoft products and a certain amount of out-of-the-box functionality; licensed software - feeling safe/secure/well taken care of.
• OS Windows Server 2003 for MOSS
• One index server & SQLServer
• ABOUT DRUPAL for the internet site:

Ø  open source, free

Ø  supports multiple operating systems

Ø  easy to customize to meet clients needs

Ø  Granular privileges

Ø  Support for social networking is better

Ø  It is easier to develop large complex websites

Ø  Code skeletons / templates to make it easier for new developers to write plugins

Ø  Most stable CMS - winner because it scales well and is rock-solid under heavy load.

Overall grade according to website performance monitoring tools

• Overall grade 18/24 (75%) (Spider simulator)
• 9.7 sec: The page loaded very quickly. The hosting is comfortably up to scratch

• SEO Score (domaintools): 89%
• A handful of images have descriptions, but not nearly enough to make an impact

• HTML size: 24k Not a bad size: Users might be tempted to stay around for the page to load, if the content looks good. Still room for improvement.

• Meta Description is missing and only 1 meta keyword cannot lead to good indexing: Having a good meta description can improve your chances of the visitor clicking on your result in the search engine.
• 62 links found – up to 100 possible to be indexed on Google; room for more but be careful not to exceed

Traffic

• #2,308,854 in the world according to the three-month Alexa traffic rankings.
• Visitors to this site view an average of 2.5 unique pages per day

• Roughly 63% of visits to the site are bounces
• Approximate  time on site for the average of 3 months: 1.5 sec
• Page rank 6/10
• SEO optimization could improve the traffic to the site

• If the content wouldn’t get actualized often enough, the traffic could decrease more (time on site too low)

• Nice images that explain ’1000 words’ each
• Extremely catchy multimedia gallery
• Clean design
• Simple and easy navigation
• unique product, service and rich on information

Multimedia gallery is not that easy to find – could be taken out more