WordPress offers better value for clients

Many website developers are now working with off-the shelf, open-source CMS products such as WordPress, Joomla and Drupal. They’re all free, well-supported and perfectly adequate for most small business requirements.
But a recent article (Mashable: Do freelancers do best on Drupal, Joomla or WordPress?) has revealed that developers make more money working with Joomla and Drupal than they do with WordPress, which is great news for the developers, but not necessarily for the client.
The article is largely aimed at developers, and perhaps suggests that those specialising in Joomla and Drupal, could be more profitable.
That would be true if the developers were upselling services and building bigger, better projects, but I am inclined to think it’s due to the complexity of the two systems compared to WordPress, and that clients are footing the bill.
The article points to several interesting facts about WordPress that make it a better choice for developers AND clients.
At Canary Dwarf, we’ve tried all three platforms, and WordPress was the resounding winner. Where developers have been ‘brought up’ on Drupal and Joomla, it’s probably uneconomic to change.
But we’ve certainly found that WordPress, particularly since version 3, offers greater flexibility for clients wanting to take control of their website, and it’s easier to train.
The article points to the statistics from the third quarter of 2010, in which WordPress projects averaged around $455 in the area surveyed, less than half of an average Drupal project.
Does that make Drupal a more profitable platform for developers? Not if you take into account the fact that the same survey revealed WordPress projects outnumbered Drupal by 6.5 times.
Which suggests that WordPress is far more efficient, easier for the developer, and therefore cheaper for the client, a win-win situation.
It’s an interesting read, and one that adds yet more fuel to the fire that makes WordPress continue to burn brighter and makes it the ideal CMS for client and developer alike.