Hygraph Avis et détails du produit

We loved the way hypgraph queries the Content created over the hygraph, it fast and reliable.

Nothing much except initial stepup time was done, then it's smooth

We used it for our Content management and worked out well for us

I think Hygraph is a good upstart in the space, they have many of the top features I need in a headless CMS and the user interface is top notch. It is a strong offering in a sea of products.

I really don't like that there is no way to create a list of items that are not simple text strings. A list of an array of other items, such as keys would be helpful.

They fill the need for content management that we have and are clearly organized and responsive to feedback. Much better than our prior solution. Would recommend.

I recently had the opportunity to use Hygraph CMS for managing my website, and I must say it has been a valuable tool in streamlining my website management process. This robust content management system exceeded my expectations with its user-friendly interface, powerful features, and overall efficiency.

If there is one aspect where Hygraph CMS could improve, it would be the availability of additional third-party integrations. While the software offers a good range of built-in features, seamless integration with popular tools such as email marketing services or e-commerce platforms would further enhance its capabilities.

Hygraph eliminates the need for extensive technical knowledge, empowering users to efficiently update their websites without relying on external resources or extensive coding.

Easy to use, great api, nice ui for developers - api playground, fast to setup, environments.

Ui for editors. Cloning environments a bit slow. Documentation for management sdk is not up to date.

Having an backend developer, with hygraph we can build features reaaly fast

Easy to use, adjust and coach. We are working with HyGraph since 3 years.

Structure is a bit difficult to understand. Combination of functions and team members in pricing doesn't make sense. We need more team members, but no additional features. We would like to buy additional team members.

No need to manage different CMS to get the content out.

The federated GraphQL API makes it project-ready for any source. As a frontend engineer, I can test any query in the API sandbox and then drop it into my code for the desired content in that React component. There is a highly performant read-only endpoint that is more secure. And the schema is very versatile. Enterprises won't bother with this, but as a hobby user, I only have one Hygraph app but can leverage various Schemas to power three published NextJS apps - a music video blog, my coding blog, and a jobs listing site. And, webhooks make it easy to auto-publish on Vercel or Netlify whenever the content in Hygraph is updated, making it a seamless workflow.

Maybe more explicit instructions on the steps involved in setting up a REST API remote source.

Easy editing of blog content that, when published, triggers a Netlify build (with webhook). More productive, as it takes out the deploy step on another platform.

The best thing in GraphCMS compared to others headless CMS i've used, is all the official examples and tutorials on how to use the tool while integrating with other APIs and systems. They also explain everything to you on support if you need any help, a quick support and documentation about how to use the platform is very important in my opinion.

Haven't disliked anything about the product yet, and although i'm still learning how to use GraphCMS, seems like everything i'll ever need will be available for me. I'd be glad if there was some more content about how to use GraphCMS alongside with Typescript.

I've been trying to create an e-commerce for small companies and until now GraphCMS is the easiest way to start with something relevant to my client's needs, a very solid way to manage data.

the flexibility that graphql gives us, the frontend is also well made

a tool like liquibase for a db would be useful, also the merging between branches could be better

we are using it as a headless cms and also some models are built up by users who are not db admins

GraphCMS from the ground up has been built with both the end-user and developers in mind. It offers extensible features which allow a developer to build a CMS that reflects their needs and requirements truly while also giving and user-friendly and customizable enough UI that non-technical users are comfortable opening it up and making changes. It has a host of well support integrations with popular frameworks such as React and a community Slack team that is well moderated and always open to giving a hand just fleshing out an idea or providing debugging help with integration or developer expereince. It's a pleasure to use, and It's hard to look back to more rigid solutions.

Sometimes it can feel like the UI is rather overwhelming with all the tabs and links and slide-out pages here and there. Sometimes I can struggle to search effectively using the search bar within the UI. Also, as a developer, It'd be amiss if I didn't ask for a dark mode :)

We are building an international Shopify store while also creating expansive and additional content for our content teams to add our own flair and meta data to products. The flexibility of relationship types in GraphCms has really allowed us to ensure we have a handle on what can be placed where while also providing our content team have the flexibility to build pages as desired using content modules we've built in-house.

When having a question or needing assistance, support is always very quick to respond and help. They really take their time (in a good way!) to help you through the problem. I've met with several of them and they all deliver top notch work!

Not really for us, but if you're not that tech savvy, it could be difficult to set the whole thing up yourself. You need a developer IMHO.

Different types of content are easily defined, created and fetched.

Easy to set up and get started with. Versatile content modeling with flexible model relations and on-fly changes without the need or worry about API, GraphQL obviously, and a cherry on top - included CDN with image transformation. Oh wait, there are two cherries on top, Netlify integration being the other.

The UI could use some TLC, seems like it was put together in a rush. I don't believe that developers would even notice this, but for content managers, it could take some time to get familiar with it. It's very flat, the whole screen looks like one big area but the actual entry form is just one column, with no tabs to group the content nor multiple columns. That single column is also hard to glance at and quickly find what you're looking for. Assets feature is also quite limited. It serves the purpose but it's very low-key.

GraphCMS solved my problem of having powerful, flexible, headless content management without hosting it myself. It also comes with CDN which is another functionality that I don't need to deal with.

The ease of use. It's pretty easy to navigate through and understand.

Assets management. There should be an easier way to correct items in assets including simply re-naming them.

It is allowing us to populate content quickly and easily. The faster we can get contnet on our site, the better and the more likely we are to obtain new clients.

good overview for different content pieces and the possibility of managing all authors and tags

sometimes hygraph is a bit slow with updated content

Managing our content pieces and evereything around

It is a very flexible platform that allows you to do a variety of things with the right internal resources.

As our site scaled the support and speed of things from Hygraph suffered.

We have a hyper-local business that Hygraph allows us to scale our website with custom pages at a rapid pace.

I really enjoy the convenient GraphQL interface. There is very little restriction on what you are able to store and I have experienced very minimal latency with the API. The API playground is also quite useful for visualizing queries.

The documentation is useful for day 1 and 2 of usage. More detailed documentation seems to lacking for more complicated queries. There doesn't seem to be a forum managed by GraphCMS to get answers from, nor is GraphCMS pervasive enough to have questions and answers on external sites like StackOverflow. For complex data, the relationship links between schema get quite nasty as well. Maybe the type system can be improved.

GraphCMS provides an easy non-technical interface for content people to curate and control information. It offloads the maintenance of such a database from the engineering team, opening up time for more important work.

Building content using models, fetching data using API. Robust and flexible. Easy asset management for content managers.

For en users like content managers a little technical system.

Supports our new online shop using headless development.

Most of the functionality is fairly clear.

Pushing changes to our website does take some time. It also lacks some functionality that we needed for our website, like contract creation.

We've automated many of our booking processes as well as set up accounts for our team.

The most important thing That I love about graphCMS is very fasttt and easy to use.

Hopefully you could add more things to it, To not be limited in this time

I wish you could add more language to it

It's the most user friendly cms platform i have experienced. visually less confusing than other similar platforms in a content implementation perspective.

Nested navigation is very confusing and annoying in general. Publishing vs Save logic gets confusing. Also has a few detectable bugs that influence the work flow.

easier to find existent components, and therefore to edit them. Assets library is also very intuitive and easy to use. Setting up components in BE is easier to understand and to brief to editors compared to other competitors.

Pre-built UI for building a GraphQL-enabled schema. Content editor for those who will input data. We don't need to create a backend.

Very limited if your project is growing. Pricing is abhorrent. You pay 300 for 50 models, then 500 more for another 25. And it's the same number of components.

It's a good concept, but they're super stingy with resources.