Sanity Recensioni e dettagli del prodotto

I really like the flexibility and webhooks

I think that layout (UX) might be refreshed, especially fonts and those sliders.

It is much faster then other CMSs we used

Quickly building document schemas without needing to dive into complex UI for Sanity Studio allows me to focus on doing the headless implementations.

The concept of Scheduling API and Document events is great however falls short when they are fired before the Sanity CDN is rebuilt. Maybe the CDN could be on demand when not warmed to resolve the issue. Additionally, the WYSIWYG editor could perhaps be changed to a different 3rd party library that would allow the ability to construct tables maybe. Additionally from a development standpoint, being required to connect to the Sanity Content Lake for performing local development is a frustration as the development data sets count towards the quota of the overall plan.

Simplified editor experience for our non-technical users

The most I like it is a tool for engineers that can allow not-tech person work with it. I like it is not hosted on my end and I can care about content on my website.

I would like to see a dedicated person for standard frontend technology (gatsby in my example) that can maintain it daily - I don't mean tech side, but at least providing answers, planning everything with the tech team and showing it to the community. The last gatsby 5 update is a great example - https://github.com/sanity-io/gatsby-source-sanity/issues/192; we would like to know what the steps are for sanity support after that.

Similar to my 'what I like' answer - I can focus on the website's content than the whole backend, which doesn't get me to move forward. Also, the free plan is beneficial to a good start.

The easy setup, and how the structure of pages are setup for you

That the Studio does not have TS support for all features like the client for running GROQ, we had to hack our way around this

Sanity is solving the problem of gathering all content in one place, where it is easily accessable

Simple and Content First solution, focused on a clear path

Watch mode is not great; especially with the preview, I believe it should have an advanced interface exposing extra-fine tunning for some cases

How to manage huge content with a simple UI

The infrastructure as code model for building out your content models is extremely helpful. Less click, more coding, and ship faster. We are using Sanity more and more as we learn more about it.

GraphQL as a second class citizen. I would like to see better support, for example bidirectional queries for many-one/one-many. Currently you need to use GROQ to support many-one queries when you define one-many in your schema.

Building full-fledged CMSs to build out multiple sites across our company for a one-stop experience for our content editors. Thinking about our sites at scale has helped us to build better models overall.

I was using as a user only - not as a developer- but it was okay

unable to load up multiple images to the media folder and organize images into subfolders

I wasn't using it to solve problems - mostly as a CMS solution

It's not difficult to understand, pretty intuitive, helps me get my job done

Sometimes its glitchy when I try to publish things, and when I have it open for too long and try to go back to it in my tab it takes a long time to reload

I just use it to publish things to my company's website, so I dont really have any problems to solve

Everything is possible. Sometimes I think I've reached its limits, but then it turns out that there is a way to solve/implement things.

The docs can be overwhelming at first sight.

I use it as a backend for a take-away ordering app. Generous free tier makes this possible.

I found Sanity very intuitive to get started in, and extremely versatile. One can create a perfectly tailored backend for almost anything! Of course, Sanity happens to work especially well for popular JAMstack frameworks like NextJS and Gatsby. One thing that really stands out for Sanity vs other solutions has been a commitment to the developer's experience while still providing a wonderful contributor experience as well. Another thing that has set Sanity apart for me has been the outstanding community that is always supportive and helpful for developers of all skill levels.

Customizing the studio UI has been less intuitive for me than creating the schema, etc.... however, they have been making tremendous strides on that side of things lately, so this is becoming less and less of a downside!

Providing a singular source for content on website, newsletter, social, etc.... It's definitely made me more productive relative to building websites, but also makes it easier to scale and adapt as the design and use-cases change.

Sanity has excellent documentation and a great API, especially if you love GraphQL.

Learning GROQ seems like a unessecary because I haven't run into a reason why GraphQL hasn't worked.

We finally replaced WordPress to give Marketing complete content control.

It is pretty easy to create objects and then be able to refer back to them later when posting documents. I also like the picture search so it's easy to find previous pics.

There are often a lot of bugs with sanity - sometimes it just tells me the referenced object doesn't exist and I have to log out of the whole thing. A lot of times the body input will suddenly glitch and say I put invalid marks and again, I have to reload the whole thing.

Sanity does help us to have a website that we can post content on fairly easily that looks good and well organized with a pretty simple process. The layout does give it a professional look too.

Easily can access the information that I'm looking for with clear directions.

Is not 100% entirely intuitive - i'm not a power user of the tool, so sometimes it's not very easy to navigate.

Content Management. Access to required information.

The ability to modify the Studio to exactly match our needs is nice.

I dislike the lack of different environments - we have those implemented as different datasets, but that means that we can on accident change data in the wrong dataset because we are connected to the only environment that exists. I dislike the low functionality implemented in GROQ. I dislike the Studio styling and how basic the interface is out of the box - to get something truly useful you need to invest a lot of development time, so I wonder whether writing our own UI makes economic sense? I dislike the caching for both the Studio and the data, which means verifying changes takes way too much time, and fixing any issues takes even longer.

We are using Sanity as the primary datastore for content.

not much at all. there are so many bugs.

It's a struggle to get it to function properly. Even simple features like sorting don't work.

It serves as our frontend CMS