This ensures that the content is current, relevant and refreshed. CMS also allows business to gain greater return and extract value from web channel, web communication and web marketing endeavors (Deo, 2010). This paper seeks to identify three CMS vendors, and compare and contrast their purchase and maintenance cost. This paper will identify three Course Management Systems Vendors; compare and contrast the functions and explain how they meet the needs and expectation of users.
The first CMS vendor is the Database Vendors. This vendor include dynamic websites in which content is stored and separated from other particulars like format, style, supporting data and access rights. For example the Oracle which has had their own CMS offerings developed. This type of CMS vendor is expensive compared to the others if both maintenance and purchase. Database Vendors have understated and significant misalignment consumer group who has restricted their success in the product class (Deo, 2010). The customer model also has direct access to competent trained IT professionals who directly communicate within the organization to content producers. The second CMS vendor is the Internet Service Provider; this includes website hosting and registration of commodity business with competent and intense price which also allows switching costs. Businesses using this vendor are mainly interested in means of adding value to customers and help in what may avoid switching between vendors. This CMS vendor delivers products of content management and site building and delivery of site hosting, domain registration and site development. The products of this vendor are however conceived poorly because they are not the major game of the operation. Purchase and maintenance costs are however relatively low compared to Database Vendors (Deo, 2010).
The third CMS vendor is the Enterprise CMS Majors. This includes vendors like