Open source vs. .net

In theory, what companies need to do is easy. They must have strong ideas, great content, and present it for the masses to consume. But that leaves a big question: which CMS to use? Choosing the right Content Management System (CMS) becomes a daunting task with all of the options out there. There is no “correct” answer as long as the choice fulfills the company’s needs and business model. Regardless, here’s a quick comparison between Open Source and .NET CMS platforms.

Look at open source and .net

what is open source?

Open Source platforms utilize software that is, as the name dictates, open sourced. That means everything that is published in this manner must present the source code as well. This way anyone may modify, enhance, or otherwise alter the software whenever and however. Any edits made must also be available for all to use.

What is .net?

.NET is another software platform whose back end is closed off to the public. It was developed by Microsoft and most often runs on Windows systems. The backend may not be open for public use, but this platform intends to connect a range of computing devices to work together and improve synchronization.

Comparing open source and .net

  Open source .net

Lower Initial Cost – OS is often a free platform (for example Word Press). However, services may charge for full versions, software, or upgrades which can add up.

High Cost – Unlike OS, .NET, as general practice, does not offer free versions. This makes most of them have a high initial cost, but costs can level off over time. However, there are some .NET platforms that are free while offering the same benefits.


There is a huge community built around Open Source projects. There are thousands of third-party and extensions and add-ons offered. With the source code available to everyone, anyone can access and make edits which spurs further interaction between users.

A far smaller community, but has professionals working to support the platform

Access to source code

Obviously, any user has access to the back end of open source programs.

As a general rule .NET does not allow users access to the source code. However, some do allow with a package upgrade.


OS is known for stability because of how many people are working on and can develop the same software. That means if the creator of the code stops working on it, others can pick up where they left off and continue its production. However, this project stability comes with risks of hacking vulnerabilities, and compatibility issues when multiple plugins are used, or updates needed.

Because the source code is not readily available, .NET has a different, consistent sense of stability. As long as the company continues to produce the software, it will be maintained and updated, receiving support, roadmaps, hotfix patches, and regular upgrades. If they stop, it ends. However, because .NET is often professionally ran, the updates will be regularly scheduled in a secure environment, and users have access to support teams (who are usually working on fixing bugs) for troubleshooting. On top of that only one company is developing and testing the code so they have the entire context of the platform in mind.


Users may customize as they see fit as long as they know how to do so. In some cases, since there is so much third-party material, there may already be an add-on for what the user wants.

Users usually need to rely on the company to implement changes and other add-ons. That or a vendor who works within the CMS. Most companies provide a framework for their CMS that allows custom functionality that fits into the CMS base.

Ease of usability

Upgrades can be difficult on OS. Some platforms do not offer upgrade paths. Others that do can be hindered by the add-ons and modifications which may not be supported by the upgrades.

Since the company takes care of the upgrades, it’s easy for the user. All they have to do is wait for regularly scheduled patches and fixes.


With all of the software being produced by the masses, they all have different approaches, looks, and feels. This can create a disjointed user experience that may seem patchwork and unprofessional.

All of the software is produced by the same company, therefore it gives a consistent look, feel, and user experience.


It is difficult to know how developed the software is which leaves doubt to how secure or well-supported the platform.

.NET is kept in-house and has companies and support teams to back it up which allows for better security.

marketing functionality

No open source CMS provides for integrated marketing functionality.

Some .NETs have already implemented marketing functionality.


Both open and closed source versions of ASP.NET have their values and benefits. Kentico is a growing platform with solutions and support provided at a price, but great for newer users. Umbraco has been on the market longer than Kentico and has the possibility of being used for less money with its open-source efforts, but at the cost of professional support. Either option will work, you just need to find which works for you.

Hopefully this presents a bit clearer look at the differences between Kentico and Umbraco.

Still need help choosing which CMS to use? Try Our Free Tool!