Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Wintersmith vs Appernetic, the Slant community recommends Wintersmith for most people. In the question“What are the best static site generators?” Wintersmith is ranked 3rd while Appernetic is ranked 28th. The most important reason people chose Wintersmith is:
Wintersmith has an extensive Markdown support. Default, it is rendered by [Marked](https://github.com/chjj/marked). However there are plugins available for [others](https://github.com/jnordberg/wintersmith/wiki/Plugins) (such as [Markdown-it](https://github.com/dwaite/wintersmith-markdown-it)).
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Markdown support
Wintersmith has an extensive Markdown support. Default, it is rendered by Marked. However there are plugins available for others (such as Markdown-it).
Pro Templates
Templating engine comes with Jade plugin and many third-party plugins.
Pro Very flexible
Wintersmith only has a predefined directory structure, everything else can built any way you want.
Pro Built on node.js
Node.js is a software platform for scalable server-side and networking applications.
Pro PageDown editor with image upload
Non-developers can easily write and update content using the inline PageDown editor.
Pro Integrated git flow
Git and GitHub is used for version control, cloning, publishing and syncing of your Appernetic Hugo project. No need to manually enter git commands.
Pro Fast set-up
A Hugo site is configured with git, a file structure and a theme in 2 min instead of 30 min.
Pro Integrated Cloudinary image management
You automatically get a cloudinary link when you upload an image.
Pro Developers have complete control over the source code
Cons
Con Thin and disorganized documentation
The documentation for Wintersmith is lacking examples and clear explanations. It's also quite disorganized, making it difficult to find what you're looking for.
