Appernetic vs Harp
When comparing Appernetic vs Harp, the Slant community recommends Appernetic for most people. In the question“What are the best static site generators?” Appernetic is ranked 28th while Harp is ranked 29th. The most important reason people chose Appernetic is:
Non-developers can easily write and update content using the inline PageDown editor.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
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
Pro Compiles assets on request
Rather than regenerate the whole site when a file changes, Harp only reloads what is necessary, keeping the compile time fast.
Pro Supports popular languages
Harp supports a large variety of languages, including Jade, CoffeeScript, Stylus and Sass. See the full list here.
Cons
Con Limited extensibility
There are no plugins available to extend the functionality or language support of Harp.