Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Appernetic vs Sitegen, the Slant community recommends Appernetic for most people. In the question“What are the best static site generators?” Appernetic is ranked 28th while Sitegen is ranked 32nd. The most important reason people chose Appernetic is:
Non-developers can easily write and update content using the inline PageDown editor.
Question 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 Easy configuration
You configure the site with a site.moon file. It is written in MoonScript.
Pro Powerful templating
It uses the cosmo templating language. It enables you to inject stuff into the page as it is being generated.
Pro Extendable through plugins
It has a plugin system. It comes bundled with some plugins already, like syntax highlighting. You can write your own plugins.
Pro HTML and Markdown
Pages and templates can be written in HTML or Markdown
Pro Easy
It's pretty easy to get started with.
Cons
