Last week, Linux.com posted an article titled, Drupal vs. WordPress - Which is better for blogging?
How do Drupal and WordPress, the leading content management systems for blogging, compare for the average user? To find out, Linux.com used a preconfigure Drupal site from Bryght and a free site from WordPress.com to set up two similar sites. We compared the interfaces, the basic tasks of customizing a site, adding content, managing comments and spam, and reading site statistics, as well as the other available options. A pattern soon emerged. Consistently, Drupal offered more fine-tuning and tools for managing multiple blogs, while WordPress, although less configurable than Drupal, proved easier to use and navigate.
The article doesn't compare the "out of the box" CMS, but actually preconfigured sites from Bryght for Drupal and WordPress.com from well the folks who brought you WordPress.org. Much of what you see at Bryght is Drupal with various modules, however Wordpress.com isn't just Wordpress with plug-ins. In fact, Wordpress.com actually doesn't use WordPress the application but instead uses Wordpress MU with a code base that is different from WordPress the application.
My point is simply that the author isn't really comparing so much the two blogging CMSs but instead is comparing two services (Bryght and Wordpress.com) along with two different blogging CMS (Drupal and WordPress MU). This fact shouldn't diminish the value of the article, but I believe it's something that should have been made clearer to the reader. While I would recommend the article as a comparison of services I can't help but point readers interested in comparisons between the actual applications to look elsewhere. Perhaps, readers might be interested in one of the longest running forum threads I know at Drupal.org: Wordpress vs Drupal; what's in a reputation?