- 0:00–0:06
Start with one store brief • List products, variants and languages. • Store brief • Product A • Variants • Languages
Product A, Variants and Languages move into one Store brief, creating the same scope for both platform proposals.
- 0:06–0:12
Check the hosted fit • Demonstrate the theme and app requirements. • Salla • Demo request • Check plan • Store brief • Theme • Apps
A storefront labelled Salla appears beside Check plan. Store brief, Theme and Apps enter a Demo request; no app or theme feature is assumed available.
- 0:12–0:18
Name the WooCommerce owner • Assign hosting and update testing. • WooCommerce • Owner: to confirm • Hosting • Update tests
WooCommerce stays visible while Hosting and Update tests enter Owner: to confirm. A named owner is still to be agreed; no update or test result is asserted.
- 0:18–0:24
Keep build and operation separate • List provider charges beside the build. • One-off build • Running costs • Plan or hosting • Paid tools • Provider fees
One-off build stays separate from Running costs. Ordered highlights identify the build and then Plan or hosting, Paid tools and Provider fees in the operating-cost group. No amount or saving is shown.
- 0:24–0:30
Compare the same scope • Keep unmet requirements visible. • Salla proposal • WooCommerce proposal • Same brief • Payment approval: follow up
Same brief enters the Salla proposal and WooCommerce proposal. Payment approval: follow up appears below both and remains highlighted. This illustrative unresolved requirement is kept visible without choosing a universal winner.
A silent illustrative comparison carries store requirements, hosting responsibility and running costs into a like-for-like proposal scope.
Read the article: WooCommerce or Salla? When a WordPress Store Makes Sense in Saudi Arabia