Wordpress vs. HTML Pages

Fiver

Fiver

New member
Jan 30, 2009
2,011
12
0
I wanted to build a brand site (something that will be around for a long time) and so I chose Wordpress because I thought it would help me with pages getting ranked easier along with being able to move around content.

However, after having a designer make me a custom design, I've come to realize that WP has its own problems (like not being able to copy pages...WTF?). I think it would've been cheaper to just have an HTML page made and copy that for all additional pages I need.

What do others prefer and are there certain situations where you prefer one over another?
 


I hate WordPress and every other CMS I've tried, so most of my sites use PHP includes and variables to create pages. In terms of getting what I want, I find this approach is much easier than any CMS. I end up with a site that is set up exactly how I want. The main downside is having to do certain things manually that would be automated with a CMS. Considering I would have to compromise on more than half of the things I want to do if I used a CMS, I put up with that minor hassle.

I've refined this setup over the years to the point that I've eliminated a lot of work by centralizing and improving code. However, I'd probably create a custom CMS if I was a better coder.
 
You can do both Wordpress + Static HTML. What you do is change the static HTML page to PHP and make it a wordpress template. Therefore, Wordpress would just serve up a PHP page.
 
Fiver said:
I wanted to build a brand site (something that will be around for a long time) and so I chose Wordpress because I thought it would help me with pages getting ranked easier along with being able to move around content.

However, after having a designer make me a custom design, I've come to realize that WP has its own problems (like not being able to copy pages...WTF?). I think it would've been cheaper to just have an HTML page made and copy that for all additional pages I need.

What do others prefer and are there certain situations where you prefer one over another?
Click to expand...

cziffra said:
I hate WordPress and every other CMS I've tried, so most of my sites use PHP includes and variables to create pages. In terms of getting what I want, I find this approach is much easier than any CMS. I end up with a site that is set up exactly how I want. The main downside is having to do certain things manually that would be automated with a CMS. Considering I would have to compromise on more than half of the things I want to do if I used a CMS, I put up with that minor hassle.

I've refined this setup over the years to the point that I've eliminated a lot of work by centralizing and improving code. However, I'd probably create a custom CMS if I was a better coder.
Click to expand...

SirKonstantine said:
You can do both Wordpress + Static HTML. What you do is change the static HTML page to PHP and make it a wordpress template. Therefore, Wordpress would just serve up a PHP page.
Click to expand...

Do any of you even Internet? All of these problems are non-existent with very little knowledge WP and CMS systems in general. if you're not willing to learn how to do it right, pay someone who does know. You'll save money in the long run.
 
I don't understand the bit about WP sites being easier to rank quite frankly. The framework has nothing to do with it!

I have both. Personally I think it's horses for courses - if I'm building a site for a complete numpty and handing over for them to add content, I tend to go with a CMS. Also there's nothing to say you can't customise WP just as much as you can centralize PHP / HTML! Remember - WP is only a SQL DB & PHP.
 
always imagine what your site is going to be like in 5+ years, a static HTML site can't accommodate bloggers the way a CMS can (wordpress or whatever)

custom solutions rank great, are lean and everything but the backends are typically not very user friendly.

for small sites I always use HTML/CSS but any major project I will always use CMS's
 
I always make html pages with php embedded, it keeps things lean...I use Dreamweaver, some people say its no good because of dirty code, but if you know html you can edit it, and ive never had a problem ranking with it in 10 years...you can embed php in html pages to run forms and comments as well as pull info from a database.

One of the best features is the 'find and replace' function or 'change links sitewide'....you can change file names or keywords literally in just a few seconds for hundreds of pages.

But if your going to sell a working site its nice to have a CMS the future owner can work with, if not then just point them to fivver.
 
I always used word press never had much problems with it but willing to learn other platforms as well.
 
I personally hate Wordpress being used as a CMS - it relies too much on having to plug it - why bother with the hassle when there are dedicated CMSs available? If the functionality isn't in the core...

Using a CMS as apposed to 'static' HTML does automate a lot of the drudgery which is a winner for me. Choose a CMS right and you can add your own custom code into it. ROI? for me a CMS is better
 
my rule of thumb is if it is a static amount of pages that will never be added to then stick with HTML/CSS - other than that I use Worpdress. Really struggling to find cons for WP - quite often see sub 1 second load times. The avid developer might not see WP as optimized but it does just fine for me.

relephant thread
 
sumohax0r said:
Do any of you even Internet? All of these problems are non-existent with very little knowledge WP and CMS systems in general. if you're not willing to learn how to do it right, pay someone who does know. You'll save money in the long run.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with not knowing what I'm doing. I only care about building quality sites. WordPress is a huge obstacle to that. I know exactly what I'm doing, which is why I avoid existing content management systems. There isn't one that allows me to do things the way I want and get that result faster than my current approach. I want control over every aspect of my sites. Every CMS I've tried forces me to compromise on at least 50% of the things I want to do. That is unacceptable.

WordPress is a horrible CMS if you actually care about things like the structure of your site. I've literally spent hundreds of hours playing around with CMSes, so I'm well aware of their limitations. My low opinion of CMSes probably has a lot to do with me starting to build sites long before people began believing the process involved just installing WordPress, a few plugins, and writing X number of 500-1000 word articles. If you build sites like that, WordPress is probably fine, but that isn't how I approach creating a site.
 
Ranking is quite equally likely difficult either way in my personal experience. Using WP or HTML ultimately goes down to what you want your site to be. If its a set amount of pages, then i suggest you go with HTML, but if you're planning on expanding your site with a blog or something, then you will have no choice but to go with WP.
 
Build a HTML/CSS site with a clear optimized flow using a silo structure will in my opinion be better than WP. Simply due to to flexibility to change virtually anything, especially if you have a good understanding of HTML and CSS.
WP is too limited in this way.
 
9skg9 said:
Build a HTML/CSS site with a clear optimized flow using a silo structure will in my opinion be better than WP. Simply due to to flexibility to change virtually anything, especially if you have a good understanding of HTML and CSS.
WP is too limited in this way.
Click to expand...

WP can be easily customized with all the best silo patterns you can imagine.

WP is a CMS and there are no other options for a "content based" and "publishing driven" site, you must use a CMS either open source or paid or "in house"
For a single page site or rarely updated sites (no DB driven) should be a better choice a simple HTML + PHP solution.
 
It is really simple, just as Flash4Ever said. If you dont use a DB its HMTL, else go for WP. Either way you wont really miss.
 
One thing I'm really not liking about WP is that I have a big list of pages (under page section) to rifle through in order to find what I'm searching for. Is there a way to structure it like a tree like you can with HTML when you FTP in?

If I'm making a lead gen site that will have a page for every city, I could put each city under a state folder on the server if doing HTML. How do I do this in WP so I don't have 200 city pages all in the same section?
 
Try CMS Tree Page View. it arranges your pages in a normal hierarchy structure.

You have hit the nail on the head against using WP for page based websites, it doesn't have any rationale to the order of pages in admin view, especially if you deal with sitse with more than 10 pages. Yes you can install the above plugin - but why do that when you can use a cms already setup for this feature?

Wordpress was built for blogging, so use it that way, not for building massive page based websites (easier said than done, a lot of graphic designers ask for wordpress for some unknown reason)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom