Wordpress or static?

[TheWaiter]

I've been looking at some of the signature links of some members and I'm not sure which is best, Wordpress (or other CMS) or static websites?

There are some static sites I've seen which look pretty good, clear text and loads very quickly but most WP sites are using a theme and more aesthetically pleasing.

Which do you prefer? or which is best?

[Renee]

As someone who had a static site for many years and switched to wordpress, I cannot even tell you how much of a pain it will be if you just have a static site.

Any kind of CMS will save you so much time when it comes to updating etc. It will also make it so much easier to redesign the look of the site later down the track.

Having a static site takes much more time because you have to code everything. And if later down the track you want to convert it to a CMS, it will take AGES.

That is my 2 cents.

[sweetbet]

My number one choice would definitely be wordpress. It makes life so much easier. I'd love to change some of my static sites to wordpress, but I just don't have the time.

[Renee]

My number one choice would definitely be wordpress. It makes life so much easier. I'd love to change some of my static sites to wordpress, but I just don't have the time.

It takes a lot of hours to get it right, but believe me by the time it is done it is so worth it. Just having everything in a db makes life so much easier, especially if you need to move it all.

[louie.wilson]

Wordpress, no doubt.
Just simpler. And if you get to code, or have someone doing it for you, then the wordpress template can be tweaked as much as you want, keeping a simple and solid basis while allowing you to customize it.

[universal4]

Wait a minute....

#1 first and foremost, moving a static html only website is WAAY easier to move, you just ftp it and it's done. Moving a wordpress site you must move the template, artwork and config files, create the database and then import it and hope the new db server imports everything correctly.

I am not saying it can't be done, but when comparing the movement only, static is much easier.

Another thing that people do not understand is the overhead that goes along with database queries.

A wordpress site needs much more overhead than a static site, so if you choose the proper host this is not really an issue, but you also need to know whether the host is using a db server on the localhost or if it is an external database server. (often simple changes in the config file but you need to know and understand this)

Many people prefer wordpress so they can play with and install/use the latest greatest plug-ins, but caution in this area is also needed since using the wrong plugin can slow the site down and adds oodles of overhead to the server.

Changing templates or themes on a wordpress site is often fairly easy (provided the new theme doesn't conflict with any current plugins) but changing a template on a dreamweaver site is often not all that difficult either.

Moving from a static site to a wordpress site is time consuming, and moving from wp to static is also, not sure which one might take longer probably from wp to static but I most often have done the former.

From a management aspect, especially for those a little less technically savvy, wordpress is much more popular, just be sure to make regular backups of both the web folders and the database, especially before theme changes or before trying out the latest greatest plugin.

Rick
Universal4

[baldidiot]

Wordpress (and other CMS's) will be way easier for most people - just play and play. The majority of my sites (95% +) use some kind of cms (usually joomla or wordpress).

But there are some advantages to static sites too - they're usually faster and use less resources, are less likely to get hacked, and having something custom helps set you apart from all of the other wordpress sites. It has to be the right kind of site though - just clean, relatively static information.

In terms of updating design etc... using php includes can take care of that for you (assuming you start with a decent structure).

I have one at the moment that I'm working on that does this, along with a data file that contains all of the information that is likely to change (bonuses, software, image links, banners). That way updating the site is all done from the same place.

[xecutable]

Don't forget the plugins. Wordpress has so many, that there's almost nothing that you cannot do. I imagine geo-targeting stuff on a static website will be a challenge. Again I'd have no idea how to make a sitemap on a static site, especially if I had 2000 pages. Cloaking urls is more for the tech savy user most will still have .html in their urls.

I don't know, some people just want to blog or write an Wordpress gives you that, to just write without much knowledge of anything else.

[-Shay-]

I coded my very first site affiliate by hand. It was a pain in the arse, but it gave me a better-than-basic understanding of how code worked, which helped later on with being able to identify, adjust, and fix things that needed it.

Now, we use WordPress almost exclusively. All the themes we use go through a heavy "tweaking" process (by me) that I'd not be able to do had I not hnnd coded that very first site.

As for which I prefer - if I had completely static sites that I do not plan to update regularly - I'd go static without a doubt. If I were building a site that is going to be updated regularly or semi-regularly, I'd use WordPress on a GOOD host (like Rick said). The plug-ins and the ability to manipulate all aspects of the site via the WordPress CMS is just too valuable for sites that are updated.

[baldidiot]

Don't forget the plugins. Wordpress has so many, that there's almost nothing that you cannot do. I imagine geo-targeting stuff on a static website will be a challenge. Again I'd have no idea how to make a sitemap on a static site, especially if I had 2000 pages. Cloaking urls is more for the tech savy user most will still have .html in their urls.

Geo Targeting is super easy if you're using php - just include a country database (such as maxmind) and use it to set a value which you refer to.

CK wrote an awesome post about it over on PAL: http://www.pokeraffiliatelistings.co...tml#post170882

As for sitemaps, you can get scripts that will do it for you automatically, and cloaking is very simple (has been covered a bunch of times on the forum).

Having said that, a CMS is probably the better choice for most users (myself included) - the above is meant more as an FYI.

[DaftDog]

I did my first affiliate website in html using Dreamweaver. I used the Dreamweaver template feature to simplify adding new pages and also for updating site wide page features.

However once I discovered WordPress there was no going back. I use premium themes that are constantly updated. I also don't hack the actual theme files so as not to hinder necessary theme updates. Instead I use child themes and css to make my site look unique.

As for transferring WordPress to another server it's not as difficult as some would make out. Simply compress all the files and folders into one zip file and transfer to your new server where you unpack them. Create a new database using the same database name, user name and password if you can, and import a backup copy of your old database. All done.

You can also transfer a WP site to a new domain name using a plugin like Backup Buddy. I think in order to be a successful affiliate you do need to have some basic technical needs and not be a total technophobe.

[kristal_cm]

Thank you Rick for this information, I didn't know that WP would use up more server space for example. I am not really tech savvy, I just use WP and really enjoy playing around with it, but don't ask me to code a super sexy looking website with all the functionality you can get like with WP plugins from scratch!

[universal4]

Like many have said, if you make the correct choice in hosts it is usually not an issue, but any site that relies on a database DOES need more resources than a static site.

Most hosts recognize this and compensate with more memory and use external database servers, and watch the percentage of resources used. In fact what many may not realize, some hosts do not expose their database servers to the internet and web servers talk to them accross a private lan. (different network card and switch). This helps make attacks such as sql injections a little more difficult and less servers exposed is less servers to worry about.

Overall I think that the popularity of wordpress and other cms systems will continue to grow, and the possibilities and options that will be offered in the way of plugins is almost endless.

Rick
Universal4

[TheWaiter]

The most successful static websites I've seen are database driven which makes them slightly easier to manage however with WP my key selling feature is the plugins, I would find it very hard to learn to code all of the features which I can just install with a plugin. I think this would come down to if you managed just one website or several?

[TheGooner]

Static? With HTML, javascript, PHP - really? Static? Let's just call it a wordpress vs non-wordpress comparison.


WORDPRESS
All wordpress sites look the same to me - they have similar plug-ins and functionality - their SEO is similar, layouts and options look that same. I guess that content is king - but it's still a restrictive straitjacket to my eyes. I am sure that's not true of ALL sites - but certainly 99% of affiliate wordpress sites look "cookie cut" to me.

I'd struggle to understand how you get any sort of onsite SEO advantage with wordpress - everyone with your theme / plugin can produce the same layout and format. In an industry where the common advice is to "stand-out" ... wordpress, joomla generated efforts et al all look the same to me. For me ... Wordpress = STATIC.

I think that wordpress is a good "starter kit" if you have no real technical knowledge, or if you are in the business of building sites for resale then the "common interface" of wordpress probably makes sense to get a wider audience to sell to.

NON-WORDPRESS
While coding a non-wordpress site does take more knowledge, you are only limited by your imagination and inclination as to what you want to do - particularly if you start using a programming language to create your site.

We have writers from around the globe creating content that is read, rated, graded, tabulated, displayed and formatted any number of ways on site. This is not plug-in territory.

Typically you do end up creating a basic CMS for data entry, and then a series of routines to interpret and display the data.

RESOURCE
I find that resource usage is actually pretty similar, because once you start programming and using a database you are doing a similar amount of work as a WordPress site ... and the REAL resource usage is dependant on demand. Get 10,000 visitors a day? YOu need a proper hosting package.

------------

SUMMARY
If you are just going to post "static" html based reviews and articles and do not have any desire to learn the technical ins-and-outs of websites and displays then using WordPress to get something up quickly that looks pretty is a viable option.

But once you start getting past the "reviews n news" stage you often start getting beyond wordpress and it's plugins too.

[universal4]

Good points Gooner,

For the purposes of my resource statements, I was comparing straight html sites (static pages) with any database driven or cms site, which is most commonly understood by non-coders as wordpress.

I agree with you, if you build your own and make database calls etc, you may or may not end up using just as much resources as wordpress.

RESOURCE
I find that resource usage is actually pretty similar, because once you start programming and using a database you are doing a similar amount of work as a WordPress site ... and the REAL resource usage is dependant on demand. Get 10,000 visitors a day? YOu need a proper hosting package.

Totally agree with this statement, and is likely the biggest deception that web hosts never discuss in their "advertising".

A straight html website with 10,000 visitors per day is not very resource intensive (depending on image sizes) but a database driven site doing 10k visitors a day is imensely more resource intensive, and few if any free web hosts will ever handle that well. Sometimes the extremely low cost ones won't either so always keep in mind you may well need to upgrade the hosting package once site growth catches up with your development.

Rick
Universal4

[freebetking]

i tend to code most sites by hand, using php includes to make updating easy - the benefits are the sites tend to load extremely quickly, transferring hosts is easy and i can basically do whatever i want with the design, i can stick different features on every single page if i want relatively easy - you basically get complete control over the site, like thegooner said you are only limited to your imagination. The world cup site in my sig is hand coded using php, responsive design, i find it easier doing it this way, granted if i ever went to flip it i'm looking at a smaller audience than if it were wordpress.

[RacingJim]

Wordpress fan-boy here

[slotplayer]

The popularity of wp has allowed websites to be mass produced, mass producing anything dilutes its value.

[TravG]

I use both. I like the look of wordpress but its a pain if you ever want to switch hosting or have to move the website for some reason. You also compromise speed with wordpress and you MUST keep updating it or you will get hacked! Many times you have to add plugins and sometimes when you update you have to go back in and redo some things that used a plugin for.

I like static sites because I just think they are easy to build and easy to manipulate and change if you have to. Static sites are much faster but personally for me its a little tougher to make them "pretty". If I were more creative I would use static pages for every site I have. I will say you must use some type of software though to manage even your static site. I use Microsoft web expression. By using this you have a "master" page and then build new pages around it but the master links to every page and when there are things like the header, footer, sidebar etc, that will be the same on every page, by changing the master you change every page that is built off of it. If you didnt have a master and changed the header or footer you would have to go into every page and change it would be a pain in the a##.

So if you are creative I would say static. If you need help in site design use wordpress. Like everything there are some good and bad things about each so you just have to decide which is ore important or easier for you.