CMS vs HTML - does the average person care?

[corrosion]

When you pitch a website, or consider getting a website done, do you care whether it's CMS or HTML? Or do you just want it to serve a specific purpose regardless of its guts?

I'm offering web development and design services (amongst other things), and it was brought to my attention to offer both. But for the sake of not confusing potential clients, I'd rather keep it simple.

Thoughts?

 

[ShadeDream]

WordPress - Simple, highly configurable, and easy to manage.

 

[artizhay]

A CMS produces HTML... You mean CMS vs custom coding, so best to first under what you're actually offering before going off and trying to sell it to clients.

Secondly, it's your job to evaluate the client's needs and present the solution you think is best for them, not confuse them with many ideas they likely won't understand.

 

[qrazy]

You can offer them both depending on the application of the website. If the website is all about few static pages you can do it with just HTML and avoid the unnecessary overheads of any CMS.

 

[thedorf]

Clients do not care about CMS or HTML. Clients care about sales and conversions.

 

[corrosion]

Got my answer; perfect and thank you!

 

[ShadeDream]

A CMS produces HTML... You mean CMS vs custom coding, so best to first under what you're actually offering before going off and trying to sell it to clients.

It's pretty obvious he was asking whether to offer clients plain HTML websites or CMS based ones.

 

[corrosion]

It's pretty obvious he was asking whether to offer clients plain HTML websites or CMS based ones.

Yeah, my ponder was because when you present a client with more options than they need, they tend to get overwhelmed and confused. I'd prefer to offer 1 type of website, with the option of "Prefer HTML? Let us know what you need!" if they're really that picky.

I prefer CMS as I find them easier for the client to update themselves, but still require monthly maintenance (updates, page changes, etc...) that becomes an easy sell.

Thanks for the responses everyone!

 

[jazzc]

Thread moved to the proper place.

 

[artizhay]

It's pretty obvious he was asking whether to offer clients plain HTML websites or CMS based ones.

A non-CMS could be anything that is custom coded. A plain HTML website, yes. But if that was all the client would need, a CMS would be overkill regardless, making this thread pointless. So that leads to a custom PHP management backend. Or something that could be done in WordPress and its plugins, but also coded in PHP, JS, etc. to better suit the client's needs. All of these are non-CMS that produce HTML. Given the inaccurate wording of the OP, your assumption cannot be proven linguistically.

Everything produces HTML. My point is, which you clearly also do not comprehend, is that is inaccurate to refer to it as "CMS vs HTML," or if you prefer your website "in CMS or HTML," which makes it seem like CMS is something that is not HTML, and that if he does not understand this, he needs to before he goes selling it.

 

[Techxan]

I am going to break the trend and say flat out that I prefer to build an HTML/CSS site instead of Wordpress.

Everyone tells me that google loves wordpress, but I disagree. I have never had a harder time ranking any HTML/CSS site over wordpress, and IMO HTML/CSS sites are better in the long run for customers with no tech skills.

WP is a hackers dream, security is a nightmare, and backups of complicated sites are difficult too. it needs to be updated every time an update comes out for the theme,a plugin, it he installation itself. I actually had a site just decide to quit displaying due to an un-updated plugin that had a reliance on something in the installation. Had to call bluehost to figure out the offending plugin because when it happened, it would not log on any users. They had to go into the server and delete the plugin just for me to be able to regain access.

Unless you are a developer, it will drive you buggy trying to get t to behave right. When you do something the way it was supposed to be done and it doesn't work,you are screwed. I have one plugin I use that floats images left, right, or center on many themes, but on others, it doesn't float the image, it puts it at the top and the text below it.

Duplicate content is always a problem if you set your pages up wrong, or assign posts to multiple categories, unless you understand using canonical pages correctly. Couple that with forgetting to forward your non www site to the www version of your website and you can end up with a duplicate content penalty you do not even know you are getting.

Small changes to the Theme are difficult,and can break the theme.

SEO is a bitch with WP and almost everyone thinks it is just a matter of using a plugin. Sorry, there is a hell of a lot more to it than that.

Another problem is the heading tags. WP developers tend to use them to control font size instead of SEO. They either do hot use the H1 tag, or use it multiple times. If they do not use it,and only define H2 tags in the CSS, when you use an h1 tag the font looks like you are building a page for a blind person. Even wprse they use the H1tag for your logo, which gives every page in the site the exact same heading.

At first until you understand default behaviors, even when you do not put something into a sidebar, the theme will populate it with whatever the developer decided to stick there.

WP is an easy way for people to build a website, but most WP installations I see are an SEO nightmare.

WP uses a lot of server resources, and the more plugins you pile on the worse it gets. The more sites you have on the account the worse it gets.

Load times are terrible, especially if the user does not re size the images before using them.

An overlooked SEO metric is the amount of text to code on a page, and WP tosses a lot of code for every function it uses.

Personally, to me its a quick way to build a default website, and you are doing a disservice to your customer dumping him with a wordpress site, especially if you do not stick around and teach them how to maintain and use the installation, or have a contract to do it yourself for them.

And for the record, I do build WP sites.

As I said, just my opinion.

 

[improvatron]

A non-CMS could be anything that is custom coded. A plain HTML website, yes. But if that was all the client would need, a CMS would be overkill regardless, making this thread pointless. So that leads to a custom PHP management backend. Or something that could be done in WordPress and its plugins, but also coded in PHP, JS, etc. to better suit the client's needs. All of these are non-CMS that produce HTML. Given the inaccurate wording of the OP, your assumption cannot be proven linguistically.

Everything produces HTML. My point is, which you clearly also do not comprehend, is that is inaccurate to refer to it as "CMS vs HTML," or if you prefer your website "in CMS or HTML," which makes it seem like CMS is something that is not HTML, and that if he does not understand this, he needs to before he goes selling it.

Artizhay - do you still offer citation service? Can you PM me with your details if you do?

 

[malkram]

I think CMS is better for SEO..

 

[blackhatdamo]

It depends what the client is after. If they want a basic static site then i'll code using foundation or bootstrap, but if they want fancy shit like hotel booking calenders or other clever php things i'll use wordpress for all the plugins. E-commerce sites I tend to use zen-cart although i may start looking at the e-commerce plugins for wordpress.

 

[Ptrick125]

If I had to build a site for a customer, I would use WordPress. Chances are they will want to update the website, and WordPress would allow them to do so without knowing pretty much any HTML. WordPress also has all kinds of fancy themes and plugins, I don't see why you would bother with basic HTML web pages...