HTML Websites VS WORDPRESS Websites ?!!
- Thread starter kentauros
- Start date
officialakash
Registered Member
- Oct 12, 2013
- 56
- 13
I would avoid flash websites, personally I use Wordpress it's quick and easy for me to manage my content and you have a lot of plugins/themes to help you customize your site. It all depends on your choice.
Umm i see different comments here @@ , i might still looking for the others
Last edited:
- Apr 13, 2013
- 8,294
- 2,803
WordPress is way easier to customize if you ask me.
youtalkmedia
Senior Member
- Dec 5, 2011
- 856
- 390
HTML will load faster on a slow server. WordPress is much easier to use.
SEO Most Wanted
Junior Member
- Jul 1, 2013
- 148
- 34
Google is Gonna Nothing To Do With HTML Or WP .. It's Barely Quality Contents & Real Traffic Which Google Actually Loves..
D
Deleted member 708208
Guest
Google does not care if a site is HTML or WordPress. Google cares more about the content on the website that
what the site is actually built with. I have to say though that Flash websites suck for SEO purposes because the
content is not good like fresh articles on a standard website.
-RK
what the site is actually built with. I have to say though that Flash websites suck for SEO purposes because the
content is not good like fresh articles on a standard website.
-RK
greenghost
Regular Member
- Dec 22, 2008
- 298
- 274
When its 5 pages, I use HTML. When its 50+ pages I use WordPress
When I know the website doesn't need any changes, I use HTML. When I know the website needs frequent changes, I use WP.
When I know the website doesn't need any changes, I use HTML. When I know the website needs frequent changes, I use WP.
ContentWriter
Banned - Selling via PM
- May 8, 2013
- 5,735
- 975
The choice between WordPress and HTML is dependent to your needs.
If it's a typical personal blog, a service website (like mine) or any website wherein you need to upload a post regularly, I'd recommend WordPress.
If you're referring to a website that requires a high level of security, especially sites that require personally-identifiable information (such as credit card details), then, you may decide to have an HTML-based website.
If it's a typical personal blog, a service website (like mine) or any website wherein you need to upload a post regularly, I'd recommend WordPress.
If you're referring to a website that requires a high level of security, especially sites that require personally-identifiable information (such as credit card details), then, you may decide to have an HTML-based website.
dezinerjimmy
Junior Member
- Nov 10, 2011
- 103
- 11
go for wordpress especially if you don't know codding. I have a site that am forced to change back to wordpress. Don't work with bought html scripts especially, i bought one for $80 and when i tried to customize it the guy was selling the source code for $1000
mrtwister_65
Regular Member
- Dec 30, 2009
- 461
- 542
WP has own uses with the good plugins. If your site gonna have thousands of pages, managing, backing up and transferring WP site is much easier than HTML website. But even though, I prefer HTML to WP.
I used to ask this kind of question before. While I was waiting for the reply, I headed out to seek for the best recommendation and advices from the programming and SEO community. My main intention is to know which one is better in term of SEO.
While there are many debates and different perspective, the majority of people who know what they're doing and know what they are experimenting are giving the same advice.
WordPress is easier for us to manage our site as well as many functions and plugins which could be possible to do various jobs on it. Static is harder to manage, but it's more scalable than WordPress because it's just static and could produce more functions with the hands of expert.
The final result is the same because both static Html and WordPress sites will produce the source codes for robot or search engines machine to read. The sources codes are still a bunch of markup of Html codes. Therefore, their is no real power of SEO of which one over other one.
In contrast, there are another factors which could lead to the bad of ranking such as site speed, bad markup by using not valid W3 standard or using iFrame etc.
Therefore, there is no debate about what is better than another in term of SEO. If one could manage and optimize their WordPress sites wisely, their sites will have better rank than the old dated error static Html sites and vice versa.
There main point that static Html is better than WordPress is the speed because they don't need call more queries from databases and only static files are reading by Search Engine robots; therefore, it's faster than the heavy coded WordPress. Even though this is better than WordPress from the start, but if one does not code their static Html sites wisely by adding bunch of codes that is not really neccessary, their sites are also slower than someone who optimized their WordPress sites wisely with good hosting provider, too.
Like some comment above, it's depend on which one you're comfortable with and which one you prefer to use. For smaller site and rarely to update or edit the content, I prefer normal static Html structure. Yet, for heavier and easy to add more content regularly, I'd prefer WordPress.
While there are many debates and different perspective, the majority of people who know what they're doing and know what they are experimenting are giving the same advice.
WordPress is easier for us to manage our site as well as many functions and plugins which could be possible to do various jobs on it. Static is harder to manage, but it's more scalable than WordPress because it's just static and could produce more functions with the hands of expert.
The final result is the same because both static Html and WordPress sites will produce the source codes for robot or search engines machine to read. The sources codes are still a bunch of markup of Html codes. Therefore, their is no real power of SEO of which one over other one.
In contrast, there are another factors which could lead to the bad of ranking such as site speed, bad markup by using not valid W3 standard or using iFrame etc.
Therefore, there is no debate about what is better than another in term of SEO. If one could manage and optimize their WordPress sites wisely, their sites will have better rank than the old dated error static Html sites and vice versa.
There main point that static Html is better than WordPress is the speed because they don't need call more queries from databases and only static files are reading by Search Engine robots; therefore, it's faster than the heavy coded WordPress. Even though this is better than WordPress from the start, but if one does not code their static Html sites wisely by adding bunch of codes that is not really neccessary, their sites are also slower than someone who optimized their WordPress sites wisely with good hosting provider, too.
Like some comment above, it's depend on which one you're comfortable with and which one you prefer to use. For smaller site and rarely to update or edit the content, I prefer normal static Html structure. Yet, for heavier and easy to add more content regularly, I'd prefer WordPress.
fullyniche
BANNED
- Dec 17, 2013
- 6,358
- 2,178
Google loves everything without flash websites. And more thing word press only very easy to customize and launch within half hr. If you're try to design in HTML. Gonna be 1 or 2 days.
Go on find wordpress treasurer
Go on find wordpress treasurer
loveplazza
Newbie
- Dec 4, 2013
- 38
- 10
google love both html and wordpress and its upto you in which you are good if you want to use wordpress plugins and tools then go for it otherwise html is best option