Should I go with manual website or CMS website

Mission0ps

13 years ago

CMS everytime

Thanks

Signature

We all start somewhere.

I suppose you could call it the honest john of review sites!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7997926].message }}

SandraElam

13 years ago

CMS websites are good

You can make changes anytime in CMS websites. they have lot more features than normal websites.

You can use custom design and integrate it with CMS

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7997999].message }}

Andrew H

13 years ago

CMS everytime

are you being sarcastic?

In my opinion you should rarely use CMS websites. Most businesses don't need to update their websites and will do fine with a static html website. No need to worry about hacking, security updates, server load, etc.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"You shouldn't come here and set yourself up as the resident wizard of oz."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7998021].message }}

mojojuju

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Andrew H

are you being sarcastic?

In my opinion you should rarely use CMS websites. Most businesses don't need to update their websites and will do fine with a static html website. No need to worry about hacking, security updates, server load, etc.

You may not agree that CMS websites should be used, but there is no reason to think that the use of a CMS is unreasonable.

A CMS has benefits. They include:

* separation of content & design (This brings numerous benefits)
* administration interface
* easy to template
* Better site search

You may not like or understand content management systems, but that's no reason to believe people are being sarcastic when they recommend using a CMS.

Originally Posted by Andrew H

No need to worry about hacking, security updates, server load, etc.

Plenty of CMS sites out there are run without such worries. It's just not very difficult to keep a CMS site online, updated, and secured. If a person can't do these things, or if it causes a significant amount of worry, then I agree, they shouldn't use a CMS.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

:)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7998057].message }}

RobinInTexas 13 years ago

I go with wordpress all the time. You can create what are essentially static pages within wordpress and do anything you can do in a static site with one of all of the available features that can be drawn from the wordpress CMS
- Thanks
Signature

Robin

...Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just set there.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7998165].message }}

Andrew H

13 years ago

Plenty of CMS sites out there are run without such worries. It's just not very difficult to keep a CMS site online, updated, and secured. If a person can't do these things, or if it causes a significant amount of worry, then I agree, they shouldn't use a CMS.

Really? If you have no intentions of updating your website frequently how can you ever suggest that a CMS be used? It causes so much headache for no reason (issues with PHP upgrades, transfer of server problems, the list goes on). If you can get by with a static html website then you should NEVER (EVER) use a cms in such a situation. It is beyond idiotic. (one caveat -> unless the client requests it)

If you do not have the (extremely basic) skills required to create a html website from scratch - then sure use wordpress and some templates. However, it should be noted that html templates exist as well... and they are much more abundant.

The reality is any good developer will know when to use a CMS, and when not to, based on the clients requirements.

Plenty of CMS sites out there are run without such worries

Plenty of CMS sites out there run with a lot of worries, and get hacked frequently. Risk avoidance is the name of the game.

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"You shouldn't come here and set yourself up as the resident wizard of oz."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7998205].message }}

mojojuju

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Andrew H

Really? If you have no intentions of updating your website frequently how can you ever suggest that a CMS be used?

I was not aware that OP was planning a web site that would be seldom updated.

Anyway, a CMS has the benefit of ease of use regardless of update frequency.

Originally Posted by Andrew H

It causes so much headache for no reason (issues with PHP upgrades, transfer of server problems, the list goes on).

It seems you've had some difficulty in using content management systems. For you, I think it makes sense to not use one.

In the case of PHP upgrades, take for instance Wordpress. Most popular shared hosting providers are going to maintain good quality with Wordpress if they know what's best for them.

Also, most CMSs that I've used don't release versions based on bleeding edge PHP releases. The releases of content management systems do a good job of being compatible with common PHP versions.

Originally Posted by Andrew H

If you can get by with a static html website then you should NEVER (EVER) use a cms in such a situation. It is beyond idiotic. (one caveat -> unless the client requests it)

You seem a bit dogmatic in your stance regarding CMS.

I require more than what I can get by with. I'm sure I could do everything with vi or notepad and store all of my files in a directory structure like I would have 20 years ago, but I'd rather have all of the benefits that a CMS provides. I use many features of content management systems.

Originally Posted by Andrew H

If you do not have the (extremely basic) skills required to create a html website from scratch - then sure use wordpress and some templates.

I have excellent HTML skils and a CMS adds to what I can do with my skills. But you mentioned a good reason for novices to use a CMS - the abundance of readily to go templates. Same goes for plugins; novices can easily achieve the functionality that they want with the many plugins available.

Originally Posted by Andrew H

However, it should be noted that html templates exist as well... and they are much more abundant.

Naturally, they would be more abundant. And with most CMS systems, they can be integrated into a compatible theme/template.

Originally Posted by Andrew H

The reality is any good developer will know when to use a CMS, and when not to, based on the clients requirements.

Also, a good developer is flexible, and not dogmatic, in his attitude toward available technologies.

Originally Posted by Andrew H

Plenty of CMS sites out there run with a lot of worries, and get hacked frequently. Risk avoidance is the name of the game.

Sure, and cars break down - some even catch on fire and explode. Some get broken into.

So ride a bike.

Thanks

Signature

:)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7998299].message }}

RobinInTexas

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Andrew H

Really? If you have no intentions of updating your website frequently how can you ever suggest that a CMS be used? It causes so much headache for no reason (issues with PHP upgrades, transfer of server problems, the list goes on). If you can get by with a static html website then you should NEVER (EVER) use a cms in such a situation. It is beyond idiotic. (one caveat -> unless the client requests it)

Never ever say never ever.

Thanks

Signature

Robin

...Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just set there.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7998411].message }}

Andrew H

13 years ago

Sure, and cars break down - some even catch on fire and explode. Some get broken into.

So ride a bike.

Exactly. If the location I need to get to is only 5 steps away, there is no need to get into a car to get their

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"You shouldn't come here and set yourself up as the resident wizard of oz."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7998348].message }}

mojojuju 13 years ago

Originally Posted by Andrew H

Exactly. If the location I need to get to is only 5 steps away, there is no need to get into a car to get their

If that's an analogy which applies to the extent of your web development demands, then I think you could easily get by with publishing plain text files instead of HTML.

And maybe you should just publish those text files to a GOPHER or an FTP site because you could easily get by without HTTP and that newfangled HTML.
- Thanks
Signature

:)
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7998374].message }}

Andrew H

13 years ago

HTTP is over rated. FTP is where it's at. If people want to view anything they can download the .txt file. Just make sure they are named appropriately.

ie: 'contact_us.txt' can have your contact info (telegraph number, etc). Also, be sure to include an 'about_us.txt' so they know what your company does (supplier of bell bottom jeans, etc). I recommend hosting on at least a 56kb upload speed for the best reliability. Your computer from home should do fine as long as your running Windows 95 or greater.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"You shouldn't come here and set yourself up as the resident wizard of oz."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7998399].message }}

mojojuju

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Andrew H

HTTP is over rated. FTP is where it's at. If people want to view anything they can download the .txt file. Just make sure they are named appropriately.

ie: 'contact_us.txt' can have your contact info (telegraph number, etc). Also, be sure to include an 'about_us.txt' so they know what your company does (supplier of bell bottom jeans, etc). I recommend hosting on at least a 56kb upload speed for the best reliability. Your computer from home should do fine as long as your running Windows 95 or greater.

I don't have a home computer or a 56bk and I don't understand any of what you just said about STDs and 95s. I would just like to be able to send you a SASE and then you send me a brochure. A fax # would be useful.

Thanks

Signature

:)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7998436].message }}

lostarts

13 years ago

There are some passionate opinions on this topic. Unfortunately the original question didn't give much information to go on other than:

I have never used cms but have seen wordpress websites which looks good.

and

On the other hand I also like manually build websites which allows anything to be edited and uses less resources

There have been some good points made and I wont rehash them. The goal of any project should be to find the simplest yet most effective solution.

We have to know what skillset and/or resources "apnavarun" has at their disposal to make this website happen. If they have basic html/css editing skills and don't plan to blog then perhaps a static site is in order. You can get a nice looking template for $10-15 and edit it on your own if you have the skill.

On the other hand if apnavarun is at least familiar with the wordpress dashboard (or other CMS, but we'll use WP as the example), then they should be able to set up and manage a decent looking website with out much effort. However using a CMS can become unwieldy when you are trying to customize pages with varying layouts or content.

The benefits of using a wordpress setup is that you'll have access to a vast amount of useful plugins. But if you don't require all of that for your site, then going through the process of setting up wordpress and managing updates becomes unnecessary.

You shouldn't ALWAYS go the CMS route if it's not required for your project. Because it does take additional time to set up and manage. However if you are willing to manage the CMS, can deal with PHP for customization, and need content management for a site with constant updates, then perhaps the a CMS is the way to go. But please don't do it just because you've "seen some nice looking wordpress sites."

Thanks

Signature

"We think in secret and it comes to pass. Environment is but a looking glass" - James Allen, As a Man Thinketh
clear-mind-meditation-techniques.com
Premium Landing Page Service
Quick, Easy, Affordable Squeezepage

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7998814].message }}

Zaiyan

13 years ago

Go with manual if its a one time update website, which doesn't require updates and if it's a regular update website then go for cms.
In my opinion though wordpress is not a cms : it has a wide collection of plugins.
Its the best.

Thanks

Signature

Handmade Sketches Online | Gold Choker Necklace Online India | Love Shayari

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7999297].message }}

ricox

13 years ago

these days google seem to love manual html websites for ranking but some other cms not wordpress might also work

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7999306].message }}

rypher21

13 years ago

I think you should go with the manual creation of the website. Although it is not that easy, it's fun. And you can practice and practice your skills in it through time.

Thanks

Signature

Business Consulting Services - Kittelson & Carpo Consulting

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8003231].message }}

kevintb7

13 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8004882].message }}

mojojuju

13 years ago

Originally Posted by kevintb7

One more point

You guys keep mentioning ease of themes for CMS sites, but you are ignoring the fact there are 1000000000000 times as many themes for just plain html sites. There are way more free open themes for creating a website manually than for any CMS.

Where do you think CMS themes come from? They come from plain HTML.

Also, I think the many people who list "many themes available" as their #1 or #2 reason for using a CMS are not the types of people who have the HTML skills needed to run a non-CMS based web site.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

:)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8005344].message }}

kevintb7

13 years ago

Originally Posted by mojojuju

Where do you think CMS themes come from? They come from plain HTML.

Also, I think the many people who list "many themes available" as their #1 or #2 reason for using a CMS are not the types of people who have the HTML skills needed to run a non-CMS based web site.

Well thats exactly my point, I read most of the responses above as "you should use wordpress because you can build a pretty site". One of my biggest pet peeves is when people use a CMS where it is not needed.

Im not sure the point of your first comment, I think you misunderstand my post. I dont think themes should ever be in the decision to use a CMS, if you like a wordpress theme and want to use it, view source, tada, now you have the html to use for a manual site (after downloading the css sheets).

I really think anyone with general computer skills can learn the very little html you need to know to run a manual site. Learn how the basic tags work <a> <p> and get a theme and do some guess and check, few hours you could get the hang of it.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8005717].message }}

wlasikiewicz

13 years ago

CMS every time, if you go with a manual HTML site then you will have to edit tons of code to make simple edits to your webpages..

Thanks

Signature

Build a Profitable & Professional email list.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8004890].message }}

Stevewoody82

13 years ago

To be able to advise you better it would be great to get an idea of the outcome of your website.

If anywhere in your planing stage you state the requirement to update content yourself then a cms would be advisable, I only build Wordpress website but started with static HTML and then php so I understand the benefits of both.

Wordpress will pose both security and performance issues as will a static site if built incorrectly. However with a good developer you should be able to utilise many of the less frameworks available to create a very secure and responsive websitr

Thanks

Signature

Your website is the window to your business . Don't fill it with cheap crap !

What I don't know about Wordpress either isn't worth knowing or hasn't been invented ;)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8005639].message }}

Should I go with manual website or CMS website

Trending Topics

Which Social Platform Is Giving You the Best ROI This Year?

How to add Backlink ? I am under thread of losing the job

How you guys normally spend your weekend?

Digital Marketing & Instagram Growth -- Beginner Friendly Strategies?

Is Off-page SEO become hard as Ai Energizes