What is Difference between Hand Coded and Wordpress/Wix Websites

Static Websites (Hand Coded) vs Dynamic Websites (WordPress, Wix, etc.)

Key Takeaways:

• Static websites built from the ground up load significantly faster, up to ten times quicker than those constructed using page builders such as WordPress. Research indicates that if your website exceeds a load time of three seconds, the majority of your visitors are likely to abandon it, resulting in lost potential customers.

• Google evaluates your website's mobile performance when indexing, and mobile sites created with page builders often lack optimization, speed, robust construction, and complete responsiveness. This deficiency may adversely affect your search rankings.

• My personally crafted static sites prioritize mobile responsiveness by adopting a "mobile-first" approach. This means I commence coding with mobile screens in mind, subsequently incorporating code for tablets and desktops. This strategy enhances mobile responsiveness, optimization, and loading speed, ultimately enhancing your website's performance on Google and reducing the likelihood of visitors abandoning your site.

• WordPress is renowned for its susceptibility to security vulnerabilities, necessitating regular updates to address potential flaws that hackers could exploit to breach your website's security. In contrast, handcrafted static sites are considerably less vulnerable and nearly impervious to compromise due to their simplicity and absence of potential entry points for hacking.

In the realm of web development, two primary types of websites exist: static and dynamic. A static site comprises the fundamental elements of web development—HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. It lacks databases, functionalities for manipulating data, or any advanced features. Essentially, it merely displays the page as originally designed. These three coding languages encompass everything visible on a website and often suffice for many purposes. When you access a static site, your browser interprets and executes the code, resulting in instant loading. Every user views identical content. Coding a static site by hand, which is my specialty, or utilizing a static site generator, represents one of the most effective methods for creating such websites.

A dynamic site, such as WordPress or those built with page builders, employs additional server-side languages and technologies. These technologies retrieve HTML, CSS, and assets from a database and assemble the website as it loads on the server. Subsequently, the compiled website is sent to the browser. Unlike static sites where browsers compile the code, in dynamic sites, it's the server that performs this task. Moreover, instead of every user receiving the same content, each user is served with unique content individually. Consequently, load times tend to be slower, and dynamic sites are vulnerable to attacks from malware and hackers disrupting the server's process of accessing the database for website content. In contrast, static sites, devoid of databases, have no vulnerable points to attack. We'll delve deeper into this topic later in the page.

Dynamic sites encompass websites constructed with platforms like WordPress, Wix, Squarespace, GoDaddy, page builders, or those built using PHP, among others. These platforms store assets and content in a database. When a visitor accesses the website, the server retrieves the requested assets and content from the database and assembles them into the landing page displayed on the browser. While these page builders simplify website creation and are cost-effective, they come with significant drawbacks compared to the static websites I specialize in building.

What makes static websites faster than dynamic websites?

The speed and performance of your website, particularly on mobile devices, play a crucial role in its ranking on Google. Dynamic websites like WordPress and Wix face a challenge: the server requires additional time to check the database and compile everything. Moreover, the more plugins and additional elements you add to your site, the slower it becomes. This is significant because research indicates that the majority of users will abandon a website if it takes more than three seconds to load. If your website exceeds this threshold, what's the point of having it if most users won't even view it? This is one of the MAJOR drawbacks of platforms like WordPress and Wix—they can be slow to load, potentially costing you customers and revenue.

Static sites, in contrast, can load up to ten times faster than dynamic websites because they don't require the intricate process of assembling and connecting website components on the browser's operating table. With everything prebuilt, browsers simply need to load and display the content. There are no plugins, databases, or unnecessary bloat. Every line of code in my sites serves a purpose and is meticulously organized, making it easy for Google to interpret. Dynamic sites like WordPress often contain excessive and disorganized code, which only adds to the loading time.

Consider this analogy: envision two plates of spaghetti. On one plate, the noodles are all tangled up, making it challenging to count them or make sense of the mess. On the other plate (your "static" plate), the noodles are neatly arranged in groups of ten, with the meat on the side for easy consumption (although I wouldn't recommend eating spaghetti like this). It's much simpler and quicker to determine the quantity of noodles when everything is organized and grouped together logically. This analogy illustrates the difference between the code of a dynamic site and a static site. The messy, tangled code of dynamic sites is akin to "spaghetti code," making it more time-consuming for browsers to analyze and load. Moreover, Google's search crawlers may struggle to comprehend the content and its meaning when it's buried within a jumbled mess of code devoid of context.

The standard load time benchmark for a website is typically set at 2 seconds. Remarkably, my handcrafted static websites frequently achieve load times of under 0.5 seconds, far below the average. In fact, they often load almost instantaneously. This expedited loading is attributed to the meticulously organized and grouped code, which facilitates easier reading and comprehension for both browsers and Google's algorithms. Consequently, improved load times not only prevent customers from abandoning your site but also enhance your website's ranking on Google. If your website isn't generating significant business, it's worth checking its loading time using this tool provided by Google.

If its loading time exceeds 3 seconds, there's a high likelihood that people are departing even before reaching it.

Regarding Google and speed, they've recently implemented an update to their search algorithm known as Mobile First Indexing. This means that your website's ranking is now determined primarily by its performance on mobile devices. Essentially, the faster your mobile site loads, the higher you'll rank. This is where static sites consistently outshine other options.

Mobile-first development and enhanced website speed

Mobile-first programming is a practice that cannot be effectively executed by a page builder. It involves writing code starting with mobile screens and gradually adding code for tablet and desktop sizes as we progress down the file. When the browser parses the CSS file to determine how the page should be structured and styled, it reads the file from top to bottom. If we begin with desktop code at the top, the browser loads it first and then continues down the page searching for rules for various screen sizes, adjusting the content accordingly. However, if the mobile code is located at the bottom of the CSS file, the browser must read through all the code, including desktop-specific rules, before identifying the appropriate mobile styling. This inefficient process wastes both time and resources.

With the mobile-first approach, your mobile code is prioritized and placed at the top of the file. Consequently, when you access the site on your phone, the browser first loads the mobile styling code, evaluates the screen size rules, and promptly displays the content. It's as if the browser exclaims, "Alright, this is it! Let's showcase this code on the screen. It's showtime!"

Speaking from firsthand experience, it's far simpler to allow content to expand into its allocated space rather than compressing it and forcing it into smaller areas. Combining mobile-first programming with static site development will result in an exceptionally fast website . It might even surprise a few people.

What makes static sites more secure than dynamic sites?

Dynamic sites possess databases and server-side platforms susceptible to attacks, particularly when accessing the database or content management systems housing all the website's data. During the process of building and preparing the site for the browser, hackers can infiltrate the system and compromise your website.

Static sites, on the other hand, lack vulnerabilities for attackers to exploit. With no database, session tokens, or data being collected or transmitted, there are no opportunities for hackers to interfere or intercept information. There are no avenues for them to clandestinely insert malicious elements into our website's processes as it prepares to deliver content to the browser.

One of the challenges with WordPress sites is the reliance on numerous plugins. If a WordPress site is set up and left unattended for a period, many of these plugins may require updates to address security vulnerabilities. Failure to update them leaves your site susceptible to attacks. Additionally, outdated plugins can sometimes cause conflicts with others, resulting in the entire site crashing without your knowledge. Who has the time to constantly monitor and update these plugins? This is where the advantage of my work in creating static sites becomes evident—there's no need for updates. It's simply HTML and CSS. There are no manual security patches required to ensure the safety and security of your site. Once it's up, it's complete.

Consider this analogy: You have two cabins in the woods. One cabin is equipped with electricity, internet access, and sophisticated electronic locks controlled via an app. The lights and appliances are connected to the internet and cloud, allowing you to manage them remotely from your phone. It's a modern and connected way of living. On the other hand, the second cabin is off the grid, with a fireplace providing heat, and traditional deadbolts securing the doors.

In the other modern cabin, someone managed to hack into their internet connection, gaining control of the house's electronic locks and disabling them. This breach allowed intruders to enter and steal everything inside. Ironically, all the fancy features meant to enhance convenience and security ended up providing additional entry points for attackers. In the end, all you wanted was a peaceful retreat after hiking.

Meanwhile, the other cabin, devoid of electricity and internet-connected gadgets, remains secure. They rely on basic necessities like a fire stove and lanterns—reminiscent of HTML and CSS. It's all about the simplicity of traditional tools: fire stoves and lanterns, just like a static site composed of its core building blocks. This is the type of website I specialize in creating. They're like log cabins meticulously crafted by hand, using only the tools of a skilled craftsman. In contrast, page builders are akin to mass-produced, lower-quality structures that pose security risks.

Given WordPress's status as the most widely used content management system (CMS) for website development, hackers often target WordPress sites to exploit known vulnerabilities, especially those with outdated versions and plugins. Your website becomes a prime target. Opting for a static site eliminates this vulnerability, effectively removing the target from your back. Your website can exist without fear of being compromised or abducted from the digital landscape.

But what about the servers hosting these static sites? Could they be compromised, causing the site to go down? Not quite! When your static site is hosted by a Content Delivery Network (CDN), it resides on multiple servers distributed globally, ready for access. Therefore, if one server experiences issues, the site can seamlessly switch to another server in a different location, ensuring no downtime.

Hand Coded Static Sites vs WordPress and Wix

In summary, handcrafted static websites consistently outperform page builders like WordPress and Wix. Static websites load in milliseconds, whereas WordPress or Wix sites may take several seconds or more. Additionally, their inherent simplicity makes them nearly impervious to hacking or compromise, making them the obvious choice for your business needs.

Dynamic sites currently lack the capability for mobile-first programming and are unable to reap its benefits. A notable issue with dynamic sites, exemplified by platforms like Wix, is their lack of responsiveness when resizing the browser window. Attempting to resize a Wix site may reveal that it lacks a dedicated tablet version, resulting in poor responsiveness where content fails to adjust or move as the screen size changes. This can lead to content being squeezed into boxes, getting cut off at the edges of the screen, or text wrapping around images in awkward ways, distorting the layout and making the site appear broken. Unfortunately, these page builders do not provide sufficient control to ensure responsiveness for various screen sizes without coding knowledge or accessing the page builder's API for intricate customization.

Why should I hire someone to create a website when I can do it myself?

Wix and WordPress promote the idea that anyone can create a website for free, which is particularly enticing for small businesses operating on a tight budget and lacking the resources to hire a developer like myself. However, if concerns such as page speed, loading times, security, customer conversion, and Google rankings are important to you and you aim to stand out from your competitors, I strongly recommend seeking out a professional to create a static website for you (like me!). Think of it this way: anyone can buy paint and attempt to paint their own house, but not everyone possesses the skill and expertise to achieve the same quality as a professional, resulting in a subpar outcome. Similarly, web development is a skilled trade that can incur costs. Having a static site developed by a skilled developer typically ranges from ₹8999 to ₹50,000 or more, depending on the complexity of the project. It's understandable to be drawn to page builders as a means of saving money by taking a DIY approach, and there's nothing wrong with that! However, if you're eager to elevate your business and maximize its potential, it's time to stop leaving money on the table and consider investing in a static site. By doing so, you'll create something that performs significantly better and gives you a competitive edge in the market.

It's highly likely that your competitors also have WordPress sites. Some developers or agencies charge exorbitant amounts to create these basic WordPress sites, which could have been built as static sites instead. Moreover, many of these sites are simply template-based creations that are handed off to you without any ongoing support—quick and impersonal. Therefore, finding a reliable developer or agency may prove to be challenging, but it will undoubtedly be worthwhile. You'll need to invest some time in distinguishing the mediocre ones from the exceptional ones.

Make an investment in your website

In my experience, I've encountered two types of individuals: business owners and entrepreneurs. A common mistake among business owners is viewing a website as an expense rather than an investment. Entrepreneurs, on the other hand, recognize that spending money on the business constitutes an investment in its growth and success. They can justify this expenditure by anticipating the returns it will yield. For instance, imagine purchasing a static website from a developer for $3000. Initially, this may seem like a significant expense. However, with a visually appealing and high-performing website, you could potentially convert more visitors into customers who might have otherwise left due to slow loading times or an outdated appearance that undermines trust. Suddenly, that investment could result in an additional ₹3,00,000 or more in revenue annually, after some time, from new business. If you could invest ₹50,000 and generate ₹3,00,000 in profit within a year, wouldn't you make that investment? While these numbers may seem speculative, they are entirely feasible. I've personally witnessed clients double their business within a year of working with me.

Let's delve into my approach. I offer websites starting at a monthly rate of ₹1500. Some may wonder, "Why should I commit to paying every month for years?" Consider it this way: do the benefits of my static sites outweigh the ₹1500 monthly fee? The answer is almost always yes. Take, for example, a business who earns ₹500 or more per new client. If my site brings in just five additional client per month, that's a ₹1000 return on investment. Furthermore, each new customer acquired every month adds to the value you receive from my sites. For the ₹1500 monthly fee, you have someone available 24/7 to manage your website, make updates based on changes in search algorithms, and address any queries you may have. You're not just receiving a website; you're gaining a partner invested in the success of your business.

Websites are akin to tattoos—quality correlates with price. If you opt for a ₹9000 website from Craigslist or Fiverr, you'll likely receive something generic or outdated that may deter potential customers. Similar to selecting a tattoo artist, it's essential to conduct research and find reputable developers who can address all your concerns and deliver a high-quality, visually appealing product.

Amidst the abundance of cheap and quick website building options, it's crucial to understand that a truly exceptional website will never emerge from such a low price point. In fact, it should serve as a warning sign. If I were in need of surgery, I wouldn't entrust my health to a doctor found online offering their services for a fraction of the standard price. Such a scenario would undoubtedly raise concerns about quality and effort, suggesting that shortcuts are being taken to churn out results as swiftly as possible for maximum profit with minimal investment. Your business deserves better than this. If you settle for a cheap website, anticipate receiving subpar results. However, if you're seeking excellence, that's where a skilled developer enters the picture.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the decision between a static site and a dynamic site boils down to your budget and priorities. If you're working with a limited budget and simply need a basic online presence, platforms like WordPress or Wix can suffice. However, if you have the means to invest in a higher-quality solution that can significantly enhance your online presence, opting for a static site is likely your best return on investment. On the other hand, if your requirements involve more complex features such as a database or the ability to edit content independently, platforms like WordPress and other page builders may be the better choice.

In my business model, you don't have to choose between DIY to save money or hiring a developer at a high price tag. Instead of charging ₹15000 or more for my services, I offer a plan with ₹0 down and ₹1500 a month. This makes my work more accessible to small businesses that need it most, providing them with a reliable partner to handle their website while they focus on their daily operations. I'm able to offer such affordable upfront costs because I'm a stay-at-home dad—my bills are already covered, I just need to keep my marriage intact! With no overhead costs like rent or employee salaries, it's just me working on your project. My goal is to create websites that last for years and contribute to your business growth, and I'll be there every step of the way to support you.

Last updated: April 14, 2024