Chief Alchemist - Business Consulting For The 21st Century Via A Holistic & Intelligent Approach
Share ChiefAlchemist.com. RSS 2.0 feed for ChiefAlchemist.com. Sign up for the mailing list. Follow Chief Alchemist on Twitter. 'Like' the Chief Alchemist's page on Facebook. See what Chief Alchemist has been Q&A'ing on Quora. Chief Alchemist bookmarks & highlights on Diigo.com. Follow the Chief Alchemist on Digg.com. Chief Alchemist channel on Last.fm. Chief Alchemist on Flickr. Mark 'Chief Alchemist' Simchock on LinkedIn. Free Initial Consultation. Email Chief Alchemist. Phone Chief Alchemist.
  • Mark ‘Chief Alchemist’ Simchock
  • 'Email me.Email => ca .at. ChiefAlchemist .dot. com
  • 'Phone me.Alchemy United => 732 997-0028
  •  
  • Free initial consultation.Free => Initial Consultation
  • Please be sure to subscribe to your communication channels of choice.
  • Click To Close => The small green (consultation), red (email) or blue (phone) icons in the top upper right.
CURRENT “TOP 10” TOPICS TOOLS CLIENTS & PROJECTS SOURCES SEARCH HIDE
Business Consulting For The 21st Century Via A Holistic & Intelligent Approach

Static is what static does

Consumed => “Good Old Static HTML Sites Aren’t Dead Yet. Should They Be?” by Ada Ivanova on SpeckyBoy.

http://speckyboy.com/2012/02/22/good-old-static-html-sites-arent-dead-yet-should-they-be

=> My value add (i.e., left a comment)…

Funny, I just had this discussion with two different colleagues.

In theory I agree with most of the other comments. That is, it depends.

But the reality is – using WordPress as the CMS context (but I also work with ExpressionEngine) – it’s hard to imagine a site that wouldn’t benefit from an auto-generated XML site map, SEO friendliness (e.g., easily setting meta titles), automated backup, a contact form that writes to a DB, perhaps a sidebar widget with a random testimonial, etc., etc., etc.

If a website – large or small – is a process and not a static slice in time then a CMS makes a lot more sense as well. It’s not that some of these things aren’t doable with a static site, but why bother? Why be so short-sighted? Why not enable your client instead of forcing them into a relationship circa 2005?

Then there’s the tool itself. Let’s suppose you fall ill or are abducted by a UFO. Now the client has to look for someone to manage their static HTML site. I don’t know about you, but unless there’s some sort of hidden upside, I would pass on such work. Files on my client? FTP? No thanks. And if birds of a feather flock together what type of reference might you get from a static HTML client?

The migration path from a static site isn’t pretty. The possibilities of a static site are limited. Were we put on God’s good earth to muck around with dated technology for a brand/client that’s going nowhere? Gawd, email (as a dated tool) is bad enough. Don’t force static HTML sites on me too.

Required.
Will not be published. Required.
Please include http://