re: How do you convince a client to a static website? VIEW POST

re: WordPress works because it already has a massive set of plugins that can be used without the help of a developer. As badly coded as the platform is...

I'd argue against there being "little business value" in static sites.

  • They're 10000x more efficient than their server-rendered counterparts since they can be purely served off a CDN. You get less bandwidth costs and immense scalability with static.
  • Your site is 10000x more secure because it's run off a CDN, not a server, so there's no much malicious code that can run. And even if there was some scrupulous client-side script, it'd be difficult to slip through, since content is controlled (Markdown only basically). No issues with a client installing a rogue plugin that runs mining operations or bloats the DB.
  • Since most deployments are through Git, your site is version controlled, allowing you to step backwards to a previous state, easier than a Wordpress backup.
  • You can still serve your static content from Wordpress as an API, and benefit from the flexibility of it's content structure (like using ACF).
  • Your SEO can be handled completely, like Yoast in WP. It's simply setup by the develop when they optimize the website (often using react-helmet and Markdown metadata).

It really depends on the client. If your client is looking for a product they can iteratively develop themselves, sure, Wordpress and a slew of plugins will work. But those clients probably aren't dealing with scaling issues, or honestly, they don't know what they want and the site's quality will suffer regardless.

At that point, they're not looking for a website, as much as a theme builder. Those are the clients I could recommend Squarespace or Wix and they'd probably be more satisfied with the greater degree of control. and honestly, being cheapos who want to install a plugin for a contact form instead of paying a dev to do it


It really depends on the client.

Yes, sir. And that's my main beef with this article. The OP is asking how to convince the client that static websites are best for them, whereas this decision should be based on a rational and far-sighted analysis of their requirements.

being cheapos who want to install a plugin for a contact form instead of paying a dev to do it

Really? Is that your stand?

I'm all for empowering clients. But when you've worked as long as I have, you've probably come across some clients that will nickel and dime you for services.

The kind of client that gets upset over charges for "updating the website" when you have to spend time swapping text and images they're indecisive over (and wanted moved around 3-4x). The same client that'll often insist to do work themselves, or in some other cases, outsource labor to cheaper places, and in even worse cases -- come back with broken code from that cheaper dev and ask you to fix it.

I'm not saying every client is like this, but I will say that these are the clients who prefer "simpler" plug and play solutions like Wordpress. It's the kind of client that doesn't respect your time as a professional. The same kind of client that'll pervade any service industry (like plumbing, car detailing, etc).

Again, we have to put things into perspective. Maybe the client is a WordPress user and knows that a simple plugin can solve the problem for the time being. And maybe they aren't a WordPress user, but a simple plugin does cover the use case.

I agree about the existence of such clients, and I personally make a run when I smell bullshit on the table, but the point here is not the ethics of clients but making the right decision.

Yes, sometimes static site generators make sense, but you have to be sane about your decision making.

code of conduct - report abuse