Static HTML based CMS vs Dynamic CMS

Get Started
1

Hello!)
I was wondering if there are CMS systems which allow to generate and manage the content in the static HTML messages. I have not seen one but I have been wondering if the following website is managed with such a system:

All pages on this news site are HTML pages which are perfect for being spidered and indexed by Google. Correct me if I am wrong but the dynamically generated pages are less helpful in driving the targeted traffic to your website due to insufficient “indexability” by major search engines.

Please let me know what you think!

D

2

I might be wrong, but as I understand it: “indexabliity” has more to do with the actual text in your website rather than if it’s static vs. dynamic. for example; if you have a lot of images,videos, etc. be sure to surround them with text.

It makes more sense that a dynamic website would be more Search Engine Friendly because the content is always fresh.

Think of your website like a refrigerator; the old stuff will ruin everything. Keep everything fresh and clean.

:slight_smile: I hope this helps

3

I have some content that does not change a lot and I need to create lots of the non-changing static pages but might wish to have them all managed by CMS to say automatically update an ad banner instead of doing it manually…do you think there is a solution for that?
thanks

4

Gotcha. What would the ad banner serve? income for the site?
in that case Wordpress would work fine, you could easily integrate it into your current site. You can create pages (static content like about, contact, etc) as well as dynamic content like blog material. There are also ridiculously easy ad banner plug-ins which even your grandma could install.

is this what you mean?

5

thank you for your reply…I am still concerned with the way the pages are to be indexed by google and if for example there is a crash on the word press database all the content is goign to be gone ??? you think there is no way the static html page database can be created and managed like the wordpress for example…

I saw the plug-in which appends HTML to the dynamic pages - will it make them look STATIC to google?

6

I don’t know about that plug-in. If you’re concerned about a crash, just back up your site every now and then. Static Pages can be created in Wordpress, they would be “pages” as opposed to “posts”. I hope this is what you’re asking, if not, maybe someone else has a better answer for you :slight_smile: Let me know if I’m completely misunderstanding you

7

yes but I am still a little bit puzzled about the CMS the Dily Mail is using…it is certainly a CMS but all the pages end with the HTML extension (example:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2086255/Victoria-Beckham-daughter-Harper-Seven-enjoy-girl-time-5-star-hotel.html)

I wonder what kind of the system they are using?
Thanks!

8

Try this plugin for Firefox; it is supposed to tell you what cms was used to build any website:

I just found it; let me know if you have any luck :slight_smile:

9

THANKS))))) cute app but it still does not show the CMS they use…remains a mystery for me!)))) hopefully there is a clue how they do it somewhere!)

10

Hmm, I’m not sure why it wouldn’t work. I haven’t used that app before. I’ll let you know if I can think of any other ways to help. :slight_smile:

11

It’s probably a bespoke CMS. The presence or absence of file extensions is not a reliable indicator of whether a site is static or dynamic, because servers can be configured to add or remove extensions from URLs. See mod_rewrite.

12

Think about it in a more logical fashion – first, what is the difference between the two?

/yourdomain.com/index.php?pageName
or
/yourdomain.com/pageName.php

vs.

/yourdomain.com/pageName.html

Do you REALLY think search engines are so **** stupid, they can’t figure that out? Magically treat them different? OF COURSE NOT. So on that front it’s ALWAYS been nothing more than people flapping their gums about things they haven’t taken the time to rub a couple brain cells together on.

That just leaves users actually typing in a URL by hand… how often do YOU do that? I’ll do the domain name occasionally, sometimes a subdirectory like /forums – but apart from that? Like I’m even going to remember it! So that’s really a nonsensical claim as well if you take the time to think about it. Bookmarks, speed dial, favicon based bookmarklets (like those built into Opera) – these exist so people don’t have to remember URL’s.

I’d also point out that using Apache and many other server softwares you can use things like mod_rewrite to redirect those long GET type requests into something simple. Take a look at my personal garbage site for example:

http://www.deathshadow.com/

and a few sub-pages:

http://www.deathshadow.com/pakuPaku
http://www.deathshadow.com/canvasDemo
http://www.deathshadow.com/glKernedFont

Those are ALL being routed through a single index.php using this .htaccess


RewriteEngine On
RewriteRule !\\.(gif|jpg|png|css|js|html|ico|zip|rar|pdf|xml|mp4|mpg|flv|swf|mkv|ogg|avi|woff|svg|eot|ttf)$ index.php

Whitelisting extensions it’s ok for Apache to handle, sending any other requests to my index.php, which then parses $_SERVER[‘REQUEST_URI’] to figure out which page content to show – or throwing a nicely styled error if it can’t find it.

http://www.deathshadow.com/library/common.php

for example, which is pointing at a file that actually exists on the server… that I don’t even allow users to run directly from the web. (just a bit of extra added security there). You can do this even faster if you have a static server running OVER Apache, since then anything the static content server doesn’t nab must be a code request.

It’s not even a matter of static vs. dynamic at that point, it’s a matter of how well written it is. You could even FAKE the .html extension on them, and then strip it off when parsing REQUEST_URI – basically calling files that don’t exist, then letting the mod_rewrite handler call the appropriate content.