I find that using a site builder is a very convienient tool to use in conjunction with knowledge of HTML. anyone else feel this way? It's much faster and the learning curve for clients are lower as well. And you virtually eliminate constant FTP and save; everything is done in real time. One builder in particular I found quite interesting was [snipped]

Edited by Ezzaral: Let's not be promoting anything here.

5 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by Lorel

Are you here to advertise?
On the slim chance that you're here for a serious discussion, you would be way better off using an open source system like Wordpress, Drupal or Joomla.


While site builders are convenient, they lack a truly versatile functionality. They tend to output a lot of markup and code that isn't necessary, and lack page optimization to compensate for it. However, if you're just making a personal web site then learning HTML and CSS could be more trouble than it's worth.



The code bloat in site builder programs is enormous due to a computer trying to understand what the human brain is thinking, and it also often lacks the ability to use unique titles and descriptions (the default for file names are often numbers). It also doesn't utilize CSS efficiently, uses multiple javascript files that are not needed and causes other problems for SEO. Wordpress, etc. aren't much better.

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.