7 Reasons NOT to Use a Static Site Generator

Static website generator (SSG) is not always the best choice: weigh the pros and cons

Static website generators (SSGs) are highly favored and offer many advantages, but this article will explore why they are not always an ideal alternative to content management systems (CMS).

Compared with content management systems, static website generators require stronger technical capabilities and relatively scarce resources, and finding pre-built plugins and templates may also be more difficult. For large websites, SSG can present challenges in content editing, publishing process, real-time updates (due to rebuilding the website), build time, and deployment difficulty. Although SSG is very suitable for content pages, it is not able to do with user login, form filling, search functions and other server and database interactions, which will lead to extended development time, complex construction, increased security risks, increased testing workload and increased costs. .

Limitations of SSG: Seven Key Points

1. High technical barriers: Using SSG requires a certain amount of development experience. Compared to CMS, it is more difficult to use, fewer resources available, and pre-built plugins and templates are also difficult to find. CMS such as WordPress has huge community support and rich resources, so even non-technical users can easily get started.

2. Difficult choice: SSG has many choices, but even the most popular tools have a small number of users in the online community. Time is taken to be studied, investigated and evaluated.

3. Initial setup takes time: Creating the first static website takes time to learn the build process and develop most of the template code. The script may also be required. CMS usually provides pre-built templates, making it easier to find help.

4. Laboring the admin interface: It can be daunting to have customers edit Markdown files directly. While existing CMS can be used as an SSG data source or provide a simpler editing process (such as editing Git-based files using StackEdit or Hackmd.io), this will further increase initial development time.

5. Insufficient website consistency control: SSG is very flexible, but users may also include scripts, widgets, or many unwanted items. CMS can be configured to restrict users, and content is usually bound to a database with specific fields, so the management panel prompts the user to enter title, body content, summary, featured images, etc. Even if the user enters content in an unexpected field, it will not appear on the website unless implemented in the theme template.

6. Difficulty in managing large websites: For large websites with thousands of pages, daily content releases, real-time news, and dozens of authors spread across multiple locations, it is feasible to manage content using SSG, However, content editing and publishing sessions are more cumbersome, real-time updates will be delayed, build time will increase rapidly, and deployment will become very troublesome. SSG is more suitable for websites with fewer pages and low update frequency.

7. Server-side features are limited: Static websites are ideal for content pages, but if you need to log in, fill in forms, search functions, discussion forums, or other servers and database interactions, the situation becomes more complicated. . Although it can be solved by adding third-party client components, creating your own server (or serverless) API, generating pages containing server-side code blocks, or switching to Next.js, development time, construction complexity, and security risks , testing workload and cost will increase.

Is SSG suitable for you?

Before making a decision, evaluate the following factors: project requirements, size, complexity, update frequency, users, user location, expectations, team development skills, and any hosting and/or deployment factors. For most websites, CMS is often redundant, and SSG can simplify development and reduce costs.

FAQ (FAQ)

This article has included the main differences between static website generators and traditional CMSs, which websites are not suitable for SSG, whether non-developers can use SSG, security risks of SSG, performance of SSG, whether popular SSG, and whether SSG are suitable for large-scale Answers to complex websites, the cost of SSG, migration of existing WordPress websites to SSG, and the SEO impact of SSG.

The above is the detailed content of 7 Reasons NOT to Use a Static Site Generator. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!