Ok, I've done a lot of search on this and there just doesn't seem to be many drag and drop editors that let you export your design out into html files and host them on your own server. Most want you to sign up and get their own hosting. I have used PixelTogether and only know of them that allow this. Any others out there? Wix, Weebly and others don't seem to.
Your problem finding such a thing could be because "drag and drop editing" is mouth-breathingly idiotic BULLSHIT that vomits up non-semantic bloated markup, inaccessible design, and in general tells any potential visitors to the resultant site to go **** themselves. Never have I seen one that produced a website that was worth a flying purple fish... they are the antithesis of sane and rational web development and a crutch for the lazy and ignorant who to be frank, if they "need" such a tool means they're probably not willing to put the effort into making a real website. Forget that inept incompetent maladroit bungling train wreck of ineptitude, the only thing you can learn using ANY of them is how NOT to build a website... the results from using such tools only tell users with accessibility needs to sod off, search engines that you have no content, and anyone with eyeballs that you quite clearly don't actually care about delivering content to users. Do the world a favor, you want to make websites, LEARN HTML, LEARN CSS, and then DO IT PROPERLY!!!
@deathshadow These services exist because there is a market for them. Yes, everyone that needs a website can learn HTML, CSS, and do it properly, but people don't have time and that's not their objective to learn HTML or CSS. They're objective is to get a beautiful website at the end of the day that addresses their business, professional, or personal needs and move on from there. From a design perspective, I understand your harsh feelings towards these services, but they do address a need that is out there.
...scamming people who don't know any better. There, fixed. Then their objective is to fail; or at the very least to have a website that tells large swaths of potential users to go perform an anatomically impossible act upon themselves... Well, unless they're REALLY flexible. When the resulting site is an accessibility, usability, and sustainability disaster, it is highly unlikely that it would properly address business or professional needs. It is far more likely to simply result in them being duped, scammed, or otherwise bamboozled by the sleazy dirtbags propagating the DELUSION these idiotic systems can actually do a blasted thing besides tell the site owner to saddle up, as they're being taken for a ride! No matter how "pretty" the result is... to perfectly sighted users on the perfect mix of screen size and resolution in the fantasy-land of "everyone has a 45mbps fiber connect" that these systems are "designed" for... not that it's ACTUALLY design, more like just outright incompetence sleaze. The same way the idiocy of starting out dicking around in Photoshop isn't design either. Wix and Weebly are a SCAM, that exist to delude people into THINKING they can have a professional website. The result, is anything but professional given the raw number of users the bloated inaccessible buggy broken disasters vomited up by these "systems' are telling to "sit on it and spin". It is the quickest road to failure and the only reason this garbage continues is the same reason halfwit nonsense like faith continues; the truth is too hard for the deluded to accept or put the effort into understanding. But sure, you want to tell the visitors to your site to go **** themselves, hey, that's your call.
I get the point your making, but not sure why you're taking it so personally. Not everyone in the world that needs a website is going to pick up the skills your describing. That's just blatantly stupid. People have other strengths that are key to their success. If they need to use a service to achieve success of their website, so be it. I can understand if you're a web designer and use those services. That would be a no no. Relax a bit and understand that all those services out there whether they live up to your standards or not, are useful to those that need them.
The point is that people with no skills shouldn't be making websites, especially via web-site-builders, since they have no qualifications to assess the quality of the finished product. If you need a new carport built, most people don't set out to do it themselves, at least not unless they have some experience carpenting. If you want to have a website, but know nothing about building websites, then hire someone to build it for you!
Wow, to some extent I agree, that if you need a quality website, it's best built by those that can build them properly. I'm not disagreeing with that point. The point everyone is missing is that these services do address a problem. Hiring someone to do something isn't always the answer, even though you may get a properly coded site, it's going to cost you. There are many factors people have for doing things differently, albeit may not be the best outcome, but it's suitable to their needs. Whether a website should be properly coded is your opinion. These services do provide a quality product, even though the coding may be off a little. You have to look at the full picture. For every proper way to do something, people are finding alternate solutions. As mentioned, not everyone can pay a carpenter to build a carport, so they will settle and build a decent one another way.
The only "problem" they seem to address is the one dirtbags have of "How can we dupe people who don't know any better" That cost reflecting the fact that the developer in question MIGHT actually know what the **** they are doing. If said needs involve letting sleazy scum take them for a ride. A little is an understatement, and it's not JUST about the code. If the resultant page reeks of "WCAG, what's that?!?" telling large swaths of users to go *** themselves, what "quality" is there to said product?!? If it's so slow nobody wants to use it, what "quality" is there? If it's broken on mobile, what "quality" is there? There is nothing remotely resembling a "quality product" to ANY of these SCAMS! ... and that's all they are and that's why I'm so against them. They are JUST as sleazy as the slimy hucksters who do garbage like squatting on domains in the hopes some ignorant twit will buy them at fifty times what they should cost, or "flippers" who create websites for the sole purpose of hoping to find some ignorant twit who will fork over money for the existing "established" website without a care in the world of how badly they are screwing people over. JUST as sleazy as the hoodoo-voodoo types who "all we do is SEO" that have turned a small part of site building into a cottage industry that's little more than a "Hive of scum and villainy". At BEST it deludes people who shouldn't have a website into THINKING they can DIY, at worst it just flat out rapes them... which is why then they come to forums (like this one) with problems more often than not the only answer we can give is "we can't help you" or "throw it out and start over, there's nothing to be salvaged from that laundry list of how NOT to build a website" ... and again, it's not JUST "code" quality, it's the accessibility and usability disaster that results from the garbage code and ignorance not just of the site owner and developer, but the weaselly shits who make tools like Weebly, Wix -- or even media darlings like Turdpress -- in the first place who quite clearly don't know enough about HTML or CSS to be creating systems for other people to make websites with. I've never seen a site built with one of these -- and not to overuse the word -- SCAMS that wasn't a utter and complete accessibility and usability disaster, that wasn't telling me as a USER of websites "I don't give a shit about you actually being able to use my content"... which is why when I -- as a user -- come across such sites I'm an instant bounce; as are most people I know. The only real difference between myself and normal users who get pissed off and just go looking for an alternative is I know EXACTLY what's wrong and how to articulate it. Even if I do so somewhat colourfully...
I have seen sites built with these services and some of these sites are wonderfully done. (i.e. responsive, beautiful CSS, etc.) These services have come a long way. Albeit some of them still using proprietary coding, that's why most of these services are hosted. The code they produce is not one that is meant to be altered. I don't think we're comparing apples to apples here.
Do you have any examples, as I've NEVER seen one that was "wonderfully done". Again, giant middle finger to visitors to the page, certainly... reeking of "Every **** bootstrap website ever" there's been a fair share... painfully slow thanks to idiotic broken rubbish like OOCSS, static scripting in the markup, static style in the markup, and providing NOTHING remotely resembling accessibility for sure. I've NEVER seen one that wasn't a disaster on every front... Code, accessibility, usability, speed... and only those in the magical fairy-tale land of "everyone has 45mbps fiber" and the equally magical combination of perfect vision, perfect resolution to screen size, and lack of accessibility needs could see it otherwise. I would suspect you are either in that magical top percentile that any pile of crap would be acceptable to, or don't know enough about websites to recognize the telltales that such sites are telling large swaths of users to sod off. That or you've developed cognitive dissonance on the subject. Just look at weebly and Wix's homepages -- they alone reek so bad of "WCAG, what's that?!?" and bloated slow halfwit "designer" crap that basically tells users "we don't give a shit about content or accessibility, just using something flashy and shiny to scam you!". Fixed metirc fonts, illegible colour contrasts, layouts that break when zoomed, massive overuse of whitespace to cover up for a lack of content of value... Take weebly... White on light blue? White on light green? White on Yellow? EPIC HUFFING /FAIL/ -- they don't know enough about "design" to even design their own honking websites!!! Or wix, thin-glyph goofy webfont that pretty much means even if they reduced it to black and white half the population is going to get eye strain trying to read their site. ... and people are supposed to trust these dirtbags are going to have a tool to make a proper website? HAH! Compared to a well created website as ripe apples on the tree, what these tools make -- or even the sites for these tools -- are the apples that have sat rotting in a dumpster since July that are dripping out the bottom as slimy ooze. Again, have any examples that DON'T inhale upon the proverbial equine of short stature, in preparation of lubing it up for the greenhorns and mouth-breathers dumb enough to use such services? NEVER seen one... and usually when I ask that's when people seem to pack it in with the lame "Wah, wah, I know what I know and don't have to show anything" like second rate anti-vaxxers or food babe fans.