Static HTML or blog?

I'm about to make a new content site and I can't decide about making a static plain HTML site or using a blog script. Blogs have some very useful features, but the static html sites I made until now seemed to be indexed better and more thoroughly by SE's(or at least that's what I experienced).

I need your recommendations. Which one should I prefer for SEO purposes and better SE ranking? Plain static HTML sites or blog scripts?

 

Depends on your experience. Are you getting at optimizing a website or blog? For me, it would have to be website... but for blogs you can read up on how you can optimize your layout and posts.

 

I would prefer blog if you are going to update it regularly..

There are lot of plugins for wordpress for SEO are available.. so no worry.

 

Blog for me all the way, easier to setup and better for SEO!

 

for me it's website... it's more official...
and better for seo and ads

 

wordpress blogs get's indexed quicker, and they bring a lot of traffic from the search engines. don't try the static stuff, it will make you work a lot, blogs are easy to maintain and works great!

 

This is one of the points that makes it harder to decide. Static websites with nice templates look more professional and corporate. Most blogs look somehow amateurish, don't you think?

For static sites it is easy to write different descriptions and keywords for each page, and set title tags, but can we do that easily with a blog script? (I'm not so experienced with blogs, sorry Bloggers, if I'm missing something.)

 

I supposed for Blog, especially if you want to update you site regularly. Blog is easier for manage your contents and also have function that good for SEO (I wrote this based on wordpress blog)

- search engine friendly URL
- automate pass w3c validation.
- most template has embeded with H tags in your title and some in sub-title.

I don't think that they have some different between blog and static html pages in seo terms. In my opinion, Blog is much more better than static html page. Both are good if you can update your site contents regularly.

 

If you will have a lot of content, a CMS is better. If you intend to have only 10 pages, then static html is ok I guess.

 

if you are targeting yahoo, then stick to html based, they love plain onside optimization.

but for you, its lots of work to do

 

I think it will not be more than 15-20 pages, but it will be about some health products, and blogs have the option for people to leave comments on your site.

 

if these pages are not to be regularly updated and if those pages have unique content, static content would tend to give you slightly better results

 

I'd also vote for blogs. They get indexed quickly, and you can also ping the new posts. Feeds are also easily available for blogs, which other webmasters can consume on their sites.

 

blogs are the way to go!

 

Yes, blogs rather than using static html... Easy to crawl by SE blogs...