google prefers blogs over static html websites

If you're newbie blogs are better optimized then websites, but people who know what they're doing can make a website surpass the blog.

 

Google treat both of them same. No matter it is static or dynamic

 

Google threat both of sites on same way, only thing that matters is quality of content and quality of links on each of them so they can deserve better ranking position.

 

Well the thing is my blog does get updated more often but with shorter less rich content than the rest of the static site. When i write new content for my static pages i blog it after linking to it.

 

Maybe your static html pages are breaking small steps / rules - that the blog doesn't, maybe your posts in blog get more internal (links from your site) than your static pages, maybe the static pages are more than 3 clicks away from index ... maybe the blog posts are linked to similar posts in your blog ...

It still comes down to links and linking - even from your own site.

One of my best and first sites was a static site and I fumbled it to high PR's and high traffic - and didn't even know it, I just thought PR5s and Pr4s were the norm' with over 10 000 uniques per day ... but I linked similar pages to each other ... wish I knew then what I know now.

 

Some interesting views here. Just to clarify, dynamic content can still have static URLs, and these are considered Search Engine Friendly. If you stick with the dynamic URLs, try not to use more than 2 variables within the URL, Google doesn't like any more than that.

To improve your rankings, why not try bringing some dynamic content onto your currently-static pages?

 

Yes this is something i've been toying with. My site is based around reviews and tutorials (blog and forum included) but i'm not sure what dynamic stuff would improve it. Any suggestions?

 

I'd have thought that if the site is based around reviews and tutorials, pretty much the whole site should be dynamic...(?) If not, then why not feature 'Popular Posts' or 'Favourite Reviews' which relate specifically to the content on each static page? Also, things like latest tweets from your Twitter account maybe an idea...

 

The reviews and tutorials are on a specific subject not all round. How would making this dynamic help? pull reviews tutorials from other sites?

I don't use twitter but maybe i should. I do pull my latest blog posts onto the index page with RSS, maybe i should do that across the whole site.

What about a commenting and rating script for reviews and tutorials, will that help?

 

Maybe your blog got more links than your main-site?

You could generate a sitemap (You can us a WP plugin) and include your static pages. Then submit to google.

 

Experiment:
Update a static webpage like you would a blog while having a blog that just sets there (like a normal static page). You should find that the updating static pages increase while the blog flounders...

In most cases it's content, not quality content, just content. Now "just content" likely wont change a PR4 to a PR6, but I can say that it should jump a PR1 to a P3...

When I update my blog weekly I get a PR3, when I don't it drops to a PR1....so I say that from experience.

 

I wouldn't pull reviews from other sites, you'll get penalised for duplicate content. You need to be providing valuable, unique copy. I think your idea for commenting and rating is a good one. Comments are seen as fresh content and if you're able to attract a fair few on a regular basis, Google will reward your site for providing fresh content on a regular basis. It's about attracting those comments in the first place which may cause issues. In some cases, if nothing is offered to the readers in return (ie., do follow links), they'll tend to think commenting is a waste of time and won't bother.

 

You will be happy with joomla. Yes, joomla is a CMS, but
like one other poster stated, static is "out" and dynamic
sites are "in".

Putting your visitors as the center of attention instead
of your site will give you more visitors. A static site
will have a very hard time making your visitors the
center of attention.

If you notice this forum is adding more features all
the time to make it more dynamic.

 

One reason for ranking your blog might be your static html pages link weighs and pass weightage to the blog. Have you linked your static pages from blog pages?

 

Which would be worthless for ranking in Google. The OP was talking about ranking in Google.

 

I concur. in general, static pages get stronger over time, and blog posts get weaker over time. otherwise its just html to Google and will rank just as well as you optimize it to.

IMO the strongest setup is the combination of both that you already have.

 

I've had the opposite experience as the OP. Static sites have done better...just need to be sure to update them and be able to get links to them consistently.

 

At this point in the thread i just want to say thanks for everyone's input. Theres been a lot of points and angles posted which has given me a lot to think about.

I hope this is true. I try to get links to my static site more than my blog.

"One reason for ranking your blog might be your static html pages link weighs and pass weightage to the blog. Have you linked your static pages from blog pages? "

I think this is the case, my blog has no PR but my site is 2. My blog is gaining links faster than my main site though. I do link back to my static stuff from my blog, this was one of the reasons for starting it.

I got an Infraction for this thread, in the wrong place appartly. So will a mod move it please.

 

IMHO one of the most important things for SEO is fresh content.
When the search engines come by and find that your content
is different, whether it be good or bad, they perk up.

When it is consistently fresh they (search engines ) notice.

Fresh content can more easily be maintained by a dynamic site.

Here is an example : LINK

 

Most of the answers here are flawed in a couple different ways:

1.) There is nothing wrong with static HTML pages, in fact, on every site I have, even if it is dynamic I always use suffix, .html...people like to know what they are going to see...if its a pdf, html, cfm, php, whatever....
2.) The reason your blog may or may not do better is because the SEO is better, has nothing to do with the dynamic aspect of it.
Some other stuff:
Wordpress will autoping Google blogs when you update content, resulting in quicker indexing in the temp index....for example, test it out...post a blog for some ridiculous kw...like "rocking raspberrys on 4th of july"....I guarentee it is in the SERP's within 30 minutes (probably quicker)
Backlinks will also result in a better ranking as well as a more frequent crawl of the content...if you put some static html pages up and dont update the content but once a year, you can expect a decrease in ranking...your pages become less relelvant with time (in 90% of cases)....if for example it was a page that would stand the test of time (definitions and things like that) then it all reverts back to the SEO of the pages...on page and off...