I continue to hear mixed opinions from a lot of people. Some people telling me that CMS is better for SEO because of the fresh content that is required every day and than others telling me that static websites are better for SEO. Can someone clarify which style of website is actually better for SEO? Also, does Google rank these static websites at all based on how often they are updated? Say I have a static website with heaps of good information, would my SERP or PR start dropping if I don't add on to it every once in a while? Thanks.
Can you elaborate a bit more perhaps? In terms of developing websites for affiliate promotion, do you think it would be easier (and better) to develop static websites (using CMS or not) rather than a straight out blog?
I think dynamic webpage suitable for SEO because dynamically generated pages in it’s simplest form is a single template page that’s used to generate an entire website (could be 1,000,000 page site). Since dynamic pages use scripting languages like PHP and ASP.It is good for SEO.
It is a single template page but I heard its better to use PHP CMS platforms and build static websites with pages rather than blog posts -- which will still interlink with tags (so good for SEO). I'm starting to thing blog posts aren't the optimal choice at the moment, especially if I'm using the website for affiliate promotion as they would require constant daily updates.
In the Search Engine Optimization world is Google PageRank one of the main indicators of your SEO Progress.This search engine optimization tool checks the PageRank on the major Google datacenters.Most times it indicates that Google is in the middle of a PageRank update when the results vary from datacenter to datacenter.
It depends how you are optimizing the sites. However for dynamic sites, probability of content updation is more compare to static one.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd love a response to my question in this thread (scroll down to read my response): hxxp://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=2290699