Static websites are ideal for simple, informational sites, while dynamic websites are better suited for complex, interactive experiences and frequently updated content. The best choice depends on the specific needs and resources of the business.
I'm seeing the term "static" used to refer to seemingly hardcoded websites that are actually generated by a cms but the user sees plain html with performance improvements. These sites might still be updated frequently, but the pages that get served aren't dynamic.
Hey Jessica, If it’s a simple site with no frequent updates, go with static, it’s faster and easier to manage. But if you need things like logins, user interaction, or frequent content changes, dynamic is the way to go. Just depends on what the business needs!
Depends on the kind of business you’re running. If it’s just a simple landing page or a company intro — static all the way: fast, cheap, and no fuss. But if you need something more interactive (user logins, forms, blogs, dashboards) — you’ll definitely need dynamic. One more thing — static sites load faster and are less likely to get hacked, which is also a win
Oh, this is like with cars: a static website is your “classic sedan” for calm drives, and a dynamic one is already turbo-tuned If the business is simple — landing page, catalog, contact form — static is more than enough (plus it’s fast + cheap). If you need accounts, personalization, filters, user dashboards — sorry but you can’t avoid dynamic. Conclusion: “the best” one is the one that fits the actual task. There’s no magic button like “this is always better for business”. It’s always “it depends.”
This is so true. It really is always "it depends". I mean, some might be annoyed hearing it, but it's just how it is.