This post looking at conventional websites vs blogs is by Suzanne Falter-Barns from Get Known Now.
Have Blogs Killed Conventional Websites?
It’s a question that’s been bugging me profoundly since I got into blogging over a year ago. Blogs are cheap, easy, efficient, wildly easy to find on the Net, super marketing-friendly, and just plain fun. They work rings around websites.
So are conventional websites no longer necessary? To find out, I interviewed Andy Wibbels, the original blogging evangelist and author of the excellent book, Blogwild!. Here’s the short version of what I learned.
- Websites are clunky and expensive; blogs are lean and cheap.
- You have to wait for someone to make changes to your website; your blog can be changed easily by you.
- You have to wait for someone else to set up your site; your blog can be set up by you in 15 minutes.
- You can update your blog at an airport, while you’re on the run. You have to call your webmaster … and wait … to update your site.
- You can collect email addresses, and download free reports and bonuses off of a website. Same with a blog.
- You can use a shopping cart to collect money for e-commerce of a website. Same with a blog.
- You can set up a press room with all sorts of cool links and forms on a website. Same with a blog.
- It takes three to six months for the big search engines to find you with a website. It takes two or three days with a blog.
- You can easily track stats of who has visited your regular website. Same with a blog.
- The media are more likely to find you on a blog.
- You can learn more about your audience from a blog.
- You market automatically with a blog. But not with a conventional website.
- You can make a lot more friends with a blog.
The list appears to go on and on, but you get the picture. Blogs are, quite simply, the next wave. So if you’re thinking about setting up a site, stop in your tracks and turn towards blogs instead!
Note from Darren: what would you add to the above list of comparisons between blogs and conventional websites?
I understand what he was meaning by this, but it’s a little misleading. Sure, if you want a default theme with no customization you can set your blog up in minutes, but if you still want a custom website (that’s just built as a blog) you should still seek a professional.
I totally agree with this list!
I have been designing websites for the past few years, and only recently discovered the power of WordPress as a CMS. So far, there have been very few things I haven’t been able to do with a blog.
I would also add (especially for those using WordPress): There is a plugin that has already been developed to do almost anything you can think of!
I think blogs will overtake websites more and more… but I also expect people’s idea of what a blog is to change. Just because your website is a blog doesn’t mean it has to be updated frequently, or that you are trying to make money by getting thousands of viewers to click your ads.
I think this is currently hard for some people to see past when I say, “Why don’t we make your site a blog?”
I’m not sure I agree.
#1 – blogs are websites. Distinguishing between the two does not make sense. I think people are more forgiving of blog layouts, but they are just as clunky.
#2 – Depends on ownership, not the website.
#3 – huh? I guess if blogs are only canned solutions.
#4 – Implementation specific. Depends on the implementation of your blog/site.
I can continue with each point like this. The distinction between the two is imaginary. Blogs are websites.
What about the case where the blog and the web site are one in the same? You’ve got the best of both worlds that way, seems to me.
I bet lots of people and webmasters have thought about this. And I’ve been thinking about it since I started my blog around Christmas last year.
At first it seemed likely; and blogs had all the reasons to be able to overtake websites, which prompted me to research an article on this. Having done some research, I have found that blogs for smaller companies will be great, but not for corporate giants. The giants will not gain any substantial benefit from blogging (one or two have, but we’re looking at the whole lot in general) and usually CEOs of huge companies wont do it.
However, the rule changes for small companies, and larger companies with a “modern businessmodel”. Think creative industries, where a human persona fits the brands and is welcomed by consumers.
If they were accountants or lawyers, traditional websites would work better.
The exception to this is the content of the blog. If the aforementioned accountants or lawyers wanted to have blogs, they would have to be very niche and not at all liberal in their views.
That’s my $0.02
I know a couple of people who only use blogging as a website. They say that its easier to keep updated (of course!) it simple, easy to change (content and appearance).
In some cases I think blogs HAVE taken over website’s. If I were to have a website, I would redirect allot of traffic to a blog where things could be discussed.
Websites are great, but only if they use Web 2.0. Otherwise only for some information.
you’ve got some great thoughts there Darren.
Thanx.
Yes, I agree. In fact, a few weeks ago, a client contacted me about re-writing/optimizing some content on their corporate website. I spent an hour explaining that the conventional website stucture was problematic, and that he’d be much better served with a blog. However, like many of today’s small busines people, he was only aware of the conventional website model. Further, he was at the mercy of service providers eager for him to continue to rely on them to maintain his site. He simply couldn’t comprehend how a blog could be so much better, cheaper, and more search engine friendly.
I’m so glad you articulated these points. As soon as I finish writing this comment, I will email him a link to your post.
Blogs are definitely the new websites…hoo-rah for writing this today. I’ve been feeling like Chicken Little or something, “blogs, blogs, blogs are coming.” Good to know I’m not really crazy.
I will take exception to some of the comparisons.
1. Websites are not clunky and expensive…in fact blogs can be way more clunky and a drain on resources. Anyone hosting on shared plans, the plugins often cause the dreaded CPU exceeded or overloaded messages, with consequent suspensions.
2. (and 3.) Learn CSS, HTML (or XHTML) and do it yourself. It’s not hard, and with CSS, updating is fairly easy, and you always have a local copy. It’s not hard to learn, and if you want, you can always start with an excellent free template, just like WordPress.
8. Nope. A few good links and the search engines will find you just as quick. It actually took only a month after my static site went live to start seeing Google traffic. And Yahoo, and MSN Live Search. It’s all about SEO.
10. As the owner of both a static website (or two), I’ve actually been found more by the media on those two sites. The key is great content, promotion and links, no matter if it’s a blog or a static, conventional site.
12. You market yourself automatically, or you should be, no matter what type of site you have.
13. Not necessarily. You can forgo the time wasting social bookmarks and run a forum. Or have other interactivity on your static website. Just because it’s referred to as static, doesn’t mean it has to be.
And to add one more thought why conventional websites will never go away: Trust. Anyone can put up a blog in no time, fill it with adsense and try to get rich quick. A website implies thought, planning and actual work. And that’s recognized by Google. Your page rank, trust and authority are therefore much enhanced. Stability counts, and millions of blogs come and go, but a static site is going to be around.
Blogs have accomplished the single most important thing that every good website developer strives for – the complete and total separation between content and design. It does this through a little thing called RSS. So in a way, I don’t think blogs have replaced websites, they just improved upon them with a better design.
I’m not going to argue much with the idea of using blog software to build a content site. You can do pretty much everything you need and the built in tools are beyond compare – things like site navigation, promotion and user subscription are just there.
But remember that a website isn’t necessarily a content site. I’d like to see you build Flickr or YouTube inside a blog.
Blog can be made in many styles, and formats, that I believe blogs are better. http://www.whatisgoingonblog.com
This article brings up some interesting points, but I believe there is a misconception as to what a blog is and what a website is.
A website is a generic term for any grouping of pages on the internet. Sites like http://www.sacloaves.org (a local to me non-profit organizations website) are a website, but so is problogger.net, or even google.com. They all fall under the generic term of a website.
A blog, or weblog, is simply a tool used to track continually updating information in a sequential order on a website.
So a website can have a blog, or a forum, or a newsfeed, etc…
Perhaps more accurate terminology to use for this article would be between a static informational website and a dynamic interactive website.
As much as I love blogs, I still have to say this. Every blog is just a CMS with a few distinct characteristics (reverse chronological post display, blogroll, categories, etc). Every feature of a blog can be carried over to a “conventional” website while still being a “conventional” website.
Does anybody remember the earliest open source CMS systems? PHPNuke?
PHPNuke had all of the characteristics of a blog 10 years ago. Now a site powered by PHPNuke is considered “conventional”.
Great list Suzanne and Andy!
To promote my How to Blog Workshop, I put together a list of the top 20 reasons to forget updating your site and begin a blog and then honed it down to 10 ways blogs grow business online.
Even though I’m an ardent blog evangelist, I find our clients get stuck on the word “blog” and the concept of updating content more frequently than they’re used to.
When we change the language to online newsroom or web publishing platform or online client service center, we get better results.
We find the biggest reason people prefer websites is so their site can stay static with minimal updates.
Teaching them how a blog can leapfrog their business ahead of their competition is often the nudge it takes to add a blog to their online marketing mix.
I agree with Justin. A blog is a website.
There are many non-static websites out there that can be updated as easily and as quickly as a blog, whether you use Mambo or a similar package.
Whoa! It seems like this post is off and running on a number of assumptions and misunderstandings that can lead someone new astray.
The comparison that they are making seems to be between CMS versus hard-coded websites, not static websites versus blogs. In which case a lot of the points hold true.
But, one of things I’ve been observing with business blogs is that if someone launches a blog, and doesn’t create ANY ‘static’ pages, such as an ‘about’ page, or a ‘services’ page, or other core pages that give some context and understanding and connection to the visitor, then the blog can become popular, but may not actually convert any visitors to customers.
You can also frustrate the HECK out of visitors, if all they are faced with is a sequentially-posted blog and there are none of these core pages, or ‘flagship content’ as Chris Garrett likes to call it. They may find an interesting post or two, but they won’t be finding the some of the more basic information they need.
For a business on the web, yes, I think it’s great to have a CMS platform like WordPress to be able to update the site yourself.
And, don’t think you’re going to be successful with just blog posts. You need some of the other core pages. Look at any of the successful business blogs out there, including this one, and you’ll see that it’s not just blog posts, but that there are other foundational pages there.
So, let’s get our terminology straight, and let’s not lead anyone down the garden path of either/or- when you really do need both.
Best I would say is it is easier to launch a product or service on a blog because people who read a blog know and trust the author more than a stagnant website.
I’ll personally be making a big announcement about a new service soon on my blog.
http://www.zenproblog.com
Just talking about the kind of sites I like to read (fashion, health, shopping, etc), blogs are definitely better from both the readers and bloggers point of view – daily updates are quick and easy so content is always fresh. Of course, not everyone likes to read about fashion, health and blogging…
I think there is still a role for old-fashioned Websites. As a journalist doing research on possible sources for stories, I find a static Website far more useful than a blog for quickly gleaning the basic facts about someone—resume, phone number, job position, list of publications, detailed description of their books, etc. As a writer who sometimes seeks new clients, I get several assignment inquiries a year from people who find my Website and like my qualifications and record of publications. There’s no room at a blog to list all that information.
Static websites are generally keyword focused while blogs are news focused. With the exception of A-list bloggers, static websites thus eat blogs for breakfast as far as earning money is in question.
Honestly?
As a web designer/SEO/marketing consultant – I build every single site I do with WP. I customize and integrate so that the site owner gets a professional, clean, streamlined site with whatever features they need right where they need them on the site.
If they want the blog up front, so be it.
If they want to use pages and make a “traditional” site with a blog feature, so be that too.
I think pretty soon (if not already), you’re definitely going to stop seeing “.htm” or “.html” at the end of URLs though… ;)
As others have noted, a blog is simply a dynamic website. Dynamic websites are built on databases.
These dynamic websites often have a Content Management System (CMS) driving them. Blog engines are simply lightweight CMSs.
Blog engines, because of their limited feature set, are more approachable by the the user.
And the great thing of course is you can still create websites with most blog engines that are page-based, not post-based, thus meaning you can create a site that for all intents, looks like a traditional static site.
So, in a nutshell, the reality is that it’s the traditional static website that is a dying breed, being replaced by CMS-based sites, which includes blogs.
I do agree with all the points on this list, especially #3. This is the bane of anyone who wants a website. Historically, they’ve always ended up being reliant on the website developer to edit and update the content. If the developer disappeared, the website wouldn’t get updated and become irrelevant.
Imagine if you got a designer to make you a letterhead but they then told you that if you needed a letter typed up, they would have to do it for you! That’s similar to the situation where website owners are reliant on the website developer to update their own content.
It’s no good, as Sue (commenter #5) says to “Learn CSS, and HTML”. A small business owner does not have the time or inclination for learning programming.
CMSs let developers/designers build the websites, but the owners manage the content. As it should be.
Another great guest post, Darren.
Thanks for a great list, Suzanne, which I’m going to show a few people.
I don’t think blogs will ever kill conventional web sites.
Sure, they may dominate a large part of the market, but they won’t ever kill static web sites out right.
Reason?
Conventional web sites are much more customizable.
For example, what would happen if Apple.com was turned into a blog?
Most of the content wouldn’t look even half as nice.
No, blogs won’t ever kill conventional web sites. Blogs may maim them, but not kill them.
Another benefit of a blog, especially a WordPress blog – there are hundreds of free templates that are essentially ready for publication and available, and there are tons of resources for plugins to make the site more user-friendly.
I was able to set up blogs via wordpress.com and blogger.com without ever having to pay a dime. It was a free, easy way to publish. And to find a web service that does that for a conventional page is virtually impossible, design aside.
I think problem with traditional sites is in robust CMS and wide technology, in blogging everything is created just for that purpose, php+mysql, what else you need. As mentioned in this nice post, blog is very flexible and easy to start and manage.
oops, I meant #2 is the bane.
I know a lot of other people have said it, but blogs are websites, or at least, a subset of a website.
Blogs are no more special than forums, or shopping carts, or wikis, or directories, any other style or method of implementation.
A lot of the points made don’t apply to anyone who has some technical know-how. And even if you don’t, you can set up “standard” web sites with various online tools, so you can do it yourself. Maybe not as professional as getting a dedicated company to do it, but then, that’s the same with setting up a standard, free blog compared to hosting your own custom blog and doing your own design, coding, and maintenance.
I understand where these points are coming from, but they can’t be used in all circumstances.
I totally agree. A big factor, in my opinion, is the interactivity. People love discussions. People love giving feedback and people are more prone to return to a site that is constantly updating.
Websites that do well have those things, but all of those things are inherent in blogs from the getgo.
I totally disagree with this entire article. Blogs ARE websites. Any website with editing features can be managed EXACTLY like a blog. Search engines can index websites the same and as quickly as blogs if it is linked the same way. And the rest of the ideas around marketing, media and friends, what a load of junk. There are hundreds of websites that do the same things as blogs and really blog software came from those website systems. They are not their own thing.
What you are really talking about are traditional websites verses new technology of editable content. Its nothing to do with blogs per say.
It is true.Blog is better than website – design, update, and I can see, search engine index is very fast.
What really constitutes a blog or website or do they both over lap to some degree? When i look at the home page of problogger.net i see “Recently at the Blog” and “Want more, check out the Blog” …. those references to me give me the impression the front page of problogger.net is actually positioned as a website and the blog is a seperate area, albeit only marginally.
Well imo, the whole idea behind a regular website taking months to be found is just plain ridiculas.
However I love blogs because they are easy to use and I can show clients how to build their own blogs / sites and be successful as well as make money online.
Interesting subject! In my little corner of the web, as a graphic designer hobbyist, blogs are a great addition to our websites. We get to design our pretty graphics, and create pretty pages, making the web a pretty place to visit (in our opinion). Our blogs help us get to know one another. Much like myspace or facebook, but in the real web world.
Mind you, we aren’t probloggers… Our blogs are personal blogs, where we talk about the homemaking, scrapbooking, graphics, grand kids, and our favorite apple pie recipes.
I love blogs and the genius software creator behind the scenes, because my technically challenged friends can log into wordpress.com and within minutes they have their own ‘website’. A website they have complete control over. It’s amazing!
No. Blogs have killed conventional websites… but they have their place on the web.
WordPress as a CMS is definitely an improvement over writing plain web pages ; and the plug in API is actually quite well developed.
I am currently building a website that pulls in hundreds of data pages from a database — and merged it into WordPress through a plugin ; and display it through a self developed (but still standard) theme.
This way I get all the benefits of WordPress (editors, RSS feeds, comments, posting, user management, plugins) and at the same time can do whatever I like in presenting the information to my visitors.
Not sure about the search engine updating though. You might hit the occasional gold with a post; but search engines still take months to index your whole site.
Viva la blog!
FAIL!… This article was clearly written by someone not technical, and it’s always interesting to know “their” perspective on technology. However, there are many things JUST PLAIN WRONG with this article, and hopefully the readers of problogger will be smart enough to realize that.
Dear Suzanne Falter-Barns:
A blog is a website. I mean, for crying out loud, take a class about Web Publishing at a Community College and learn HTML/CSS and possibly PHP and that way you won’t have to pay anyone to update your website. HEY GET THE KNOW HOW (GET IT? LOL).
A blog is just a very common type of site, that comes with a nice Content Management System. I have built my own blog and CMS, it’s not rocket science! …And IT WAS FREE! (Well yeah, because I know how to code a little… it’s like magic).
I can go on and on about the advantages and disadvantages of a normal blog site (like blogger.com), but let me just mention one very important one:
— Do you have access to the database that holds your “blogs”? No. Do you have access to any tool that will provide you a backup of your “blogs” No. — What does this mean? It means if for some reason the server that’s holding your data fails, your blog is gone.
Anyhow, if you want to be in the business of selling cars you should know a little about car mechanics. Likewise, if you want to talk/blog about web development, at least do some research first.
I think this article is very misleading, built on wrong assumptions, or interpretations, of what a blog is and I wouldn’t expect to find such an article in Problogger.
I will agree with the comments left by Tommy Day, Justin Wandro, Matt, Chris Howard, and so on.
It amazes me how people, who supposedly blog, or even work with blogs, still can’t see, or don’t want to admit, that a blog is simply a CMS configured to produce/publish a weblog.
A blog (=weblog=logging on the web) is nothing but a dynamically created website designed to produce certain results. In plain terms:
A blog is not a type of software or tool, but rather a presentation. A blog’s underlying software/tool/call-it-what-you-want, is the CMS that enables it to produce the weblog style output.
CMS’ have been around forever, but because newer, simpler, inexpensive CMS’ made publishing available to the masses, and due to the buzz around the word “blog”, all ignoramuses think that blog means CMS.
Please, let’s up the content quality in here!
With regards to blogs being websites – I agree.
As a software engineer who has been in the development process for “conventiona”l websites as well as having my own blog, i’d have to disagree on the point that blogs are killing off traditional websites though.
Most conventional enterprise websites (in recent years… but then again, we’re talking about the present, right?) have an application running on something far more than a blog could provide. Whether it’s a .NET/J2EE application, or some other enterprise level application as well as back-end applications (Web Services, Data mining and report generation, complex process handling engines, enterprise-level security) to provide services to their customers. It’s not only what you see on your web browser that counts.
Sure, you could run a small application using PHP (for WordPress) or the equivalent (if you’re using some other type of blog). I wonder how many years it’s going to take you to code and develop an entire enterprise level system using these though.
J2EE, Java, the .Net platform, etc, on the other hand, were all designed to provide a far more powerful service than just putting content up on a CMS.
If you’re looking to just display content, and run a few simple applications, a blog would be fine. At the enterprise level, however, things change.
Take these few points into consideration:
1. How would you run Enterprise applications on a blog? It is possible I guess, but the setup and configuration, not to mention the development would be even more difficult than that with a traditional website.
2. Banking, anybody? Web Services? The security on custom built enterprise websites are far higher than personally managed blogs could provide.
3. If your clients want to use a messaging system aside from HTTP or XMLRPC (TibCo, JMS, MQ, Traditional TCP/IP client server communications), how would a blog manage that? You would need to write code or use a plugin that supports those messaging systems. Aside from that, you would need to change the behavior of your blog to handle the new message formats.
These are just a few points to consider and if you study closely what developments other websites have gone through, you will see the difference.
Think. If blogs really were really the next big thing, wouldn’t the giants be one of the first to convert? They certainly have the resources to do so. Microsoft, Google, Oracle all have blogs – but they run their core businesses on what we here call “conventional” websites.
In my opinion, blogs are simply a form of “website in a box”. Sure, they’re configurable and customizable, but far less powerful than the “conventional” websites.
My first website, set up in 2001 hasn’t been updated in two years, but it still brings in an average of 5k hits a day. When I started blogging 10 months ago, my first blog was for a totally different niche where a website format wouldn’t have worked. I’m amazed at how the blog’s taken off so quickly. I think websites and blogs both have a place in the WWW, depending on the niche, content and the people they serve.
The author may have misunderstood what a blog really is, but that’s great, because that in itself shows that nowadays you don’t have to be some technogeek to have a website, blog or otherwise.
The gist of her article is correct though. And that is that the days are numbered for the static, hardcoded website.
Dynamic sites (the pages are generated on requested rather than being static and pre-coded), built on CMSs, blog engines, enterprise applications etc are the way of the future.
Supporters of static coding can argue all they like, but the key is that dynamic sites separate the code and the content, thus enabling content owner to maintain their own content without having to learn any coding. Or have to use a secondary application (eg Dreamweaver) to create the page and then upload it.
From a developer’s point of view, this would be a god-send, as they can focus on what they do best without having to waste time on content.
It’s true, blogs are much better to manage than a conventional webpage.
Making changes to blogs is also much quicker.
I personally prefer blogs over old school websites.
This is a very odd comparison to make. Firstly, a “conventional” website is not defined. Is that a website built in HTML? A static site? Or is it a website like Yahoo!? Or maybe a traditional news site?
And then, obviously based on whatever assumption is being made about what defines a “conventional” website, the list makes some rather spurious claims or even downright false ones like this one:
“It takes three to six months for the big search engines to find you with a website. It takes two or three days with a blog.”
That’s the biggest load of garbage I’ve heard. Sure, a wordpress blog will probably be indexed very quickly, with some extra short-term benefit given for fresh content, but traditional websites built with nothing but HTML can be indexed equally as fast. The quote shows an entire lack of understanding (or perhaps misrepresentation?) of SEO; being indexed fast is not due to the technology you’re using or what “style” of site you have. It’s how your site is linked into the internet that counts.
I’m sure there’s some true nuggets in there, but that ruined the credibility for me.
Long live blog… ;)
Content Management System, can simplify the making of websites. Full control in ALL PARTS of that, but need more skill than administrate a blog.
Ps: try Joomla!, one of the best CMS, I think :)
Robert.
http://onlinehardware.blogspot.com
The point about SEO is very intelligent. It takes much longer for a site to appear high on a Google search than it does for a blog.
This is true that blog is better than website. But still a blog is a blog and a website is a website. A blog can’t and won’t replace a website. They are good that their own respective places.
It seems that using blog software is just another way of creating a website, not a different technology. But I guess that’s just a matter of semantics.
That said, I did switch one of my project sites from a CMS package to WordPress for one feature, comments. I wanted my visitors to be able to easily leave comments on almost any of the pages similar to the PHP site. In most cases it was easier for them to leave a comment directly on the page they had a question on rather than emailing me or registering and posting on my support forum.
What blogging software does really well is to make it easier for non techy people to post to the web. It’s relatively easy to install blog software to a server, and even easier to use a hosted package. Once it’s there publishing whatever you want online is really simple even if you’ve never done anything web related.
I have taken to building websites with a wordpress blog on the homepage with any number of static pages “behind the blog in the same url. The static pages can be custom designed and optimised for keywords and whatever I want to be permanent. The frontpage has constantly updated content and thus is more appealing for regular visitors. If you want to take advantage of a range of web 2.0 actions a blog is far superior IMO, but fails to do all that a website can do.
That is very true..not only blog friendly search engine but more than that..now I understand why I falling love into wordpress..thanks to wordpress people..make blogging easier than before :)