3 ms·
The comparisons are all to large content management systems. However this seems like a better fit for static site generators. Would it be better to compare to
by SquareWheel 6y ago
The comparisons are all to large content management systems. However this seems like a better fit for static site generators. Would it be better to compare to Jekyll, Hugo, etc?
- HermanMartinus 6y agoSure, serving static files will always be the fastest, but this is for people looking for a service like Medium, or Blogger, where there's no need to handle anything locally.
- SquareWheel 6y agoI see, thanks. I guess in my mind I was thinking of Wordpress as .org, not .com.
- masukomi 6y agoto be clear, you don't _need_ to do anything locally. It's possible to use static blogs without touching your site and there are lots of competing tools out there that will give you a web front end to your static blog. For example. I use Hugo, with Forestry.io and don't have to touch my filesystem (or even my personal computer) to blog. I just go to a web page like all the CMS blogs. I'm self-hosting rather than using something like netifly so the setup was a bit more geeky BUT it's totally doable and doesn't have to be tooo geeky.