Summary
- The technical approach to website redevelopment should be determined based on goals.
- There are no inherently wrong technologies, only careless choices.
- There are several excellent ways to implement a website, such as custom solutions using ACF (Advanced Custom Fields) and Gutenberg, as well as various page builder solutions. Ideavirta implements all of these approaches.
Selecting the Best Approach for Your Website
The technical implementation of a website should align with business needs and objectives. The choice is often between two approaches: using page builders or developing a custom solution. Both have their advantages and limitations. If you encounter discussions claiming one approach is the only right way, don’t worry—there is no absolute right or wrong way to build a website.
The best solution is determined by the client’s goals and project requirements. This article explores the differences between these two approaches and helps you determine the right one for your business.
Implementation with Page Builders
Page builders were introduced to offer an easier, more DIY-friendly way to build websites. This approach became popular in website and small e-commerce development, providing a lightweight solution for a specific customer segment.
However, page builders have not replaced the traditional method of separating design and technical implementation. Instead, they complement conventional approaches by introducing another option for different types of projects. Often, page builders are used in cases where less design work is needed.
Advantages of Page Builders
- Page builders integrate structure, visual design, and content creation into a single tool, reducing the need for separate tools and processes.
- If the user has sufficient knowledge of design, structure, and content creation, a page builder can be an efficient solution for small to medium-sized projects.
Challenges of Page Builders
- Page builders can create the illusion that everything is easy to do. Their ease of use may lead users to overestimate their abilities, only to face unexpected difficulties.
- If the user lacks an understanding of visual, structural, and content-related aspects, working with a page builder can be confusing. Proper use still requires knowledge of web development principles, such as responsiveness optimization.
- Managing the visual and structural integrity of a page builder-based site requires discipline and vision. The risk is an inconsistent design due to the “anything is possible” nature of the tool.
- Enhancing or modifying a page builder-based site can be more time-consuming since customizations are often applied page-by-page or even element-by-element.
- The HTML/CSS/JS output generated by page builders is often bulkier, leading to heavier server loads. This can slow down page load times, which affects SEO performance.
Custom Development
For larger and strategically significant projects, such as a brand overhaul or a company’s communication strategy development, custom solutions are often the better choice. A more effective and higher-quality approach separates high-level design and technical implementation into distinct phases. This method allows for prototyping and review before technical development begins, making it a more design-driven website renewal process.
Advantages of Custom Development
- Rapid brand development and evaluation through prototyping.
- Agile modeling of structures and user journeys, enabling a better user experience assessment.
- Prototyping allows stakeholders to experience content in a near-final format before full implementation.
- Custom solutions rely on standardization, which is beneficial for managing large websites efficiently.
- Custom development often utilizes WordPress’s Gutenberg blocks or the popular ACF plugin, allowing for fixed or easily adjustable design elements and functionalities.
- Properly developed custom Gutenberg or ACF implementations are more lightweight, leading to optimized loading speeds. Google approves of this.
Challenges of Custom Development
- Custom development requires careful planning of UI and structures.
- The combined process of design and technical implementation is generally more labor-intensive compared to page builders, which should be reflected in the project budget.
- This method demands project management skills and dedicated focus on each stage, making it less suitable for clients with tight schedules.
- Since the site structure and content are standardized, introducing entirely new layout models requires planning and the technical implementation of new content components.
Conclusion
Page builders are a great choice for small to medium-sized projects where speed and cost-efficiency are priorities. Custom solutions, on the other hand, are ideal for strategic projects focused on improving key aspects such as branding, usability, or search engine visibility.
There are multiple approaches to building a website, and both methods can produce high-quality results in skilled hands.
At Ideavirta, we are proficient in various technological solutions, including page builders like Divi, Elementor, Bricks, and Beaver Builder. We also specialize in fully custom solutions using Gutenberg and ACF.
