Static Site Generation vs Static Site Generation

Developers should use SSG for content-heavy sites like blogs, documentation, portfolios, and marketing pages where content changes infrequently, as it offers superior performance, security (no server-side vulnerabilities), and low hosting costs meets developers should use static site generation for content-heavy websites like blogs, documentation sites, marketing pages, and e-commerce catalogs where content changes infrequently. Here's our take.

Static Site Generation

Nice Pick

Developers should use SSG for content-heavy sites like blogs, documentation, portfolios, and marketing pages where content changes infrequently, as it offers superior performance, security (no server-side vulnerabilities), and low hosting costs

Pros

• It's ideal for projects requiring SEO optimization, global scalability via CDNs, and simplified deployment workflows, especially when combined with modern frameworks like Next
• Related to: next-js, gatsby

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Static Site Generation

Developers should use Static Site Generation for content-heavy websites like blogs, documentation sites, marketing pages, and e-commerce catalogs where content changes infrequently

Pros

• It improves performance by eliminating server-side processing delays, enhances security by reducing attack surfaces, and reduces hosting costs due to efficient CDN delivery
• Related to: jamstack, next-js

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Static Site Generation is a methodology while Static Site Generation is a concept. We picked Static Site Generation based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.

The Bottom Line

Static Site Generation wins

Based on overall popularity. Static Site Generation is more widely used, but Static Site Generation excels in its own space.