Traditional Web Apps vs Static Site Generator

Developers should learn traditional web apps for building content-heavy websites, e-commerce platforms, or applications where SEO and initial page load performance are critical, as server-side rendering provides better search engine indexing and faster first contentful paint meets developers should use static site generators for content-heavy websites like blogs, documentation, portfolios, and marketing sites where content changes infrequently. Here's our take.

Traditional Web Apps

Nice Pick

Developers should learn traditional web apps for building content-heavy websites, e-commerce platforms, or applications where SEO and initial page load performance are critical, as server-side rendering provides better search engine indexing and faster first contentful paint

Pros

• This approach is also useful for projects with simpler interactivity requirements, legacy system integrations, or when targeting users with limited JavaScript support, as it ensures robust functionality across diverse browsers and devices
• Related to: server-side-rendering, html-css-javascript

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Static Site Generator

Developers should use Static Site Generators for content-heavy websites like blogs, documentation, portfolios, and marketing sites where content changes infrequently

Pros

• They are ideal when performance, security, and low hosting costs are priorities, as static files reduce server load and vulnerabilities compared to dynamic server-rendered sites
• Related to: markdown, git

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

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

The Bottom Line

Traditional Web Apps wins

Based on overall popularity. Traditional Web Apps is more widely used, but Static Site Generator excels in its own space.