Why 1 against another? Why not together? There are builders such as webflow that allow you to do almost anything a basic website needs (I have been in this industry long enough to know that 90 percent of websites out there are just basic). You get something beautiful, quick, lowcost, high standard code quality, and you can do it yourself or with the help of designer or developer.
So you mean web developers using a site builder? It is debatable that they output a high standard of code. I haven't been in contact with many webflow sites, however wix code output is horrendous.
I think once the standards improve a bit more then I can see them being a good solution for basic sites- however as mentioned I feel that there needs to be a human with experience to get SEO and content to a high standard.
Check out webflow :). What I meant by high quality standard is that if the website builder team is competent, they can generate very consistent, well tested code. Of course you may not compare that with the work of an expert, highly skilled developer yet. But the amount of incompetent developers is just so dang high that sometimes it's better to go with consistently-good-result?
I'm not trying to argue against a custom solution in anyway. But not many people/business have the required resources for that. And you cannot ask skilled developers to work for cheap, or can you?
Why 1 against another? Why not together? There are builders such as webflow that allow you to do almost anything a basic website needs (I have been in this industry long enough to know that 90 percent of websites out there are just basic). You get something beautiful, quick, lowcost, high standard code quality, and you can do it yourself or with the help of designer or developer.
So you mean web developers using a site builder? It is debatable that they output a high standard of code. I haven't been in contact with many webflow sites, however wix code output is horrendous.
I think once the standards improve a bit more then I can see them being a good solution for basic sites- however as mentioned I feel that there needs to be a human with experience to get SEO and content to a high standard.
Check out webflow :). What I meant by high quality standard is that if the website builder team is competent, they can generate very consistent, well tested code. Of course you may not compare that with the work of an expert, highly skilled developer yet. But the amount of incompetent developers is just so dang high that sometimes it's better to go with consistently-good-result?
I'm not trying to argue against a custom solution in anyway. But not many people/business have the required resources for that. And you cannot ask skilled developers to work for cheap, or can you?
I'm also a big Webflow supporter and user! It allows you to build websites in a relatively short time without compromising on the design quality!