web development

web-development

Deciding Between Building And Web Based Hosting For Your Website

One of the biggest decisions to be made when deciding on a web system is the choice between building a site and hosting on your own hosting account or going with a web based service that hosts the web system for you. For example, if you choose the WordPress platform you have the option of downloading WordPress and uploading it to your hosting account. Or you can head over to WordPress.com and get started without downloading anything. So what's the difference between the two options.

recently compared several popular web based site development systems including WordPress.com, SquarespaceNing and TypePad. Another viable option to consider is Google Sites. I posted an early review of Google Sites shortly after it launched but we'll take a closer look at the current features of Google Sites in an upcoming post.

Here are some general guidelines for deciding between one option or another. It's important to note that these guidelines are not necessarily specific to making a decision related to WordPress.

When To Host On Your Own

  • You have in-house web development skills that you can leverage
  • If you don't have the skills in-house, you have a budget that supports hiring a web developer
  • You have time to spare to design and test your website
  • You need the maximum control possible over site theme and features
  • You can set aside extra time each week for site management and monitoring
When to Use A Web Based System
  • You don't have in-house web development skills available to you
  • You don't have the budget to hire a designer and developer
  • You have a compressed time frame for the launch of the site
  • You can live with standard themes and features
  • You don't want to spend much time looking after the health and status of your site

As you may have gathered from the comparison between the two lists, the major decision points fall along the lines of time, skills and budget. If you have the time and money to build what you want and then manage what you've built then you may be happier with a hosted system. If you're still on the fence the dealbreaker will come down to features and customization. You always get access to more features and more possibility of customization if you host your own site. But the time to develop and manage, and cost to build the site will be greater.

Depending on your goals it is very possible to be successful with either decision. There are many successful businesses that choose the hosted option because they want to either be economical and/or focus on getting the message out instead of worrying about the technology. Some of the web system options mentioned previously, like TypePad and WordPress.com for example, offer specific business class options geared toward those that need more service and features than the average customer.

It's not unusual for a business to start with one approach and then switch to another approach as their needs change. Some go from hosted to web based. Others go in the opposite direction. Don't assume that because one company has used a particular method that their choice is the best one for you. Select the option that best suits the needs of your business today. If your needs change in the future (and it's likely they will change) you can re-evaluate your options and choose another approach if necessary.

Hosted Web System Comparison

Over the last few weeks I've been evaluating several different hosted web systems. These systems are "all in one" website solutions that are that are offered as a service. That means you don't need to purchase separate hosting or download any files to make it work. You just need a browser, time to build your site and content to add to the site. I focused on four services: Squarespace, WordPress, Ning and TypePad. Although I have personally built sites using the first three services in the list I have not built one on TypePad. So to be fair I focused on comparing the features offered rather than trying to comparing things like performance, ease of use and other factors.

All of the systems offer a wide variety of features and options as you will see in the embedded Google Doc below. The one common thread across all of the systems is that they do not support Google Friend Connect or Facebook Connect for authentication or account creation. The Google and Facebook Connect features are potentially valuable features because they allow sites to establish the identity of the visitor without the visitor having to create yet another account. The definition for each of the features listed is offered in a separate sheet which you can access by looking at the entire document which is public for viewing.

Which one of these systems should you use? It depends on the ultimate purpose of your site. Ning offers very strong features if you want to build a social network with community generated content. WordPress and TypePad are strong tools for those seeking to create a single or multi-author blog. Squarespace offers features that allow you to build a personal or corporate website that includes an integrated blog and photo gallery.

Squarespace Preview

I spent about ten minutes walking through some of the features of the Squarespace service which I'm trying out. Squarespace allows users who are reasonably comfortable with the web, but aren't programmers, to build unique and feature rich websites. Squarespace's competitors are services like WordPress.com and Ning.com that let you get started building a site very quickly. While Ning and WordPress start out free, Squarespace starts at $8 a month. I don't consider that a bad thing. Paid services usually translate into more security, better performance and much less risk that the company will make some silly change to its features in the name of revenue.

What You Really Need Is A Web-System

I've been sketching out some ideas lately aimed at redefining what it means to maintain your own presence on the World Wide Web. Until a few years ago a web presence for many consisted of a series of web pages that were built primarily offline and then uploaded to an empty space on a web server that you purchased from a web hosting company. Over the last few years there have been some great technological advancements with the development of database driven content management systems and the introduction of services that offer access via application programming interfaces or APIs. Expectations have changed with respect to the delivery of rich media such as audio, video and high resolution photos. Websites that offered up rich media were the exception since costs for hosting and delivery of such media were prohibitive to the average website owner. That's not the case today. If you want to offer up the best web experience to your visitors then you must offer a rich, vibrant experience that goes beyond links to download media.

I get messages from a lot of people telling me that they're launching a site and asking for advice. My perception is that many times people decide that they want a web presence, choose a platform, start building, then decide on their features in that order. Given the array of tools and options available today I think that's the wrong order. Here's what I think the order for developing a website should be.

  1. Decide on the ultimate goal of the site
  2. Decide on the feature list that you would like to have at launch
  3. Review currently available tools and platforms and match them up with your feature list
  4. Choose a base platform and associated services
  5. Start building

This is the process that results in the development of a web-system instead of merely a website. I've made some notes that provide more detail on what I think are the basic components of an effective web system and shared them below. I hope to be able to find some time to develop a matrix that outlines the different platforms and services available to meet these needs. The upshot is that these requirements really turn the service traditionally offered as web hosting on its head because you need to start out with a lot more than an empty space in order to make this happen in a reasonable time frame. I think that we'll continue to see a trend towards hosted services such as Ning, WordPress.com and SquareSpace because they offer a more integrated solution that allows the web-system owner to focus on content and community growth rather than technology.

Google Sites Isn't A Website Builder

Google SitesMany people were wondering what Google was doing with Jot, the wiki service that Google acquired in 2006. The answer came last week with the launch of Google Sites. According to Google, Google Sites, "...was designed to allow you to easily create a network of sites and share them with whomever you choose."

The response to Google Sites has been lukewarm. Dan Farber of CNET wants to know, "What's all the fuss?" Dennis Howlett wasn't impressed. Ditto for The Global Geek Podcast.

Google Sites Requires A Google Apps Account

I wanted to see for myself so I dove into Google Sites to see what they have there. The most important thing to state up front is that you need to be a Google Apps customer (free or paid) to use this service. Most probably got started with Google Apps to leverage Gmail on their personal or business domains. Since the launch of Google Apps, Google has integrated Calendar, Docs and now Google Sites as add on functionality for your domain. So what does all that mean? It means that Google Sites isn't a service you sign up for with an email address and get started. It's one part of the larger domain application offering by Google.

Google Sites Is Not For Public Facing Websites

From a design perspective, Google Sites does not have the features to allow an individual or brand to represent to the world in a totally unique way. You can add a logo and change colors of links and backgrounds. You don't have access to CSS or much ability to reconfigure the base layout of the site. As it stands now your final product will look very basic. It's more about utility to get access to the features than it is about designing a site for the world to see.

Google Sites Is Meant For Collaboration Amongst Defined Groups

There's no interactivity available to those who are not a part of your domain. For example, each page can have comments and file attachments but only those logged in to their apps account on your domain can get to these features. So don't look to build an ad-hoc community with Google Sites. You're better off using a bulletin board or CMS application to do that. Google Sites will work best for work groups and maybe families who all want to be on the same page. Another example of this is the fact that there is email subscription to updates but no RSS feeds available.

Google Sites Is Optimized For Use With Other Google Apps

It is very easy to integrate videos from YouTube as well as gDocs and gCal. Other services don't integrate so easily. For example, I tried to insert a Flickr slideshow into a page and the embed tags got stripped out. But adding a Picasa slideshow was a snap. The features for adding dynamic content rely heavily on Google Gadgets as well. If you're not using the suite of Google applications it is pretty obvious that your feature set will be limited.

Google Sites Is Easy But There Is A Learning Curve

Building pages and integrating content (subject to the limitations mentioned above) is easy. Everything involves either pasting links or dealing with a WYSIWYG editor. Each team member who uses this will need to take some time to learn the layout and options for adding different types of pages to the site. There are currently five different types of pages you can create and a user needs to understand the features of each one in order to make the right choice. And it's also a fact that this will be a new system for just about everyone.

Google Is Targeting Services Like WebEx Office

WordPress, Drupal and systems like them are not going to lose market share due to Google Sites. The real target are online business collaboration tools. WebEx Office, 37Signals are two examples of services being challenged by the new Google offering. These are systems whose user groups are typically on the same domain (Gmail). They're sharing files (GDocs). They coordinating schedules (GCal). Sometimes they're chatting in real time (Google Talk).

You Can Build Limited Websites With Google Sites

I built a website in order to learn the system and see what I could do. See The Brother Love Shrine to check out what I came up with. It's not too bad I think. But other platforms offer much better tools for creating artistic websites. You do have the option to share all the sites you create with the entire world. Or you can limit them to the people on your domain. It's also important to point out that there are no stats available for this service and you can't add Google Analytics tracking codes. This is yet another sign that sites built on this platform are really not meant to be serious public websites.

The Best Feature Of This Service Is

The ability to create multiple sites makes Google Sites a very powerful application. This gives every logical work group or project within an organization the ability to have their own collaboration space. You can invite everyone on your domain to a site. Or you can invite select people. You can also invite people from outside the domain to be a part of the site. This is helpful for consultants working with clients at other companies. There are also basic tools for allowing you to create a site directory as each site can have one or more categories added that can be browsed from a single page.

In short, if you're looking for a collaboration tool that can leverage your use of other Google apps services then this is probably the best one out there. Google Sites is also a good tool for building a budget intranet that has most of the basic features that smaller companies will need. I plan to create a screencast soon to show others how Google Sites works. Til then I hope that this post provides you with some information that can help you make a decision on whether or not this new offering is worth your time and effort.