1. What is the best website builder for you?

[Beginner]

Just curious to know, what website builders are best for you and why?

[Owen]

Just curious to know, what website builders are best for you and why?

Weebly because it is very easy to customize and let's you export the code.

[anilverma]

Weebly, Wix, Jimdo are some generic website builder options.
If you want to build a content management system (Wordpress, Joomla, Drupal) are good.
If you want to build a ecommerce application (Opencart, Magento, PrestaShop, Shopify) are some options.
And if you want to build an enterprise web applications from scratch, try frameworks like Spring MVC, Play, Laravel, Rails, etc.

[Beginner]

Thanks a lot for your opinions guys

[UK Content Writer]

I tend to avoid any kind of website builder, they're good if you are just starting out but you can soon outgrow them because they're just not as flexible as CMSs such as Wordpress, Drupal, Joomla etc.

[trunker]

I started with Weebly but ended up 100% WordPress. Why? In the beginning I had no idea what I was doing and Weebly was what seemed like an easy option. WordPress my look intimidating at first but it allows you to do a million times more.

[Cashbrain]

I used godaddy.com to build mine. I wanted to do something a little quicker just to get some information out there incase someone was looking. I will most likely for to WordPress after a small growth in the business

[ChiefDesignStudios.com]

Just curious to know, what website builders are best for you and why?

Over 15 years of working in the changes in this field I think this is a matter of how much time you want to spend on development. If you are wanting to save time and have an easy quicker way to make changes later you may want to use builders like Wix and others that are online based web editors. If you don't mind the extra time and effort you can choose to use software (another extra cost) like Dreamweaver to then FTP your files to a host, structure the site files, etc....A little more involved and is why the automated solutions from companies like Wix are so popular. The price difference is really the software because you will pay someone for hosting (bandwidth, disk space, etc.) and someone for the domain..If going the hard build via FTP you will incur software cost and another in between company that you may have to deal with to resolve any issues you may run into.

If this is a question based on a business structure (building sites for clients) I would recommend using a user friendly automated editor online version (like wix) for customers. It's a great solution for getting beginners to take over site edits once you design them. They handle any user support issues, spend their money on R&D, and provide an easy way for you and your client to make changes. The downside to using companies that are easy and an automated option to a builder and editor is that they are limited.

You may not be able to do things you or a client may need in a build like in depth back end process, user and member management, and some other things..Good news is that they are making headway towards being able to do these things allowing for some companies tie into their back end and partnering which is very attractive to companies selling web based services.

I would say depends on the application to better answer the question of what is the recommended builder. What is the application? Personal or for designing for customers?

<Please set up a signature through Settings>

[BizAdvisor]

Perhaps I'm the last unsung web developer that still appreciates the outdated, though never obsolete, SiteBuilder. Why? It's simple enough to allow clients to maintain and update their own sites and make minor modifications; i.e WYSIWYG... Yet, it also allows experienced developers to implement stylesheets, HTML5, CSS, JavaScript, jQuery... or any other coding platform their tiny, little hearts desire to implement. I have yet to come across any website that cannot be developed using dumb, old SiteBuilder. In fact, I'm pretty confident that I could have easily developed the $835,000,000 HealthCare.gov website using SiteBuilder, without any defect or glitches, for under $100... Just sayin'.

[Fulcrum]

In fact, I'm pretty confident that I could have easily developed the $835,000,000 HealthCare.gov website using SiteBuilder, without any defect or glitches, for under $100... Just sayin'.

You mean you would deliver a working product without gouging the government - err taxpayer?