Webflow VS Wordpress

[Ivel]

I need a new website to be built and I have contacted a few designers for a quote. Some of them suggest Webflow and are claiming that it is new, easier to work with and website loads faster. Others say that Wordpress is more SEO friendly, more flexible for design and it is cheaper to maintain etc. As my knowledge in the area is very basic, I need your advise. It will be a corporate site, about 20 pages and a blog, no online shop or anything like it.

What is your oppinion?

 

[intheTRADE]

We moved over to Webflow last year to build clients website and it's the best thing we've done. I wouldn't say it was new, they have been around a few years now

I would disagree with Wordpress being more SEO friendly. Both on a par with each other

 

[Paul Norman]

My opinion is that the platform choice is not as important as the skill of the website builder. It is possible to set up Wordpress badly, and Webflow well. Other packages exist.

 

[fisicx]

Stick with Wordpress. Far more support and a bigger range of available themes and plugin.

Webflow is more of a design tool. Tried if and didn’t like it.

 

[antropy]

What is your oppinion?

Neither. Take a look at Concrete5 instead.

 

[gpietersz]

Everyone will recommend their favourite. There are a lot of CMSs out there and unless you have specific needs it probably does not matter much which you pick.

I would go with Wordpress rather than Webflow. Webflow ties you into their hosting and their system. You can export a copy of the site, but not in a very useful form (i.e. not easy if you want to switch to something else).

Wordpress gives you the choice of many providers offering a fully hosted service, or you can run your own copy of the (open source) software wherever you like, and its relatively easy to move between these.

 

[peppermintlover]

Wordpress will always be a better option compared to anything that is relatively new to the market. It will always be far better equipped with plugins, and other integrations. Unless Webflow becomes completely mainstream, I highly suggest sticking with Wordpress first.

 

[antropy]

Wordpress will always be a better option compared to anything that is relatively new to the market. It will always be far better equipped with plugins, and other integrations. Unless Webflow becomes completely mainstream, I highly suggest sticking with Wordpress first.

Although I'm not a fan of WordPress at all, this is very sound advice.

Paul.

 

[gpietersz]

It will always be far better equipped with plugins, and other integrations. Unless Webflow becomes completely mainstream

I do not think Webflow does has plugins as such. There are integrations with a limited number of services, but its likely to stay limited.

 

[dmxleeds]

I would echo what others have said. I have nothing at all against Webflow, but it's a totally different offering to Wordpress, which has far more potential to be developed. Webflow is great for designers or site owners to build their own sites, but if you are planning to use a developer then WordPress will always offer more flexibility moving forward, not to mention being able to self-host.

If you have a designer that uses Webflow however, there is nothing at all wrong with that for a small corporate website, if they know what they are doing.

Most developers (well, none that I know anyway) wouldn't use platforms like Webflow or Squarespace as they are too restrictive compared to what they are used to using historically, but there is a large market for those CMS services all the same.

Good luck.

 

[FourFronts]

We built ours on WIX and are pretty pleased with it way more cost effective than Wordpress, plus it doesn't require a hard core knowledge of coding to make amendments like a word-press will so requires far less maintenance.

20 pages is a big site though and for that to be custom built on Wordpress with mobile functionality is going to cost several thousand plus you will need to factor in hosting , maintenance and a domain.

It all depends on your budget and specifications and what type of content will be going on the site ?

We could probably quote you for both.

 

[fisicx]

20 pages is a big site though and for that to be custom built on Wordpress with mobile functionality is going to cost several thousand plus you will need to factor in hosting , maintenance and a domain.

Rubbish. Sorry to be so blunt but that is about as wrong as it gets. Wordpress is free. Themes are free. Plugins are free. Hosting is cheap as chips and maintenance is easy. If a developer quoted you thousands they were having a laugh.

20 pages isn’t big. 2000 isn’t even big. You can have as many pages as you want. Doesn’t cost a penny more.

 

[FourFronts]

Rubbish. Sorry to be so blunt but that is about as wrong as it gets. Wordpress is free. Themes are free. Plugins are free. Hosting is cheap as chips and maintenance is easy. If a developer quoted you thousands they were having a laugh.

20 pages isn’t big. 2000 isn’t even big. You can have as many pages as you want. Doesn’t cost a penny more.

Sorry to be so blunt, But not sure what type of developers you have been speaking too most credible ones will quote on page / content / product volume , we have never known a qualified web developer to want to be referred to as " cheap as chips "

Anyway nothing is free in todays world , And if OP goes down the route of trying to build a Wordpress himself with zero experience and finding all of these "free" themes and plugins he will still need to put them all together on a platform designed for qualified web developers he will then need to optimise them for mobile use, then buy a domain , find a hosting platform and then he will have the joy of SEO.

Heck by the end he may as well have just done a qualification in it

Ok once all that is done then yes it won't matter how many pages he has and yes he should be able to continue maintaining it himself

However It's all time and any business owner worth their salt will realise time > money

 

[fisicx]

Sorry to be so blunt, But not sure what type of developers you have been speaking too most credible ones will quote on page / content / product volume

You have been speaking to the wrong developers. Wordpress is a CRM. THere is no need for a developer to create any pages, you do this yourself.

we have never known a qualified web developer to want to be referred to as " cheap as chips "

Hosting is cheap as chips

And if OP goes down the route of trying to build a Wordpress himself with zero experience and finding all of these "free" themes and plugins he will still need to put them all together on a platform designed for qualified web developers

Nope. You install wordpress on your hosting (takes a few minutes) and start creating content. It's as simple as adding pages to your wix site. You don't need to be a developer to do this. Once you have all your pages you can flip and switch themes until you find one you like using the preview function.

...he will then need to optimise them for mobile use

All modern themes are already responsive.

then buy a domain

No different to any other site builder

...and then he will have the joy of SEO.

Easier to do with WordPress than Wix

Heck by the end he may as well have just done a qualification in it

Have you ever built a site with wordpress?

Also, Google is pushing out Web Core Vitals of which performance is a key component. Your site scores 30/100. You will never get any better than this with Wix.

 

[FourFronts]

Well it sounds op doesn't need a developer then he just needs your expertise , op will be whipping up his own Wordpress in a matter of hours for next to nothing with this advice .

 

[fisicx]

Well it sounds op doesn't need a developer then he just needs your expertise , op will be whipping up his own Wordpress in a matter of hours for next to nothing with this advice .

It's as easy to create a wordpress site as it was for you to build your wix site. You don't need a developer. The OP said they were contacting designers not developers. They are two different beasts.

 

[gpietersz]

@fisicx you are assuming the OP knows the difference between a designer and a developer. A lot of people do not.

I have also come across different definitions used even by people doing those jobs. On that came up in a conversation on Reddit was that designers do graphic design and (e.g. a mock-up in Photoshop) and developers turn them inti HTML and CSS. I have a feeling that does not correspond to your definitions.

 

[ctrlbrk]

The thing is that CMSs have somewhat blurred the lines between development and design.

Essentially you are using code written by someone else - either core code or plugins - to create web pages/sites without needing to know the underlying technology.

 

[makeusvisible]

I would keep in mind that you can have a good Wordpress site, and a bad one, just like with a Webflow site. I can understand your approach of getting the advice here about the platform, but my advice is to let your chosen provider make that decision.

Every freelancer, agency or coder will have their preferred platform of choice. So if you make a pre-determined decision on which platform you want to use, you are going to be either asking your preferred provider to work on a platform they wouldn't normally, or you're going to be restricting your choice of provider.

You are far more likely to get the right result if you choose a provider you trust and who presents a solid portfolio/reviews and then let them work with their chosen platform. Obviously within reason.

Also keep in mind that a 'designer' has zero interest in platform. An actual 'web designer' often wont even touch a platform, at all. A designer is normally someone who is qualified in graphic design and will create a visual presentation of how your site should look, and may also be working on brand/colour palete/typography choices etc.

A front end developer will then take that design and html/css it into a browser-able site, and a back-end developer will then integrate that HTML into a CMS (such as Wordpress).

If one person is undertaking the work, they will normally be using website building tools to remove the design and front end coding stages, and if that is the route you are going down, it is really crucial you let that person undertake the work using the tools they prefer.

 

[HostXNow]

Stick with Wordpress. Far more support and a bigger range of available themes and plugin.

Webflow is more of a design tool. Tried if and didn’t like it.

I agree with that. I couldn't use Webflow. I prefer WordPress myself.

At least you know there will always be a free version of WordPress. Can the same be said about Webflow? Could Webflow remove the free version or start charging for the free version even if a smaller amount compared to their paid plans? At any time could they not force everyone to use a paid version? Also, isn't Webflow hosted with them? I prefer self-hosted which you can do with WordPress.

 

[Beautinow]

Wordpress will always be a better option compared to anything that is relatively new to the market. It will always be far better equipped with plugins, and other integrations. Unless Webflow becomes completely mainstream, I highly suggest sticking with Wordpress first.

it's becoming mainstream now! hahaha take a look of some projects built on Webflow, they are just too good!

 

[fisicx]

it's becoming mainstream now! hahaha take a look of some projects built on Webflow, they are just too good!

No better or worse than any other properly developed site.

 

[Paul Carmen]

WordPress is fine, Webflow is fine.

This is the same old conversation, and it's meaningless without knowing the requirements of the site, and especially any future growth needs.

There are far more restrictions and limitations with Webflow, and we moved a big client away because of these, but when their site was smaller/simpler it wasn't an issue.

The Webflow hosting is good, their support is OK, the functionality is OK, but there are growth limitations when it comes to pages (used to be max 99), adding certain types/lengths of external code, payment functionality and development that isn't supported by their road map.

It's far easier to find/develop plugins and find 3rd party systems that integrate with WordPress, but there's nothing inherently wrong with Webflow and it's far faster and easier to SEO optimise than Wix.

 

[Blacklaw]

It depends on what you want to do and what skills you have.... If you plan to build the site yourself then webflow is harder and has quite a learning curve, and you do have to know how to code to get it to do most things that WordPress can do out of the box or with a plugin.

A webflow solution is likely to be more expensive.

If you will have someone else build and maintain the site for you, then it probably makes no difference as you won't ever touch it, aside form the cost.

If you will just be an editor and will edit text, again it makes little difference, but the web flow EDITOR mode is probably easier for the novice client to use.

The main advantage with Webflow is that you do not have to worry about ongoing management & maintenance as you do with WordPress as there is nothing to update. But it is less flexible and extensible as a result as you cannot just install a plugin when you need some new functionality.

If you go down the WordPress route, I would suggest using a company like managedwp.uk so it all gets fully managed for you, unless you do have the time and ability to do it all yourself.

If you just want to build the site yourself and want something super simple and easy to manage, try kopage.uk.