Is Wordpress best program for making websites these days?

OOPS just tested my site on the number 1 search engine result for "Page Load Speed"

Since google page tests were not good enough for you...

Out of Dallas Tx... 1.25 seconds to load LOL
Out of San Jose... 984 MS LOL

YOU SIR, @deathshadow are a got damn joke... Oh, and faster than 85% of sites tested on their platform too LMMuthafuckinAO

try again you disgruntled turd

https://tools.pingdom.com/

 

Pingdom's evaluator is often pure comedy, where it will give 100% performance grades to sites that don't even make 50% on the "Faster than" category. They overvalue goofy tricks for making shitty sites ALMOST acceptable, over practical techniques for ACTUALLY being faster.

See what it does with my cutcodedown website:


That's comedy gold right there. Performance grade of 81, but faster than 99% of websites tested. THAT should be setting off your bullshit alarm right there. But let's look at what it's giving such horrible reviews for:

1) External JS -- it has TWO.... yours has two being served from the same domain, why aren't you being dinged for that?

2) Minimize redirects... it uses disqus, which inherently uses redirects to pull the correct protocol (http or https) -- this has ZERO impact on performance in any real-world environment and is a bullshit claim.

3) Leverage browser caching -- thing is, I am... by using a monolithic stylesheet. The files it is complaining about are either too small to waste time bothering (and would be on the short purge no matter what you set them to) or just flat out not under the control of the devleoper -- for example, well... when it's blaiming "http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com" that should be MORE than enough to set off your bullshit alarm.

4) Vary-accept-encoding. Something google doesn't bother with, which is why FIVE of the SIX files listed aren't even under the domains control are google Adsense!

... and yet, you take a page that gets a 85% or lower rating with the EXACT SAME FILES, these same faults will NOT be listed! That's bullshit where they are actually trying to dupe people with the fastest sites into making them SLOWER!!!

My little toy personal page:


see, higher the performance grade, lower the faster-than. I've rarely seen the two work lock-in-step like you'd expect. The laugh is that most everything being done that it bitches about on the first site is present on the second! They're damned near the same codebase!!!

Of course on this one, they latch onto "oh noes, he hazdedsies teh cookies" -- yeah, ONE cookie, the php session ID. so small it doesn't even make the request larger than a modern packet size, meaning there is NO reason to waste time sending the static files from a different domain. What's REALLY interesting about this is that the OTHER sites of mine ALSO set that same cookie and serve off a single domain, so why aren't they bitching about those?

Pretty much, they're talking out their arse with their statistics; statistics intentionally designed to skew the numbers in favor of the scam artists and hoodoo-voodoo peddlers.

Of course the numbers for your site are also skewed since they're not reporting images correctly, same problem I have in FF with the web devleoper tools where something in your scripting is trying to game the system by flat out lying about what's being loaded... hence your 3.8 megabyte page in 52 separate files reporting as 1.1mb in 30 files..

See how every refresh FF's developer tools on your site throws up seemingly random different values:


Being about middle of the road, but 100% BULLSHIT in terms of the images present on your page. That's what FF's built in developer tools says for your domain selling site -- but laughably it stops counting and shows that a good 30 to 40 seconds before THE PAGE ACTUALLY SHOWS!!! Hence my saying it takes a minute or more... probably because it's sitting there waiting for all that bloated mental midgetry scripting, or the browser's parsing engine has gone off to never-never land trying to deal with that 800k+ of markup doing 16k's job!

Pingdom is probably throwing equal hissy-fits trying to make sense of the convoluted mess of code that makes up your site. My sites because I'm not playing goofy games with headers or scripting, well take cutcodedown:



Spot on consistent EVERY page-load... and that's WITH the "massive fat bloated wrecks" that are disqus and adsense sitting atop it. (since there's only 19k in two files of JS being hosted on-site -- everything else is additions like ads and disqus)

Though pingdom's tool on that same page is likely registering load time incorrectly, since tools like that completely screw up lazy-loading/post-loading in terms of performance. About two thirds of what it's counting overall isn't loaded until after the page and the actual important part -- THE CONTENT -- is loaded.

... and that sad part is, right now pingdom's tools are some of the more honest ones. Don't get me started about the sleazy dirtbag "bait and switch' Google pulled with pagespeed -- where it went from the useful tool of helpful data it was at launch, to an outright scam designed to dupe people into shelling out for a CDN or for their goofy "pagespeed service" that makes crappy pages mediocre, and actually makes well written sites behave like crap! They keep dumbing down further and further the information and card stacking it not in favor of faster sites or building faster sites, but in terms of what they can sucker someone into forking over money for.

 

In the case that a disable person uses a mobile to browse the internet.

Could a non-responsive website (not mobile friendly) be interpreted as going against disabled people?

 

Absolutely. Responsive layout is just the latest in a LONG line of stepping stones to accessible design. There's a reason many search engines penalize pages for that now, and I've had a few clients the past two to three years who were dragged into court over that. Most noteworthy being a multinational banking group (aka they own a bunch of banks) I'm doing work for RIGHT NOW!

There's a bunch of stuff we've been told to do since 1998:

Semantic markup -- so non-visual users have access. Search engines can be treated as non-visual users

Separation of presentation from content -- so you're not wasting time sending visual layout to users who don't use it, so you can target different devices by media type, so you can easily provide different skins to different users with different needs. It also aids in graceful degradation should any of that fancy style not work, be blocked, or be unwanted by the user.

Elastic layout -- using EM's for font-size, widths, paddings, so the layout adjusts to the user preferences not the designers whims

Semi-fluid layout -- max width to prevent long lines from being unwieldy, min-width to prevent breakage on older browsers, but fluid between those two extremes adjusting to the available space.

Those are the basics, we've been told for twenty damned years to do that; but artists, lazy ignorant fools, and just plain scammers make up lame excuses not to do it. The Laugh being that if you have all the above, making it responsive is a no-brainer. Not even 2k of extra CSS in an existing stylesheet.

Responsive layout to be mobile friendly (or large screen for that matter, don't forget 4k is a thing now) is just the latest addition to this, adding to the power of media targets that separation of presentation from content provides, and enhancing what happens with semi-fluid layout when going smaller than the min-widths we used to be restricted to. It's also why making my existing sites responsive when media queries dropped wasn't even 20 minutes coding, whilst the rest of the world ran around like chickens with their heads cut off "wah wah, how do we do this?!?"

Given that more than HALF of all web traffic is now mobile, it's no longer just about the disabled, it's about users in general.

BUT, disabled are users too... as much as some people try to dehumanize them by discounting their value, worth, or importance. See @locals dirtbag responses on the subject -- surprised he has time to post here given all that marching he must have been doing in Virginia... given I suspect he's one of these twaddles that if he saw Stephen Hawkings on the street, he'd say "out of the way retard"

That or I'm overly sensitive on the subject as I'm fighting a losing battle against Parkinsons, shouldn't be working, but still am because the support mechanism in place for the disabled is a joke... made all the worse by jackasses like him!

HTML is about providing content to as many users as possible. Any normal website that fails to leverage this is --- AGAIN -- ineptly and incompetently developed.

Though it's still one hell of a learning curve, which is why so many dive for things like Bootcrap even if it does fall apart on anything less than bleeding edge overpriced hardware. (see how not one bootcrap built website works right on my Icoo or Cubot). There are SO many targets with SO many capabilities, you simply have to design as fluid as possible adjusting to the needs of the content, instead of targeting specific devices.

Which is where SO many people trying to go mobile friendly screw up. They'll go "Oh the galaxy S7 is this resolution, the iPhone 6 is this resolution" and try to customize to each and every single one, instead of just building for legacy desktop (what we can't target with queries), and then narrowing the browser window until it breaks, and adjusting the layout accordingly -- lather, rinse, repeat.

All that said, you also have to know where to draw the line. At the real extremes the page should be usable, but you shouldn't bend over backwards to make it perfect. I'll often say "If IE8/earlier doesn't get rounded corners or drop shadows, OH WELL!" -- in that same way, if a device that's 256 or even 192 pixels wide has difficulty navigating the page, OH WELL. IS it USABLE? Yes or no? Whilst well written code should support the extremes, anyone in those extremes should be used to the common issues. (of hey, you're on a 2" wide screen what do you expect?)

That's the particularly infuriating part of non-semantic markup, it crosses that line for a LOT of users from "not great, but usable" into "Ok, screw this I'll go somewhere else". The objective of building any site template or layout should be to minimize the former group as much as possible, and eliminate the latter entirely.

 

I like your inclusive attitude. It's good that at least somebody takes disabled users into account when creating websites. It's really tiresome to hear some people who ignore disabled users, as if disabled people had no value. I'm interested in creating professional websites that cater disabled users, so I wonder if you know any websites or tutorials that can guide one in this regard.

 

@MrKing01 this is a great starting point: http://www.cutcodedown.com/article/progressive_enhancement

Check also the links in his website and https://www.nngroup.com/articles/

 

@badger_ -- love how someone else answers by linking to my site.

Other HIGHLY relevant articles by yours truly:

http://www.cutcodedown.com/article/whats_wrong_with_YOUR_website_index
... and you can bet your sweet bippy 99%+ of off the shelf templates for systems like Wordpress have the majority of those failures due to the UTTER AND COMPLETE INCOMPETENCE of the people making templates for it, AND the fundamental flaws in how WP itself works internally!

These jokers can't even use h1...h6 properly, but because its' "ooh shiny" people who don't know any better fall for the outright SCAMS like the whole thing were run by the same type of clowns who peddle snake oil like Amway or Mary Kay... or Jade Eggs, or the whole "Organic" foods movement... or the REAL mouth-breathers like flat-earthers.

Though to be fair, around half the off the shelf templates have good concepts -- it's the execution of that concept that puts the herp into that there derp. Tens if not hundreds of K of HTML, tens if not hundreds of K of CSS, MEGABYTES of JavaScript, all doing the job of three to five dozen K of code COMBINED. Nothing resembling semantic markup, graceful degradation, or any of the other things HTML, CSS, and JavaScript [b\were all created to DO!!![/b] For people who know nothing about building websites BY people who know nothing about building websites is not a recipe for success, and I've seen it burn so many companies the past twenty years I wonder how in the hell these SCAMS continue to operate or that sleazebag after sleazebag actively defends it.

But then this is 2017 and "Faith" is still a thing instead of in a museum where it belongs, so all bets are off.

Though @locals is right on one thing, I do:


On this subject a lot, that's because I see the same mistakes repeated over and over again, the same lame excuses used over and over to "apologize" for it, and endless media darling bullshit heaped on broken systems out of ignorance, nube predation, and echo-chamber. AGAIN, you'd almost think we were dealing with politics or religion the way the noodle doodle "I know how I feel I don't care about facts" IDIOCY gets parroted time and time again.

The earth is not flat, all of creation wasn't made in six days, tumeric doesn't cure cancer, steaming your clam doesn't help "detox" you, cleansing detox's across the board are pseudo-science quackery, "organic" food is marketing scam bullshit, GMO's are no more dangerous than non-GMO, vaccines do prevent diseases and do not cause autism, chemtrails are not real, climate change is real, the alt-right is racist no matter how much they claim they are not, the moon landings were not faked since when they hired Kubrick to do it he insisted they film on location...

... and choosing an off the shelf template for ANY CMS for your BUSINESSS is at best the equivalent of thinking that late night "make money fast in real-estate" infomercials are legitimate... and the people constantly singing it's praises are web developments equivalent to David "Avacado" Wolfe or Vani "Food Babe" Hani... The mouth-breathers yumming up the bullshit they peddle like it was coming out of a soft-serve ice-cream machine, they just sell the waffle cones.

If you believe a word they say, you either have an extreme case of gullibility mixed with ignorance, or just plain brain damage.

Inclusive is a very good word for it, but it depends on WHO you want to include... the entire public that might want to use your site, access your content, and buy your products -- or people who shouldn't be running websites in the first place as they are unwilling to put in the WORK, or too stupid to learn how badly they're screwing themselves AND their clients.

After all, it's called work, not happy happy fun time. If as a web developer, web designer, or site owner you aren't trying to include as many people in your "audience" as you can, YOU'RE NOT DOING YOUR DAMNED JOB AND DESERVE TO FAIL!

... and you'll see it time and time again; what I like to call "percenters" -- we've dealt with this card stacking glittering generality lame excuse IDIOCY for decades. Oh Opera is only 3% who cares about them, Oh visually impaired is only 3% of the population who cares about them. People using anything less than the latest iPhone or Android are only 20% who cares about them. Legacy IE share is dropping below 10% who cares about them. There aren't that many people on slow connections, under bandwidth caps, or facing high latency -- it's only around 50% of all internet users worldwide -- who cares about them.

Until in their endless stream of mind-numbingly dumbass excuses, THEY'VE EXCLUDED EVERYBODY except their magical perfect world of perfect people on perfect connections buying into their perfect manure they've dumped a can of shellac on and buffed to a high quality shine.

THEN they have the giant set of donkey brass to call people like myself fighting for web standard and accessibility "Elitist". RIGHT.

Pot? This is Kettle. Kettle? Pot. Here's a nice spot in the corner I'm sure you'll get along famously.

See this rather insightful article from a few years back....
http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200704/lame_excuses_for_not_being_a_web_professional/

Oh, and you want a REALLY good source that will change your way of looking at things?
http://www.harpercollins.ca/9780062358363/the-end-of-average

This excerpt will give you an idea of what to expect from it:
https://www.thestar.com/news/insigh...ir-force-discovered-the-flaw-of-averages.html

... and that too is the problem with off the shelf answers like turdpress and the stock templates, stock plugins/mods/extensions and so forth. The ACTUAL truth of one size fits all is that it fits nobody.

 

Anyone who knows what they are doing wouldn't use it. WP is the middle of the road solution for people who don't know what they are doing and don't care about their site. If it's best at anything, it's DUPING people who shouldn't even have a website into thinking they can slop one out easily.

 

Indeed, wordpress is user friendly. Aside from that customization isn't that hard especially for beginners. That's why I think most of the people on the internet is considering wordpress.

 

100%
Yea,its user-friendly easy to learn,has a ton of plugins that act like up-grades and ton of themes

 

Yea it is,its the most user friendly platform ever,super-easy in fact..

 

very user friendly but easily over-bloated with lots of extras that can slow your site down ...

 

Wordpress is still the best, but now it is being flooded with useless plugins. You need to take time to find the ones that work for you. Never rely on ratings alone, but make sure ratings are based on at least a couple thousand votes.

 

Considering the amount of free resources available for wordpress (themes/plugins/tutorials) even a complete newbie could put together a decent website in no time.

 

Wordpress has many advantages which have been already mentioned in his thread. What I experienced is that knowledge of PHP will help in getting more advantages out of Wordpress. Knowledge in PHP will help error debugging, more customization of the themes.

 

Depends on what you need. A lot of plugins and free templates are available to download and use and if you know a bit of some PHP + HTML + CSS + JS you can customize it even more on a deeper level. But for online shop it might not work very good for you, for example or if you want to create a forum etc. Generally, it's a very good and trusted one and free, of course.

 

If you want to create powerful and polished sites without learning much coding then, WordPress is best solution for creating business websites.

With WordPress, you can easily develop or create websites like: . Personal portfolios, blogs, and brochure sites. Also with WordPress plugins, you can also easily build e-commerce sites, job boards, social networks and other custom sites.

There are some good reasons to use WordPress to create your website

WordPress is easy to setup, manage, and update.

Go to WordPress and sign up for free account. You can create website online in 2 minutes. If you want you can host the domain over there with a very nominal fee. You don't need to be an internet expert or a coder to create a website in WordPress.

WordPress is good for both your blog and your website.

WordPress has evolved as a full featured web content management system but it started out as a blogging system several years ago.
Currently, you can use WordPress to manage your whole website as well as blog.

Professionally Designed Themes
WordPress has thousands of designed themes and many of them are free to use. These themes allow you to design a website professionally without hiring a web designer.
There are over two thousand free themes available in the official WordPress Theme Directory and more available for a fee at commercial sites like Theme Forest, StudioPress, and WooThemes.

WordPress Plugins
You do not need to hire a coder to add complex features on your website, you can do this with WordPress Plugins. There is a plugin for any functionality you want to add on your website and this helps in meeting your business needs.

WordPress is search engine friendly
As Matt Cutts says, “WordPress automatically solves a ton of SEO issues. With the free Yoast SEO plugin, your site will be search engine friendly.

WordPress is popular
With the availability of thousands of themes and plugins, WordPress is the most popular content management system. Over 27% of all websites are powered by WordPress.

WordPress Community
WordPress community provide support, exchange ideas and this makes the WordPress better for everyone. Anyone can connect with the community on the official WordPress forum or in person at WordCamp events around the world.

WordPress is ready for the mobile web.
In today's’ era of technology, your site has to be responsive that works well on any device. Many WordPress themes are responsive , this means your customers can use the site on any device like tablet, mobile phone.
Also, WordPress dashboard is designed to work on smartphones as well as full-sized PCs — so you can easily manage your website from anywhere.

WordPress is mature.
WordPress has been refined, tested, and enhanced since last 10 years. In the process, it has evolved into a world-class web publishing system or content management system.

WordPress is open source
Wordpress is open source and free from any restrictions and limitations .You can use the software any way you choose and host your website anywhere you choose. A major benefit is that WordPress costs less than commercial alternatives.

 

Honestly, its Wordpress that is usually applied as the bridge for every marketer to the target audience. Despite of the numerous free hosting CMS sites Wordpress still the highly recommended to start of and specially it dominates the SERP today.

 

and @mmrelinn and @deathshadow are no where to be found once the wordpress train takes off...

 

Hi
I think it depends on your requirements. Though WordPress is very simple, highly customize and easy to use Content management system (CMS) with lots of themes & plugins available.