Permanent vs Useful

The ideal website is static and hosted on a simple service like Amazon S3 or a cheap VPS. As long as someone keeps paying the bill, a static website will be around forever. There’s no need to worry about software upgrades or CMS vulnerabilities. A static website is fast and permanent.

But for the editor(s), a static site isn’t very useful.

This blog has run on just about every platform every created. I love when I switch to a completely static build. It’s just raw HTML files in a folder, what could be better? Lot’s could be better.

I want to post from Ulysses or MarsEdit or whatever other tool comes along to make the process more pleasant. I want to automatically post book reviews from GoodReads. I want better integration with other services. I want to play with a wider range of templates and widgets. I want to easily post from my iPad.

What I don’t want is to deal with keeping Wordpress updated and running smoothly. I don’t want to worry about security issues. I don’t want to worry about making sure everything is backed up safely. I don’t want to worry about cache invalidation. I don’t want to worry about keeping a VPS updated and secure.

I love playing with my site. Wordpress may not be simple or permanent, but it makes everything else easier. For permanence, I can run httrack a few times a year and mirror everything.