I have posted this question on other boards and no one seems to "get it". I find this site via matt cutts blog, so hopefully that means something lol ;)
I am not looking for a short cut or scam or any such thing, as has been suggested on other sites.
I just want to know plain and simple the following -
Do the search engines ( any and/or all of them ) prefer one method of site development over another method? eg. frontpage, dw, old fashion HTML, CSS, FTP etc. ?
Someone at another forum suggested that the method a site was developed does matter today ( as in just recently started to matter ) to the SE - with the method of Joomla or Drupal being the preferred method over anything else.
My apologies if I seem rude. I am frustrated as I have been trying to find this information out for days now with no luck.
Can someone here please give me a direct answer to this?
Your question is a long and difficult one to answer. FP vs DW doesn't matter. CSS gives better text to code ratio, but I don't know if that actually helps. Spiderability and content is more important than other criteria you are asking. One content management system may be more important than another if it is SE freindly with respect to spiderability and not having duplicate pages.
It makes no difference. Here are some reasons why I think that.
1) one place to start is the search engines themselves. Google has given out plenty of advice on how to make a site search engine friendly. They've never once mentioned the back-end system as a factor.
2) if it did make a difference, then the search engines are not doing their job, because they are trying to assess relevance and quality at the front end, not the backl end. They want to rate sites according to what the user experiences. So ideally the only difference in search engine friendliness will be differences according to how well they produce a nice, easy-to-use site.