Tabke versus blogs?

Is a blog a better way to begin today?

[gstick]

I have read Brett Tabke's 2003 post that describes how to build a successful site in 1 years time via Google alone. Among other recomendations he advises putting together at least 100 pages of solid original content for openers.

Another poster on this site talks about starting with a blog as a way to get feedback as well as other advantages.

Is Tabke's post out of date today?

I have built 3 websites hand coded with html & css. My personal website is quite large. Building a conventional website is not a problem. But I am daunted by the task of setting up for and managing reader responses. So far I only understand email responses. Is it the same thing?

Any help will be appreciated.

[WhiteWebServices]

Is Tabke's post out of date today?

Nope. The method describes there works as well as it ever did.

[wolfadeus]

The posting is still widely considered to be valid and working - don't expect the work descibed to be as easy as it sounds, though. It is not only extremely time-consuming, but also harder than in 03 due to much stronger competition (I started around 05 and I am far from achieving what I have had in mind by then).

[Tastatura]

As a side note (and probably irrelevant) to your question - BT has a blog but it's not publiciesed much (all those pesky robots to WebmasterWorld would have a field day if they knew)...

[gstick]

Thanks White, Wolf and Tast. You've helped me to straighten my question considerably.

I believe that Tabke's method is fundamental. In addition to the one year and 100 pages the post included a number of other strategems including suggested page size.

Wolfadeus points out that competition is increased dramatically in the four years since BT's original post. Also new techniques have developed such as the blog. I am wondering whether anyone has any thoughts on the current competitive importance of a collaterial blog, for example, as a way to increase your basic web's exposure and drawing power.

I really don't understand blogs as anything other than a method for exchanging views, political or otherwise, or a informal way to gather viewer reactions and opinions.

Is there a need for an update to the BT 2003 post reflecting blogs or other relatively new techniques?

[jatar_k]

>> Is there a need for an update to the BT 2003 post reflecting blogs or other relatively new techniques?

no

a blog is just another tool, like a forum or a form. You don't need a blog to succeed. Some may say not having one is better.

[mack]

Just for referance here is the thread being discussed...

[webmasterworld.com...]

Mack.

[stever]

>>a blog is just another tool, like a forum or a form. You don't need a blog to succeed. Some may say not having one is better.

I'm not sure about that one. I agree that a blog is a website, and blog-users and owners take the blogosphere far too seriously.

But if you are more articulate than the average couch potato and have a yen for self-expression, then it certainly appears to simplify the task of obtaining relevant links and traffic (which is why so many old-school SEMs have become social media proponents).

[claus]

A blog is basically a Content Management System. So, a blog is as much a "web site" as any other web site (cms,hand-coded, forum, gallery, shopping-basket, etc). The good thing about such a system is that it builds the site for you automatically, around your content. So, all you have to do as the publisher is to publish what you write.

Although there are quite a few flavours of blogs -- and even quite a few extension modules to each flavour -- blogs are still "one size fits all"; you will not get 100% customization as with a web site built from the ground up.

On the other hand, you will not need to put ressources into coding the web site either. This means that you should be able to save some time on technical stuff, and spend that time on content in stead.

So, yes, blogs are okay.

However, it is not the case that it's "Tabke versus Blogs" - that isn't how it works. Brett's "20 steps" applies to blogs as well as any other type of web site. Some of the specifics may need a little adjustment but basically it's fundamentally sound advice for any type of site - and, a web site that is a blog is still a web site.

[gstick]

Thanks Mack! I had lost the url. But I've got a hard copy.

Thanks also to jatar, stever and claus for painting a picture of what a blog really is. Claus' explanation is the best definition I have seen.

I think I see a way to use a blog as a complimentary or collateral site. The only way to find out if it is worthwhile is to try it. So that's what I will do.

gstick

[wolfadeus]

I'm with claus: I can't see a fundamental difference between a blog and any other website with a content management system (CMS).

Socially, blogs made technical knowledge redundant (you don't need to know HTML or CSS for having a good-looking website). Therefore, blogs can often be considered to be high-key competitors and not only highschool-kid's platforms to share their views on current TV programs: Blogs combine a solid layout with varying content (depending on the person behind the blog).

They certainly made web-publishing easier and accelerated the consolidation of the web.

[stever]

>>I'm with claus: I can't see a fundamental difference between a blog and any other website with a content management system (CMS).

Well, you're looking at it more from the technical point of view, which I agree with 100%.

But I would still say that there is a fundamental difference of tone between "a blog" and "a CMS-managed website" (although obviously you can make each look like the other!) and I would say that it has to do with the social aspects, the readiness of others to quote it and link to it, the pinging and RSS facilities, and the willingness to update.

So, although I realise that you can do all those things with a "normal" website (whether it is controlled by a CMS or not), I would still say that a blog adds a different atmosphere just by what it is.

[wolfadeus]

Fair enough, stever - in that sense a "social" defintion for blog is more approoriate than a technical one.

For the comptetition point of view blogs mean mostly that they have enabled more people to become publishers than ever before.

Interesting thread, by the way.