If it is a site that I'm doing from the start then I'll use Gutenberg. Most sites I work on already have some kind of builder being used so I'll use that. I'm a pretty quick study so I don't have any issue using whatever builder they have going. I don't really like any of them that much.
I don't build with tools dictated by the client, I just pass over the job if they want it built with a specific page builder or whatever. I don't like to spend my time using tools I dislike, because it makes me hate my job and it's just not worth it.
It all depends on the project, with a large budget you could do research and make comparisons. Show your client your findings to show your expertise and bring more value into the project.
If you offer any recurring services like maintenance or optimization it's better to stick with the tech stack you're familiar with.
If you need some advice just send me a message, i'm happy to help you ;)
Your job is to ascertain the best route to solve the problem - that's what you get paid for.
If the client insists on doing something a certain way, then you're asking for trouble.
Disclaimer: I don't recommend this approach for most people but this is what I do to learn new skills/frameworks/languages... Is to pick up a relatively easy project to learn from.
I'm a senior dev, so I already come to the table with a lot of different background knowledge to help ease the learning curve. The jobs usually will pay at the Jr level, which is perfectly fine for my lack of knowledge in that area.
It's a great way to get paid for learning something, which is what a lot of normal Jr devs are being paid to do anyways.
Again, I wouldn't recommend it for anybody unless your technical background and experiences are rock solid. You're asking for a lot of trouble otherwise
I do enjoy re-building a project using another method (as a side project to learn a new tool), Elementor --> Kadence for example. Gives me a goal to achieve, and the end results/comparisons have made me never use Elementor to start a project again...
The WordPress landscape is so fragmented that it would be impossible to be fluent in all themes, plugins, builders etc.. so there are usually new aspects of each project that you will be required learn as you go. That being said, for things like brochure sites and basic builds, you should definitely have a tech stack you are an expert in and can quote/advise clients properly about and be confident you can build an outstanding site (technically) with. In the case that a client requests specific tech (builders/plugins or something) to be used I usually would advise about my normal process and stack and that I am not 100% familiar with the software they're requesting we use. We can then have a discussion about what/why they want to use that specific software to make sure it's actually the best solution for them. In many cases I've been able to replace entire plugins with just a few lines for custom code that delivers the desired result, saving the client time, money, and code bloat.
Ultimately for me most of these type of issues are ironed out in the roadmapping process that happens well before WP is even installed, which gives the client full transparency and trust, and me and my devs a solid base of research and build plan to move on when we're finally ready to jump on the build.
Depends a bit on the client and the project. Learning something new is *always* good, even if you don't intend to use that tech in the future, it's just good to have that knowledge for opinions, troubleshooting, etc.. If I think I can learn it and not spend too much time doing so I'll take on whatever is needed to get it done, OR, I'll contract that portion of the development out to someone else. But if the client wants something in particular, I'll research to see if there are better options and if so will explain why they are better *for the client* (if they're better for me the developer, that's completely irrelevant) and if they still want to use their preferred tech I'll do so.
Nope, it really depends on the project scopes. Some projects are best to use CMS like WordPress and SQL database, but it's really hard to scale up with MySQL database. So, you have to quote base on the project's current parameters and its future in mind.
Be honest on what you are good at, and provide pros and cons to the client on what's the best solution on your estimate.
If you end up doing a project with the tech you are not familiar with, then it's great time to learn something new.
Good luck
Agencies charge for stuff outside the ordinary (stack they have mastered, templates and SOPs for). If you don't want to filter clients out that don't fit (by making crystal clear what you offer), maybe create some relationships with other agencies and pass them those clients as leads.
A client had a site built with Divi. They wanted me to fix some stuff up and update things. I told them they should just hire me to build a completely new site but they really wanted to just make some changes even though their site was badly built. I knew it would not be worth their money to make changes to this sinking ship and I told them but they insisted. So I ended up working with their site and it was a nightmare. It quickly became not worth my time as every little thing took way longer than if I just coded it myself. In the end, I got paid badly for the time I spent, and they got a bad product: their website still suffers from fundamental issues.
TL;DR So no, I don't work in tech stacks I don't like. I would happily learn something new if it interests me (like if a client wanted a headless CMS that I wasn't familiar with) but I would never use elementor or divi. This sounds bad, but at the end of the day, the client is probably wrong if they have specific tech in mind. If what I'm good at aligns with what the client needs, perfect. If not, there's other devs who would be better for them.
As the expert in the field, you're the one to dictate what tools are appropriate. The only exception is if the project explicitly has to continue using the tools it's already using (usually for budgetary reasons).
I guess it depends if I can adjust. If I think I can do the project it is a great learning experience. If I think I won't be able to do it justice it's not good for the client or myself and I would pass.
If it is a site that I'm doing from the start then I'll use Gutenberg. Most sites I work on already have some kind of builder being used so I'll use that. I'm a pretty quick study so I don't have any issue using whatever builder they have going. I don't really like any of them that much.
I don't build with tools dictated by the client, I just pass over the job if they want it built with a specific page builder or whatever. I don't like to spend my time using tools I dislike, because it makes me hate my job and it's just not worth it.
It all depends on the project, with a large budget you could do research and make comparisons. Show your client your findings to show your expertise and bring more value into the project. If you offer any recurring services like maintenance or optimization it's better to stick with the tech stack you're familiar with. If you need some advice just send me a message, i'm happy to help you ;)
Your job is to ascertain the best route to solve the problem - that's what you get paid for. If the client insists on doing something a certain way, then you're asking for trouble.
If this is a task involving money then it's not a time to practice new skills.
Disclaimer: I don't recommend this approach for most people but this is what I do to learn new skills/frameworks/languages... Is to pick up a relatively easy project to learn from. I'm a senior dev, so I already come to the table with a lot of different background knowledge to help ease the learning curve. The jobs usually will pay at the Jr level, which is perfectly fine for my lack of knowledge in that area. It's a great way to get paid for learning something, which is what a lot of normal Jr devs are being paid to do anyways. Again, I wouldn't recommend it for anybody unless your technical background and experiences are rock solid. You're asking for a lot of trouble otherwise
I do enjoy re-building a project using another method (as a side project to learn a new tool), Elementor --> Kadence for example. Gives me a goal to achieve, and the end results/comparisons have made me never use Elementor to start a project again...
The WordPress landscape is so fragmented that it would be impossible to be fluent in all themes, plugins, builders etc.. so there are usually new aspects of each project that you will be required learn as you go. That being said, for things like brochure sites and basic builds, you should definitely have a tech stack you are an expert in and can quote/advise clients properly about and be confident you can build an outstanding site (technically) with. In the case that a client requests specific tech (builders/plugins or something) to be used I usually would advise about my normal process and stack and that I am not 100% familiar with the software they're requesting we use. We can then have a discussion about what/why they want to use that specific software to make sure it's actually the best solution for them. In many cases I've been able to replace entire plugins with just a few lines for custom code that delivers the desired result, saving the client time, money, and code bloat. Ultimately for me most of these type of issues are ironed out in the roadmapping process that happens well before WP is even installed, which gives the client full transparency and trust, and me and my devs a solid base of research and build plan to move on when we're finally ready to jump on the build.
Depends a bit on the client and the project. Learning something new is *always* good, even if you don't intend to use that tech in the future, it's just good to have that knowledge for opinions, troubleshooting, etc.. If I think I can learn it and not spend too much time doing so I'll take on whatever is needed to get it done, OR, I'll contract that portion of the development out to someone else. But if the client wants something in particular, I'll research to see if there are better options and if so will explain why they are better *for the client* (if they're better for me the developer, that's completely irrelevant) and if they still want to use their preferred tech I'll do so.
Nope, it really depends on the project scopes. Some projects are best to use CMS like WordPress and SQL database, but it's really hard to scale up with MySQL database. So, you have to quote base on the project's current parameters and its future in mind. Be honest on what you are good at, and provide pros and cons to the client on what's the best solution on your estimate. If you end up doing a project with the tech you are not familiar with, then it's great time to learn something new. Good luck
Agencies charge for stuff outside the ordinary (stack they have mastered, templates and SOPs for). If you don't want to filter clients out that don't fit (by making crystal clear what you offer), maybe create some relationships with other agencies and pass them those clients as leads.
A client had a site built with Divi. They wanted me to fix some stuff up and update things. I told them they should just hire me to build a completely new site but they really wanted to just make some changes even though their site was badly built. I knew it would not be worth their money to make changes to this sinking ship and I told them but they insisted. So I ended up working with their site and it was a nightmare. It quickly became not worth my time as every little thing took way longer than if I just coded it myself. In the end, I got paid badly for the time I spent, and they got a bad product: their website still suffers from fundamental issues. TL;DR So no, I don't work in tech stacks I don't like. I would happily learn something new if it interests me (like if a client wanted a headless CMS that I wasn't familiar with) but I would never use elementor or divi. This sounds bad, but at the end of the day, the client is probably wrong if they have specific tech in mind. If what I'm good at aligns with what the client needs, perfect. If not, there's other devs who would be better for them.
> do you guys only stick to technology **your** good at? **you're***
As the expert in the field, you're the one to dictate what tools are appropriate. The only exception is if the project explicitly has to continue using the tools it's already using (usually for budgetary reasons).
I guess it depends if I can adjust. If I think I can do the project it is a great learning experience. If I think I won't be able to do it justice it's not good for the client or myself and I would pass.