I remember the exact moment I decided to build Jottings differently.

I was sitting with a writer friend—someone brilliant with words but completely allergic to command lines. She wanted to start a blog. Not just post on Medium or Substack, but own her own website. So I recommended Hugo. A static site generator. Fast, secure, free to host on Netlify.

She looked at me like I'd suggested rocket science.

"Vishal, I don't know what a command line is. Why can't I just... write?"

That question stuck with me for months.

The truth is, the web development world has created a massive gap. On one side, you have incredibly powerful tools—Hugo, Jekyll, Gatsby—that can generate blazingly fast, incredibly secure websites. On the other side, you have creators and writers who just want to publish their ideas without learning Git, npm, and markdown syntax.

Most non-developers end up choosing Wix or Squarespace. They're easy, but you pay for it. Literally. And your site is slower and less flexible than it could be.

But here's what you're actually getting when you build a static site: speed, security, and simplicity. You just shouldn't need a computer science degree to access those benefits.

What Are Static Sites (And Why Do They Matter)?

Let me demystify this first.

A static site is just a collection of HTML files. That's it. When someone visits your site, the server sends them the exact same HTML file every time. No database queries. No server computation. Just the file.

Compare that to a WordPress site or Squarespace. Every time someone visits, the server has to:

• Check a database
• Generate the page from templates
• Add tracking code
• Handle plugins
• Process ads

It takes milliseconds, but those add up.

With a static site? It's instant. The file is already there. Just send it.

This matters for three reasons:

Speed. Static sites load in milliseconds. This isn't a nice-to-have—Google literally ranks faster sites higher. Your readers also leave if your site is slow. There's no excuse for sluggishness when the technology can be this fast.

Security. A static file can't be hacked. There's no backend to exploit. No database to breach. No plugins with vulnerabilities. This is why government agencies, banks, and security-conscious companies use static sites. It's not paranoia. It's just smarter.

Cost. You can host a static site for free or nearly free. Netlify, Cloudflare Pages, Vercel—all will host your site for $0 if you're starting out. Try that with WordPress.

So static sites are objectively better. The problem is they're objectively harder to create.

Why Traditional Generators Alienate Non-Developers

Hugo is impressive. It's fast. The documentation is thorough. But the barrier to entry is enormous.

To use Hugo, you need to:

• Install it on your computer (terminal)
• Learn how to use the terminal
• Create a project structure in the right way
• Learn markdown
• Learn YAML for configuration
• Learn about themes and how to customize them
• Learn how to deploy your site

This is a 50-hour learning curve minimum. For someone who just wants to write.

Jekyll is similar. Gatsby is worse—it requires knowing React and JavaScript.

These tools weren't built for writers. They were built for developers who want a lighter-weight alternative to WordPress. The assumption is that you understand command lines, version control, and code.

If you don't, you're stuck.

The Market Gap

Here's what I realized: there are millions of people who want the benefits of static sites. Speed. Ownership. Security. Simplicity.

But they're not willing to spend 50 hours learning a command line interface. They shouldn't have to.

Substack solved this for newsletters. Medium solved this for essays. But for personal blogs and websites, there's no good solution for non-developers who want to own their own site.

So everyone defaults to Wix, Squarespace, or Shopify. They're easy, which is good. But they're expensive, slow, and your site is tied to their platform. If they change pricing or shut down, you lose everything.

A Different Approach

When I built Jottings, I started with this premise: what if we took the power of static sites and removed everything that requires a developer?

No command lines. No Git. No configuration files. No learning curve.

You get the speed and security of static sites, but the simplicity of a platform like Medium or Substack.

You write in your browser. You hit publish. Your site generates instantly. It's hosted and fast. You own your content. You control the design.

That's it. That's the entire flow.

Behind the scenes, we're handling the static site generation for you. We're optimizing images. We're generating clean, semantic HTML. We're ensuring your site loads in milliseconds. We're managing the hosting on Cloudflare.

But you don't need to know any of that. You just write.

What You Actually Get

Here's what changes when you use a static site generator built for non-developers:

Your site is fast. Not "pretty fast." Milliseconds fast. This improves Google rankings, user experience, and bounce rates.

You own your content. You're not renting from Substack or Medium. You can export everything. Your site is yours, permanently.

Your site is secure. No plugins. No database. Nothing to hack. This matters more than you think.

No recurring costs. Substack takes 10% of revenue. Squarespace is $12/month minimum. Wix keeps pushing higher. A static site costs nothing to host.

You control the design. You're not limited to Substack templates or Wix themes. You can customize your site to match your vision.

Unlimited scalability. A viral post won't crash your site. Static files handle millions of visitors without breaking a sweat.

Who This Is For

Static sites aren't for everyone. If you're building an e-commerce store with inventory management, static sites aren't the answer.

But if you're:

• A writer who wants a personal blog
• A freelancer who needs a portfolio
• A consultant building an authority site
• A creator who owns their platform
• Anyone who prefers quality and control over convenience

Then a static site generator built for non-developers is exactly what you need.

The Future of Simple Publishing

The web was supposed to democratize publishing. In some ways it has. Anyone can start a blog on Medium or Substack.

But true ownership is still gatekept behind technical knowledge.

I think that's backwards.

There's a middle path: tools that are as easy as Medium but as powerful as Hugo. Tools that respect your time and your wallet. Tools built with writers in mind, not developers.

That's where I think web publishing is heading. And it's the problem I'm focused on solving with Jottings.

If you've ever wanted to own your site but were intimidated by the technical side, I built Jottings for you. No command lines. No configuration. Just write and publish.

Ready to build your own static site without the complexity? Start with Jottings—it takes 2 minutes to get going.