The AI helps build. The thinking happens here.
I built my first website entirely with Claude, three weeks long, as an experiment. I reached eighty per cent astonishingly fast. The last twenty took time. What I learned along the way is in every project I build this way today.
What you can count on
I do not hand over the thinking
For me the AI is the tool for the build, not for the idea. Structure, design and copy come from me. Whoever does it differently gets a site that looks and sounds like a thousand others.
Trying out instead of describing
Normally I hand a brief to the developers and wait. Here I see immediately what is emerging and can change course while it is still cheap. You can tell from the result.
Pure HTML, nothing to maintain
No content management system, no login, usually no cookies. Nothing that needs updating and little that can be attacked. This very page is built exactly like that.
What really changes because of it
The biggest gain is not the speed. It is the creative freedom.
I have been designing for fourteen years, and I am one of those people who want their idea exactly as it looks in their head. Not roughly. With a page builder that is impossible, there the design ends where the template ends. With classic development it works, but costs accordingly. This way I can work freely on a small budget, and that is new.
On top of that comes something I had not expected. While the machine is working on a task, short pauses arise. They can be used. And I no longer have to hold a complicated problem completely in my head while I work on it. That sounds like a small thing and is in truth the difference between a good and a sluggish working day.
What it is suited for
Sites with their own handwriting
If you want something that does not look like a template. This is exactly where the approach plays to its strength.
Sites that rarely change
A handful of subpages that change twice a year. Nobody needs a content management system with everything that comes with it for that.
Drafts and concepts
Making an idea visible quickly before money flows into the big build. People discuss differently when they can look at something.
Accessibility from the start
Without a system in the background I control every element myself. That makes clean, operable markup easier than in many a template.
Where it gets stuck, honestly
An effect you have seen somewhere on the web, the AI rarely reproduces exactly. Every attempt produces something different. It is like rolling dice: you take the best hit and work on from there.
Then this contradiction that accompanied me through the whole project. Things I thought were simple took forever. Complicated ones ran as if by themselves. You cannot adjust to that, you have to plan for it.
And if you want to maintain content yourself, this is the wrong path. Without a content management system you change nothing without me. Then WordPress is the better choice, and I will tell you that beforehand.
I have written down the whole report with everything that went wrong: AI-generated websites – shit in, shit out.
Frequently asked questions about AI in web design
Does the AI build my website?
No. The design comes from me, as do the structure, the copy and the decision about what belongs on which page. The AI takes over the coding, the part I would otherwise commission someone for. Whoever hands over the thinking gets exactly that kind of website.
Can you tell from the finished site that AI was involved?
Hopefully not. Generated sites are recognisable by the ever-same building blocks and by copy that sounds like nobody. Both happen when you simply adopt the suggestions. I take them as a starting point and keep designing.
What do I get out of it as a client?
Creative freedom that otherwise fails on budget. Without a page builder I am not tied to ready-made templates, and because I see every change immediately, I can try things out instead of describing and waiting. The result is closer to what we discussed.
Is such a site technically different?
Yes, and pleasantly so. What emerges is pure HTML without a content management system. So there is nothing to update, hardly any attack surface and as a rule no cookies, so no consent banner either. The page you are on right now is built that way.
And if I want to change content myself?
Then this is the wrong path. Without a content management system you change nothing on your own. For sites with posts, job ads or several editors I use WordPress. Which path suits you, we clarify beforehand, not afterwards.
Where does the AI reach its limits?
In reproducing. An effect you have seen somewhere, it rarely gets exactly right, and with every attempt the result looks different. Oddly, complicated things often succeed more easily than simple ones. The last twenty per cent of a project are the tough ones.
Is it cheaper than classic development?
Often yes, because the detour via separate programming is dropped. But it does not get cheap. The time shifts from the build to the design and the coordination, and that is exactly where it should be.
Which system suits you?
WordPress
If you want to maintain it yourself.
- Change posts, job ads and dates yourself
- Lean with GeneratePress, no page builder
- Updates needed, but plenty of room
Joomla!
When it gets big.
- Multilingual out of the box
- Many editors, fine-grained permissions
- Development with Benjamin from the core team
HTML, hand-built
If it should stay simple.
- No system, no login, no updates
- Usually no cookie banner needed
- Very fast, hardly attackable
Accessibility is not an extra you book with me. Each of the three paths is built to WCAG and the BFSG – which is why it is not an option in the table below, but a given.
| WordPress | Joomla! | HTML | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Size of the site | small to large | large | small to medium |
| Maintain yourself | yes | yes | no |
| Multilingual | with plugin | built in | possible |
| Many editors | good | very good | no |
| Updates needed | yes | yes | no |
| Cookie banner | usually | usually | no |
| Attack surface | medium | medium | very small |
| Design freedom | large | large | complete |
| Future-proof | with updates | with updates | yes |
| Load time | good | good | very fast |
| Extendable (shop, booking) | yes, via plugin | yes | limited |
| Time to launch | weeks | weeks to months | days to weeks |
| Running costs | hosting, licences, updates | hosting, updates | hosting only |
| Accessible under the BFSG | yes | yes | yes |
In short: if you want to maintain it yourself, take WordPress. If it gets large and multilingual, Joomla!. If it should be simple, fast and maintenance-free, we build it by hand. Which path suits you, we clarify in the first conversation – and I will tell you too if you need less than you thought.
Curious whether this suits your project?
Preferably simply in a video call. I will tell you honestly whether this path makes sense or whether you are better off with something else.