Lately we hear the same question more often from clients: “Do we really need all this complexity for a simple website?” Our answer is no. Complexity is sometimes the nature of the work, but not the nature of every project. At Maviband, we’ve long trusted the fundamentals—HTML, CSS, and JavaScript—because most projects truly need readable typography, fast loading, clear information architecture, and dependable form flows. To reach those goals, we first set strong foundations and then add the right tools only when they are actually needed.
In today’s ecosystem, adding a simple button to a page can turn into a trek through package managers, bundlers, multiple config files, component libraries, and state managers. None of these tools are inherently wrong; for large, real-time, highly interactive applications, they can be lifesavers. The problem is bringing this “heavy” stack to every project by reflex. When the requirement is a corporate site, a clean blog, a fast landing page, or a lightweight product site, those choices inflate cost and maintenance without delivering measurable value to the user.
We also prefer the phrase “build websites” over “develop websites.” Building suggests a solid footing. We start with semantic HTML to frame the structure, apply accessibility standards, shape the visual rhythm and hierarchy with CSS, and let the page do its job at this stage. We use JavaScript where it’s truly necessary and in measured amounts. What wins users over is initial performance, the flow of text, and a reliable form experience—not a five-second “app loading” screen when they just want to place a coffee order.
Of course, some projects deserve SPA/SSR/ISR and more sophisticated architectures. If you have heavy dynamic data, online/offline scenarios, complex role-based authorization, or real-time interactions, we’ll establish component architecture, routing, state management, and test scaffolding. But we don’t make that call because of trends. We evaluate traffic profile, content update cadence, team skills, maintenance budget, SEO targets, and page experience metrics (LCP/CLS/INP) side by side. In short, technology must serve the goal; the goal should never be forced to serve the technology.
Another common issue is reaching for massive libraries to fix “tiny CSS quirks.” Experience shows that most typography and grid issues are solvable with plain CSS—often with capabilities built into modern browsers. A sound design system, consistent units, early consideration for dark/light modes, and accessible component variants replace hundreds of kilos of dependencies while dramatically reducing maintenance.
Our approach at Maviband is simple: start with a lean core, then add smart layers as needed. If the content is static, we publish it statically; if content management is required, we connect a lightweight CMS. If form flows are well defined, we validate server-side and provide immediate feedback to users. For visual performance we process images, serve the right formats, deliver critical CSS early, and defer the rest. And we keep all of this at a level of simplicity the client’s own team can sustain, because real life begins after launch; a maintainable codebase is worth more than the first “wow” moment.
“Does everything have to be an app?” No. A good website is often the sum of well-written HTML and CSS, measured JavaScript, and thoughtful content. When you pick the right tools for the job, users are happier and the budget–time–maintenance triangle stays balanced. Our job is to keep complexity as a means, not an end—protecting the value of simplicity while bringing modern techniques in where they matter. And if your project truly needs to grow into a large application, we know that road, too. But we always start by asking: “Can we solve this more simply?” Most of the time the answer is yes—and the result is fast, lightweight, and sustainable for the long run.
