NostalgiaPHP

NostalgiaPHP vs Astro

Both are tools for building content-heavy sites.
Both lean on files, not databases.
But one is caveman simple, and the other is modern meta-framework simple.

🐘 NostalgiaPHP

  • Markdown or HTML + PHP. That’s it.
  • File-based routing. Pages and collections map directly to the file system.
  • Zero build step. No npm run build, no node_modules.
  • Instant deploy. Upload the folder, site goes live.
  • Portable. Your project folder is the site.

🚀 Astro

  • Islands architecture. HTML by default, sprinkle JS where needed.
  • File-based routing. Drop .astro files into src/pages.
  • Build step required. Always needs Node, npm, and a build process.
  • Integrations galore. React, Svelte, Vue, Tailwind, Markdown, MDX, etc.
  • Portable (after build). You ship the compiled output, not your source.

✨ The Similarity

Both say: “The web is mostly content. Let’s optimize for content.”

  • Astro ships pure HTML by default.
  • NostalgiaPHP ships pure HTML too — it just skips the compile step.

🚀 The Difference

  • NostalgiaPHP = raw, server-side simplicity. Markdown in, HTML out, no tooling.
  • Astro = modern static-site generator + meta-framework. Flexible, but requires a build and an ecosystem.

TL;DR

If you want the fastest path from Markdown to website, without any toolchain:
👉 Make site. Files good. Framework bad. (NostalgiaPHP)

If you want a modern static generator with integrations and a plugin ecosystem:
👉 Astro.