A Google Sites Alternative for Sites Your Agent Builds

The short answer

Google Sites is free, and the part most people expect to pay for is free too. Connect a domain you already own from the site's settings at no cost, up to five per site. Birta's Free plan connects your own domain as well, so on price the two meet.

The difference is the surface. On Birta an agent does the work, its own in the panel or the one you connect, and it reaches the draft, the published version at its own address, the way back, the lead form and the remarks a reviewer pinned to the page. On Google Sites all of that sits inside the editor: the Sites API carries the notice "Sites API is deprecated and might stop working at any time. Sites API can only access classic Sites," and classic is the version Google replaced in 2016. Person editing, Google Sites. Agent editing, and the whole life of the site after the files exist is on Birta's side.

What each side actually costs

Google Sites is free on an ordinary Google account, with no plan and no trial, and it is included on every Workspace tier, which Google's pricing page lists at $7, $14 and $22 per user per month. Nothing there is a Sites charge, and the custom domain has no add-on. A subscription only comes into it when you buy a new domain through the Publish dialog.

Birta's Free plan carries the agent, your own domain, the lead form, remarks, drafts, versions and rollback, with a Birta mark on the page. Team, at $12 a month, removes the mark and adds shared context for a team working on one project, with more people and room. Check both pages before deciding, because prices move.

How far an agent reaches on each side

Google Sites is edited through its own interface, and everything that interface owns stays there. Restoring a version, sharing the site, publishing a change: each one is a person signing in and clicking. The Sites API exists but is deprecated and, in Google's words, "can only access classic Sites," a product retired years ago.

That is specific rather than general, because Google is moving toward agents everywhere else. Its Workspace MCP server went into public developer preview on 1 May 2026 with real tools for Gmail, Drive, Calendar, Chat and a contacts directory. Sites is not one of the five, and if that changes this page changes with it.

Birta has no visual editor to open: you describe the job in its chat, or in the agent you connected, and the same conversation creates the project, writes the files, publishes a version, rolls back, connects a domain, reads the leads and reads the remarks. Nothing on that list waits for somebody to sign in. If the idea is new, here is what an agent connection actually is.

What Birta leaves to the agent

Birta has no importer: no Drive sync, no Takeout reader, no page fetched by link. Notice which side of the connector that sits on.

That same Workspace server, the one with no Sites tools, does cover Drive. Your agent opens the export, reads the document the copy lives in, takes the images out of the folder, and writes the whole thing out as HTML. That half has tools today, from Google.

The half with no tools is publishing: a public address, a version saved for every publish, a way back to an earlier one, a page a reviewer can mark up, a lead form, a domain, a daily visitor count.

Compare the work after the first publish

Two rows go to Google outright. It carries no vendor badge where Birta's free page has a mark, and its version history restores an individual page, which Birta cannot do; our history is capped at the last 10 publishes and Google's documentation states no such limit.

They read differently once you ask who operates them. Google's restore is a person in the editor picking a page. Ours is one call the agent makes mid-conversation, next to the draft it is already editing.

Getting someone to sign off on the page

Google Sites is built for collaborators, not reviewers. Share the site and people get editing rights or, on a restricted site, the Published Viewer role. Either way they need a Google account, and neither role lets them comment on the page.

There is one feedback path, narrower than it sounds. Google's announcement of site feedback describes a contact option in the site info panel: "The feedback will be sent to the site owner by email," including the page it came from. Two conditions come with it. "Site viewers must be logged in to a Google account to share feedback," and "This feature is only available for G Suite domain-owned sites; it is not available for consumers and non G Suite organizations." On a free personal account the answer is an email.

Birta puts the round on the page. Every version has its own permanent address, handed back when the agent opens a draft and again when it publishes, and it keeps working after publication. Anyone holding it opens the page without an account, gets a nickname, and marks remarks straight onto the element they mean.

The agent reads them back: each thread returns its number, the element, whether it is open, and every message with author and time. Numbers do not change. After the fix it replies in the thread and closes it. Everyone on the project gets an email digest roughly 15 minutes after the first remark, minus their own. Nothing is gated by plan, and the versions and remarks guide is the walkthrough.

Stay on Google Sites when...

Stay when a person is doing the editing. Google's editor is built for someone making visual decisions directly, and handing that person a conversation with an agent is not an upgrade.

Stay when the site lives inside Google's tools anyway. Embedded Docs, Sheets, Calendars and Forms are already there, already free, already signed in.

Stay when a Google Form is doing the job: no response cap, every answer written to a spreadsheet, no cost. Birta's form is a different shape rather than a bigger one.

And stay when price decides it. Free is a real number.

Birta fits better when...

Birta fits once an agent produces the site and the work left is publishing it, keeping it current, and handling what happens when someone fills in a form.

Choose it when changes arrive as instructions rather than clicks: you describe the change, the agent edits and publishes, and nobody opens an editor.

Choose it when a bad update has to be reversible without rebuilding from memory. Every publish becomes a version, the last 10 stay, any goes live again with the original files.

Choose it when somebody has to approve the page first. They open the version's address, mark the two things they would change where those things are, and sign in to nothing.

Choose it when the page has to look like whatever the agent wrote. On Google Sites custom code goes into an embed block inside Google's layout; on Birta the site is the files.

And choose it when a real lead form belongs on the site and the submissions should sit with the project rather than in a spreadsheet.

The tradeoff is real: no visual editor, a Birta mark on the free page that only Team removes, no store, no payments.

Moving from Google Sites

Google gives your content back, not a website you can host elsewhere. The export runs through Drive and covers draft and published sites, themes, fonts, colours, logos, favicon, text and images, embedded HTML, navigation, buttons, custom page paths and attachments. Google calls the result an archive to keep or use in another service, which is fair. It is source material, so plan a rebuild.

1. Step 1Export the contentPull the site's text, images, navigation and page structure out through Drive. Copy anything the export misses straight from the live pages.
2. Step 2Rebuild through the agentHand the exported content and a description of the site to Birta's agent or your own, and have it produce the new static site from that material.
3. Step 3Publish and verifyPublish through Birta, check every page and the form submission, then move the domain's DNS once the new site passes review.

The domain move is the least painful part. You already own it, and pointing it somewhere else is the same job you did to connect it to Google in the first place.

The decision

Google Sites is the right call whenever a person edits the site by hand. It is free, the custom domain is free, and it sits inside tools you already use. Most people reading a "Google Sites alternative" query should stay where they are, or move to a builder with better templates.

Birta is the better fit for the narrow case Google cannot serve at all: an agent builds the site, an agent maintains it, and the site needs somewhere it can be published, versioned and given a working form.

Frequently asked questions