whether you would build a prefabricated house afterwards again or rather a solid house? I think many prospective builders ask themselves that.
Many, up to almost all builders ask themselves that: Mendelian normal distribution looks like this, that for every two neutral builders, one builder is committed to one option and one to the other. The most common background of neutral builders is lack of information, and that of the committed builders is half-knowledge or pub talk belief, as the question itself already suggests: "prefab"
or "solid." The two words symbolically stand for the assumed main characteristic (sometimes mistakenly or falsely) ("prefab" means "built faster," "cost estimate faithful," or similar, "solid" means "stable robust"). The "prefabricated house" is highly industrialized, but the same applies to the "solid house," provided it is purchased from a provider with a nationally well-known name, namely that it is a ruthlessly marketed product. Regardless of construction method, you can't look fast enough how the purchasing power of builders is turned into corporate profit.
There are now also stone houses from some providers, panel by panel, prefabricated in the factory hall, and the house made of wooden frame walls has long since ceased to be the shack of the sixties or the victim of the rough bioicide wood protection from twenty years later. The "prefabricated house market" mainly suffered a consolidation in the past decade like (or even worse than) the beer and mineral water market. But even with "solid houses," the big names are often corporate shells with a traditional scent, connected to high-performance pumps for private equity. If you are looking for customer satisfaction, then go to your regionally active master craftsman company – bricklayer or carpenter according to your preference, which not even a person of the Blue type will ever have in purely factual form.