NeedScripts
msg:582918 | 7:50 am on Nov 5, 2003 (gmt 0) |
| but it lacks features and fucntions such as more fonts, etc. |
|
Are you sure.. you might wanna pick up the latest version of FP.. it rocks and it also has wonderful html editor within it too.. However if you are looking for something free.. you can check out 1) 1st Page 2000
2) HTML Kit If you are in the mood of spending money, you can also check out 1) Dreamweaver
2) HomeSite Hope this helps. NS
|
techiemon
msg:582919 | 8:16 am on Nov 5, 2003 (gmt 0) |
I assume by FP you are refering to FrontPage? If you notice in my first post I said Composer is lacking fonts and features, by Composer I mean Netscape Composer. I HATE Frontpage and refuse to use it ever again. In general I dislike Microsoft software. I will check out the other two companies you provided. I am very family with Dreamweaver, however, I am not out for forking out the bucks right now. Thanks
|
victor
msg:582920 | 8:49 am on Nov 5, 2003 (gmt 0) |
Check out some options, starting at: [dmoz.org...]
|
photon
msg:582921 | 1:11 pm on Nov 5, 2003 (gmt 0) |
I strongly recommend HTML-Kit. It is freeware. With all of its features and scarce documetation it can be a little overwhelming, but you should be able to get the basics quickly. And the author is very invovled in the newsgroups dedicated to the program. Best feature for me: the ability to seamlessly edit files "directly" on the server (the program automatically handles the FTPing in the background).
|
SIRokai
msg:582922 | 1:14 pm on Nov 5, 2003 (gmt 0) |
I use TextPad and HomeSite... TextPad is free if you decide to give it a shot. J
|
photon
msg:582923 | 5:36 pm on Nov 5, 2003 (gmt 0) |
TextPad is a good editor; I really like the "feel" of it. But it's only free to evaluate for 30 days; after that you have to pay.
|
txbakers
msg:582924 | 5:39 pm on Nov 5, 2003 (gmt 0) |
Yes, Textpad is free for 30 days, and after that you SHOULD buy it, but it continues to work with a gentle reminder to pay for it. HOWEVER, I have to say that off all the software I've used and purchased, TEXTPAD is clearly the leader in value for money spent. $27 is an incredible bargain for such a full-featured program. Consider the several hundred against Dreamweaver.... Buy it, use it, you'll never be unhappy with it.
|
tbear
msg:582925 | 6:14 pm on Nov 5, 2003 (gmt 0) |
You might give Arachnophilia 4(last build) a try. It's free and I have been happy with it for several years (from ver.2).
Wouldn't bother with ver.5 though.......
I started with composer (2) and moved seamlessly to arach.......
|
g1smd
msg:582926 | 10:33 pm on Nov 6, 2003 (gmt 0) |
Composer writes quite bloated code. Earlier versions also had some wierd quirks. Newer versions allow you to use CSS instead of font tags, but do this inline causing yet more code bloat. The resulting files always need tidying and editing. I always code in Wordpad, as it has better editing facilities than Notepad.
|
divaone
msg:582927 | 12:52 am on Nov 7, 2003 (gmt 0) |
i have to strongly second HTML-Kit from chami.com. after two years of use i am still finding new uses and functions that make my developing so much easier and faster. i agree it can be a bit daunting initially, but there has rarely been a question that hasn't already been answered regarding it's use. and yes, the community support is tremendous. did we mention its free? :o)
|
Stefan
msg:582928 | 2:20 am on Nov 7, 2003 (gmt 0) |
techiemon, as g1smd said, Wordpad is the best html editor. At some point you have to bite the bullet and learn the tags and how to code with a text editor. There might be "what you see is what you get" programs that you'll find useful, but they can produce many lines of unnecessary code. It makes the pages load slower for people with dial-up, (like me). It's good to be able to at least look through and strip out the bloat. It's really not that hard learning to do html by hand if you spend a few hours at it. Beer helps later in the day, I find, when you're starting to get frustrated.
|
g1smd
msg:582929 | 5:39 pm on Nov 7, 2003 (gmt 0) |
Another problem with WYSIWYG is that quite often it turns out to be WYGIQWYW. . (What you get isn't quite what you wanted)
|
techiemon
msg:582930 | 10:36 am on Nov 11, 2003 (gmt 0) |
Thanks to all of you for giving me your feedback. I know how to code, maybe I am just getting lazy and want to develop pages quickly. I will attempt html-kit again and see what happens. Thanks again!
|
photon
msg:582931 | 2:02 pm on Nov 11, 2003 (gmt 0) |
If you rely on hand-coding but want the abilty to quickly prototype a site, HTML-Kit's got you covered. It has a feature called the ProtoPad. It's a very basic WYSIWYG editor that will allow you to get a basic look done quickly.
|
techiemon
msg:582932 | 3:36 pm on Nov 11, 2003 (gmt 0) |
I have another quick question. I use Netscape Composer currently, but as said above these kinds of programs leave a lot of garbage code, is there a progarm available that can take my Composer file and weed clean out all that junk automatically? I much prefer to type my page and see it as it's being typed, I can code but takes too long and I want the results immedately. I don't like shifting through code trying to find the one little place that I want to change. Thanks again.
|
TheDoctor
msg:582933 | 8:35 pm on Nov 11, 2003 (gmt 0) |
techiemon, have a look at Amaya. It's not quite WYSIWYG - although it's meant to be - but it's near enough for me, and doesn't produce horrendous HTML (as indeed it shouldn't, since it's produced by the W3C).
|
photon
msg:582934 | 12:54 am on Nov 12, 2003 (gmt 0) |
techiemon-- At the risk of sounding like an HTML-Kit fanatic, it has a "live preview" that let's you see the results of your code as you're coding (with a few seconds lag time). And for cleaning up "dirty" code, it incorporates HTML Tidy--which is also available as a stand-alone program as well.
|
pbb00
msg:582935 | 3:21 pm on Nov 12, 2003 (gmt 0) |
techiemon, you mentioned you were looking for features like more fonts. are you aware that an html page cannot contain any fonts, only references to fonts that are on the visitor's machine?
so even if your html editor would have a million fonts, it would be no good unless you would be the only one viewing your pages!
|
techiemon
msg:582936 | 5:32 am on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0) |
pbb00, Yes I know that. I'm just lazy to type in the name of the font manually, especially when I want to compare how things look. I often use MS Word to see an example, but I like to see what it looks like on my site immediately.
|
denisdekat
msg:582937 | 1:40 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0) |
I am a happy user of dreamweaver. Everyone loves something and hates something. I think it may have to do more with which software you are used to or feels right for you.
|
shasan
msg:582938 | 6:46 am on Nov 15, 2003 (gmt 0) |
Dreamweaver was more than worth the money. Whether you want to design visually or otherwise. The Site manager, HTML/CSS reference, code validators/tidier, find and replace ... ... heck take the HTML editing functionality out and it would still be worth the money :)
|
pcguru333
msg:582939 | 5:13 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0) |
My 2 centavos...
I have never used any WYSIWYG before. I started using Notepad and graduated to HTML-Kit. I LOVE that program. Many time savers... and it has been noted it is FREE. Dan
|
eric996
msg:582940 | 6:13 am on Nov 22, 2003 (gmt 0) |
Personally, I use Evrsoft 1st Page 2000...but I've checked out the html-kit and am very excited to try it.
|
|
