| 7:18 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)|
If there was a product out there that was able to 100% optimize your site for Google we would all use it. As it is, research is the key to figuring out what Google wants. It's just an educated guess from the webmaster community as to what works and what doesn't. Only Google knows what it wants, and it seems a bit confused most of the time.
| 8:06 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)|
What OS and DW version are you using?
| 8:49 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)|
What is DW? :)
I don't know much about webdesign, however, I am getting the hang of using Dreamweaver as of tonight.
| 9:14 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)|
DW = Dreamweaver
If you are using the latest version (MX2004) then you will need a decent ammount of RAM to keep it working smoothly. I instaled it at home and work and my work machine crashes whenever I use it, my home machine (better spec) is fine.
| 10:57 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)|
There was a (free) update to MX2004 several months ago. You can get it from the updates section of the company's site. It addresses performance issues, including crashes.
But obviously you'd want to have something in excess of the program's basic requirements to get it to run well in any event.
|Mr Bo Jangles|
| 11:49 am on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Darren, IMO you really should be seriously thinking of junking ME and trading up.
ME has been rated as one of MS poorest OS efforts ever - a real lemon.
| 12:29 pm on Oct 13, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I agree, DW MX 2004 combined with ME is almost certainly your problem.
DW MX 2004 works well with XP Pro and Home Edition but can still crash on the odd occasion possibly loosing Site Definitions P/Ws etc.
| 11:52 am on Oct 14, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Good old clean HTML done in a basic note pad or Web editor - insert your own tricks to the mix.
| 5:45 am on Oct 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I stick to text editors, take up a lot less memory, and just as powerful.
But that would require people to actually know the code they type, instead of relying on crappy software to hopefully not release crappy code.
Crappy code that may look nice on the outside, but on the inside is hell...
That's my 2 cents.
| 8:05 am on Oct 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
The less you automate, the higher your in SERPs ;)
| 8:12 am on Oct 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
>Good old clean HTML done in a basic note pad or Web editor - insert your own tricks to the mix.
I agree. A raw HTML editor is the tool you need. DW can be used for that of course, but is a little over the top for what you actually need. If you have DW keep it, and use it correctly, if you are looking to purchase something, a free HTML editor is a better option.
| 5:05 pm on Oct 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|The less you automate, the higher your in SERPs ;) |
I have found that those who are against automation are those who don't know how to do it. We manage over 6,000 domains and automated everything and we have a very high percentage of clients who rank very well in the SERPs. Without automation, the system would be impossible to maintain unless we had a staff of over 200 full time employees which would force hosting charges to unrealistic levels.
We have our own CMS that we developed and the bots eat the pages as if they have been fasting for a month.
| 6:59 pm on Oct 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Funny you say that about DW, I use 3 editors DW MX, Namo 5 and free one I find myself using them in exactly the reverse order listed.
Yet DW cost me the earth.