| DW vs Mambo vs FP vs .
pros and cons of editors |
boldautomatic
msg:936328 | 9:48 pm on Feb 9, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Now I've always worked with DW and have built a lot of sites with it, mainly HTML and ASP with many having a SQL back end. Someone recommended to me to try out Mambo which they were raving about. I spent a few days messing with it and decided that it was really suited only to intensive content rich sites and relied too heavily on blocky layout and the result is a busy looking site with too much going on and the focus taken away from simple design. Which annoyed me. Just wondering what others think. Is Mambo the future or would I be wise to steer clear of it?
|
smatts9
msg:936329 | 10:35 pm on Feb 11, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Well Mambo can be used for a lot of things, if you know what you are doing. You can edit the templates to make it look very basic if you wanted. I have always liked Typo3 more than Mambo or Joomla. Typo3 has a steeper learning curve. I'd recommed looking at Typo3 if you have enough patience to learn it. Plus Mambo is not a WYSIWYG or editor, it is a CMS. I use notepad / wordpad, never did like Dreamweaver.
|
DaveLite
msg:936330 | 2:25 pm on Feb 18, 2006 (gmt 0) |
I use FP for the front end of a couple web sites and Joomla for other parts. I've been known to pull the templates for various CMSs into FP or DW and edit them. CMS's make some parts of a website easier to manage and you can still do your very own thing out front.
|
|
|
