| 5:18 am on Aug 22, 2001 (gmt 0)|
BBedit is number one by far but textpad is the best if you are confined to a PC.
| 10:11 am on Aug 23, 2001 (gmt 0)|
I am looking for a program which is capable in cutting a picture into pieces to be used in the webpage. I have tried using paint shop pro but it took me a long time to do it.
Thus is there any tool which most of the web designers are using to create those beautiful webpages.
| 10:17 am on Aug 23, 2001 (gmt 0)|
Hi Gooly, Welcome to WebmasterWorld,
Try Image Splitter [mapdes.hypermart.net]. Shareware but not expensive. There used to be a free version around as well, try searching for "Image Splitter" and the likes and you should find something.
| 11:07 am on Aug 23, 2001 (gmt 0)|
it is fairly simple to split an image with PSP...take another look at how you went about it and try to use the keyboard options more than the mouse options...if you know where the splits will be beforehand it is a very simple process
| 9:55 pm on Aug 31, 2001 (gmt 0)|
homesite is good but it has too much junk that i never needed or used. i used arachnophilia for about a year and never had any 'real' problems with it but got rid of it as soon as i found editpadlite [editpadlite.com]. it does everything you need it to do and does nothing that you don't want it to do.
however, developers pad [developerspad.com] looks real promising. it's completely free and you can even download the source so if you know vb, you can add you own features to it.
| 6:36 pm on Sep 6, 2001 (gmt 0)|
Textpad gets my vote every time. Not only is it a quick download, it is also very cheap ($29.95, I believe, but you can download and evaluate for free).
The best thing about Textpad (www.textpad.com) is that you can define your own tag sets, entities (or anything else you don't feel like typing over and over again) by editing the .tcl files in the Samples directory. That way if you have certain attributes you always set, one click brings your default tag in every time. Can't live without it! The color coding is obviously nice as well.
| 7:35 am on Oct 9, 2001 (gmt 0)|
After trying over 50 HTML editors I've stuck with THE one that has been constant right throughout my years as a webmaster...
It's simple. No cr*p, no added features. And the only problem is the font. (fixedys ewww)
But still its a pain in the...
| 7:49 am on Oct 9, 2001 (gmt 0)|
I've been hearing about this whole text editor, I love notepad thing for years... I have to wonder why so may web designers are smoking *****! ;-)
I've been using AceExpert (now AceHTML) for years. Like other non-WYSIWYG editors it's basically just a text editor that color codes your source so that it's easier to read and navigate.
There are, of course, all the extras like mass search and replace, syntax checking, spell checking, link verification, tag reference, various wizards, etc...
My question is this... Are web coders masochists? :-) Using a plain text editor after using one designed for HTML and scripting is just plain painfull.
Ok, I'm done now... The notepad debate has always mystified me. :-)
| 9:35 am on Oct 9, 2001 (gmt 0)|
Alright... someone edited out the word crack in my post above! ;-)
I'm a little confused as to why this word is considered something that needs moderation. I can understand there's a social stigma around certain 4 letter words that's been around for long enough that people don't question it... but come on... how moderated do we need a webmaster forum to be? The word crack??
| 9:41 am on Oct 9, 2001 (gmt 0)|
We are trying to clean up the tone and language used Ian. Sometimes we go back and pull out the stars that the auto-swear word filter puts in (****). It's not arbitrary and certainly not meant personal (mods remind me of my own langage often). We have a surprising number of high schoolers and jr high school students that use the forums for research.
| 10:59 am on Oct 9, 2001 (gmt 0)|
Best editor: Vi :)
Most painful learning curve: Vi.
Acutally its become really fantastic in the last few years with the introduction of GVIM - versions for Win, Unix, (Mac??) all available at [vim.org...]
Supports syntax checking, pretty printing (C++ - HTML - Fortran), scripting and more. And its free and now version 6.
Sounding like an advert for the Vi society ;)
| 7:46 pm on Oct 9, 2001 (gmt 0)|
You can't possibly be implying that high schoolers (even grade schoolers) don't hear 'bad' words on a regular basis :-)
I'm not taking it personally... it's principle of the thing... You know, allowing people to communicate in whatever way they naturally do it?
We're just talking about words here, after all.
| 8:44 pm on Oct 10, 2001 (gmt 0)|
If you want a fast, easy to use, but with the most frequently use programming tools (except spell check)
Get Metapad 2.0 (not 3)
then just rename notepad.exe to notepad.old, put metapad.exe in /windows directory and rename to notepad.exe
| 10:34 pm on Oct 10, 2001 (gmt 0)|
When Dreamweaver 4 won't do and I need a basic editor I always reach for Cute HTML - its the one I learnt HTML on and I couldn't imagine using anything else. I haven't come across any restraints with it so far.
Though having said that, if I worked in an office full of web designers and they were working smarter than me, I might begin to question the merits of CUTE. But its free and its simple and I don't know any better.
I'm not sure why notepad is so popular here - not sure at all. I suspect its some sort of puritanical dislike for software that makes life easier - keep thrashing yourselves on the back notepad boys ;)
| 2:26 am on Oct 11, 2001 (gmt 0)|
Using only Notepad is a macho thing. Sort of like the programs who claim to program only in Assembly language, only with even less reason.
| 2:51 am on Oct 11, 2001 (gmt 0)|
I've been using editpad when I need to drill down into raw server logs and other big files, but I use Homesite (3.0) for html work. I love the customizable HTML validation and extended search and replace for an entire site.
I've been happy with both these programs for years. I've heard that editpad can struggle with really big files, but I haven't run into that.
| 6:42 am on Oct 11, 2001 (gmt 0)|
I also have been using editpad (classic) [editpadclassic.com...] for text but for HTML I really dig Arachnophilia [arachnoid.com...] - this is freeware and out-performs many that sell for a pricey tag.
| 8:26 am on Oct 11, 2001 (gmt 0)|
>Using only Notepad is a macho thing. Sort of like the programs who claim to program only in Assembly language, only with even less reason.
One thing with notepad on win & vi on unix. You can alway guarantee that its there. No matter where you are this editor will be available - so gaining a reasonable amount of familiarity with it is useful.
Now using it as your sole method of producing sites well ... its like cleaning the john with a toothbrush ;)
| 6:33 am on Oct 12, 2001 (gmt 0)|
>One thing with notepad on win & vi on unix. You can alway guarantee that its there. No matter where you are this editor will be available - so gaining a reasonable amount of familiarity with it is useful.
By renaming notepad and moving it to another folder and giving that name to editpad, editpad (now called notepad) becomes my default text editor and "no matter where I am" it's there.
| 7:54 am on Oct 12, 2001 (gmt 0)|
Until you're at a client's site and good old notepads back :)
Though I agree changing notepad for your preferred text edit is a smart idea.
| 1:24 pm on Oct 12, 2001 (gmt 0)|
HTML/WEB: Allaire Homesite 4.5.2 - for me nothing is faster and more precise to work with.
TEXT/PROG: NoteTab Light 4.85 - loads almost instantly on any machine, handles multiple docs/files intelligently, and it's totally free.
| 3:47 pm on Oct 12, 2001 (gmt 0)|
/Cheer for TextPad! I love it...
| 5:39 pm on Oct 12, 2001 (gmt 0)|
I don't think that there is anything better for building quick webpages than Dreamweaver. I like to get the pages basic design and then just edit with notepad from there. Dreamweaver also works as a text editor, but I'm sure there are others that are better in this aspect.
There really is no competition for someone new to html and web design.
It's strength is really the speed in which you can put out a webpage. You could literally have a full page done in just a few minutes, not many people can work that fast with notepad or a simple text editor.
Another great advantage to dreamweaver is it's simple integration into Flash and Fireworks. Since the basic layouts are similar for all 3 programs, going quickly in and out of each one is very painless. It's possible to make media in fireworks or flash and to import and preview it almost instantly into Dreamweaver. I love how Macromedia designed the three seperate programs to integrate seamlessly into eachother.
The only bad part about Dreamweaver is the cost, but it's well worth it if you can afford it.
| 6:24 pm on Oct 12, 2001 (gmt 0)|
I'm sure I'll get holy heck for this but...
| 7:28 pm on Oct 12, 2001 (gmt 0)|
>>I'm sure I'll get holy heck
welcome to the club. I use FP all the time for websites. It's easy to use and certainly has come a long way from even FP98 days.
That said - I do not use any of the propietary stuff that requires FP extensions be enabled like FP forms etc. I plug in custom scripting for anything interactive. I essentially use FP for the quick layout and creation functionality.
As for those that claim FP is a hinderance to SEO I've got several top listings for pages that are pure FP2000 code base.
At the end of the day I say if you're using the tools that you are comfortable with and they are getting the job done to you or your client's satisfaction, that's really all you need to worry about.
| 2:33 pm on Oct 13, 2001 (gmt 0)|
gethan... metapad is only 23k, fits on a floppy.
| 2:21 pm on Oct 18, 2001 (gmt 0)|
My vote: vi on *nix and EditPat on windoze.
| 3:46 am on Nov 10, 2001 (gmt 0)|
BBedit just went to my list of LEAST favorite text editors after receiving this "upgrade" offer for $35.00 on a program that cost me close to $120.00.
Copied from promo email I received:
"One of BBEdit 6.5's hottest new features, is integrated support
for Cascading Style Sheets (CSS), including syntax coloring,
navigation of rules via the function pop-up menu, and contextual
menu markup support via Tag Maker (part of BBEdit's
industry-leading HTML markup tools)"
I paid $119.00 for this software and now I have to spend $35.00 to get the "hot" new feature that supports CSS. I personally think the email should have read:
We are sorry for not integrating css support into our editor sooner. After all, CSS has been a big part of web design for some time now.
Please take the time to to download the patch that will give you the feature we overlooked. At no charge.
At $155.00, Barebones can go pound sand.
| 12:13 pm on Nov 11, 2001 (gmt 0)|
HTMLKIT for me.. The next version is going commercial!!
| This 31 message thread spans 2 pages: 31 (  2 ) > > |