zubby01
08-20-2003, 09:43 PM
What is the best software for creating websites? I already have VisualStudio.Net but would I be better off w/ something like Dreamweaver?
Click to See Complete Forum and Search --> : Help me get started
Jupac
08-20-2003, 10:45 PM
Umm notpad!!!:) :) :) :) :cool:
Jupac
08-20-2003, 10:50 PM
or if u dont want to do it by ur self use http://geocities.com but there hosting sucks
pyro
08-20-2003, 11:04 PM
Everything about geocities sucks... ;)
First of all, you should learn to use valid HTML 4.01 (http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/) for markup (or XHTML (http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/)) and CSS (http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/) for layout. http://www.w3schools.com is a good resource to learn from, if you find the specs too challenging... If you are looking for a WYSIWYG editor, Dreamweaver is among the best. Adobe GoLive is also a good choice. But, nothing compairs to knowing how to hard code your web pages...
First of all, you should learn to use valid HTML 4.01 (http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/) for markup (or XHTML (http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/)) and CSS (http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/) for layout. http://www.w3schools.com is a good resource to learn from, if you find the specs too challenging... If you are looking for a WYSIWYG editor, Dreamweaver is among the best. Adobe GoLive is also a good choice. But, nothing compairs to knowing how to hard code your web pages...
Paul Jr
08-20-2003, 11:05 PM
I have used Dreamweaver a few times. And I really like it. I haven't used anything else, so I'm not sure what's out there.
I would recomend Dreamweaver to anyone.
It's very expensive though. You should get some feed back from some other people, there might be something else out there that's just as good, but not at the high price of Dreamweaver.
I would recomend Dreamweaver to anyone.
It's very expensive though. You should get some feed back from some other people, there might be something else out there that's just as good, but not at the high price of Dreamweaver.
DaveSW
08-21-2003, 06:39 AM
If you can work with the source code html-kit from www.chami.com is free. Just no WYSIWYG.
Aronya1
08-21-2003, 02:50 PM
I use DW. It's fine for straight-ahead html, but it does sometimes add superfluous code, so you should know how to tweek it manually. At least it does allow you to use it in both code & wysiwyg modes.
Also, I'll go ahead and say what everybody else is thinking anyway... Just don't use FrontPage.
Also, I'll go ahead and say what everybody else is thinking anyway... Just don't use FrontPage.
Charles
08-21-2003, 02:58 PM
Originally posted by Aronya1
I use DW. It's fine for straight-ahead html, but it does sometimes add superfluous code, so you should know how to tweek it manually. At least it does allow you to use it in both code & wysiwyg modes. I took a look at your web site and a list of the HTML errors on just the first page can be found at http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aronyanet.com%2F. Don't use a WYSIWYG; they are all bad. The only solution is to learn how to do it yourself. And it's not much harder to learn how to do it right than it is to learn how to use the WYSIWYG.
I use DW. It's fine for straight-ahead html, but it does sometimes add superfluous code, so you should know how to tweek it manually. At least it does allow you to use it in both code & wysiwyg modes. I took a look at your web site and a list of the HTML errors on just the first page can be found at http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aronyanet.com%2F. Don't use a WYSIWYG; they are all bad. The only solution is to learn how to do it yourself. And it's not much harder to learn how to do it right than it is to learn how to use the WYSIWYG.
spufi
08-21-2003, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by Charles
Don't use a WYSIWYG; they are all bad.
As a person who has Dreamweaver, but still handcodes, that's a mighty blanket statement. If a person knows what they are doing in the first place, WYSIWYG editors can be really useful. Yes, for a newbie things can get out of wack, but that's not because something like Dreamweaver is bad, it's because of their own knowledge is lacking.
Don't use a WYSIWYG; they are all bad.
As a person who has Dreamweaver, but still handcodes, that's a mighty blanket statement. If a person knows what they are doing in the first place, WYSIWYG editors can be really useful. Yes, for a newbie things can get out of wack, but that's not because something like Dreamweaver is bad, it's because of their own knowledge is lacking.
Dark Dragon
08-21-2003, 04:46 PM
The only solution is to learn how to do it yourself. And it's not much harder to learn how to do it right than it is to learn how to use the WYSIWYG.
Umm..do you know what a monumental pain in the spleen it is to hand code everything?? It is hard enough already and to try and memorize all those codes is enough to induce clinical and irreversible psychosis!! :D
However as Aronya mentioned, DW has this annoying habit of creating it's own non compliant language so I learned to copy and paste certain codes into my document....I got them from the W3schools site..very cool and informative. so now I am working on XHTML to see if I can get it to work....so you can use a combination of notepad and DW.... ;)
Umm..do you know what a monumental pain in the spleen it is to hand code everything?? It is hard enough already and to try and memorize all those codes is enough to induce clinical and irreversible psychosis!! :D
However as Aronya mentioned, DW has this annoying habit of creating it's own non compliant language so I learned to copy and paste certain codes into my document....I got them from the W3schools site..very cool and informative. so now I am working on XHTML to see if I can get it to work....so you can use a combination of notepad and DW.... ;)
Charles
08-21-2003, 04:57 PM
Originally posted by Dark Dragon
Umm..do you know what a monumental pain in the spleen it is to hand code everything??If you're doing it right then it's really simple, actually. It's only when you use TABLEs for layout and such that things get ugly.
Take a look under the hood of Spufi's site (http://www.matts-website.net/) Anyone with a copy of Notepad could do that with ease. (Please note, I don't mean to suggest that there is anything at all wrong with Spufi's site. On the contrary, I mean to hold it up as an example.)
Umm..do you know what a monumental pain in the spleen it is to hand code everything??If you're doing it right then it's really simple, actually. It's only when you use TABLEs for layout and such that things get ugly.
Take a look under the hood of Spufi's site (http://www.matts-website.net/) Anyone with a copy of Notepad could do that with ease. (Please note, I don't mean to suggest that there is anything at all wrong with Spufi's site. On the contrary, I mean to hold it up as an example.)
Dark Dragon
08-21-2003, 06:02 PM
If you're doing it right then it's really simple, actually.
Oh sure it is easy..if you are into hand coding and can memorize all that stuff (I can barely remember my ATM number let alone codes).
However I have copied and pasted code into notepad from the W3schools site though..I suppose I could try that then test it in DW or IE.
I guess I just like having a visual representation of what I am doing and what progress my site is taking rather than staring at text all day long..kinda makes one eyeballs go all wonky! :D
Oh sure it is easy..if you are into hand coding and can memorize all that stuff (I can barely remember my ATM number let alone codes).
However I have copied and pasted code into notepad from the W3schools site though..I suppose I could try that then test it in DW or IE.
I guess I just like having a visual representation of what I am doing and what progress my site is taking rather than staring at text all day long..kinda makes one eyeballs go all wonky! :D
Charles
08-21-2003, 06:07 PM
But staring at the graphical browser, visual representation of the page makes you think that the page is a visual thing at it's core. And that is the essence of what makes a page inaccessible. You need to understand your page non-visually and then add the visual layer on top of that. And that is something that no WYSIWYG can help you with.
Think about it. If what you see is what you get then what do users who cannot see get?
Think about it. If what you see is what you get then what do users who cannot see get?
Dark Dragon
08-21-2003, 06:23 PM
No offense but I am not making a sight for people who are blind. My intended site is going to be a mish-mosh of my artwork, tutorials and so on. (Yeah, I know it is kinda stupid but that is what I am doing.)
Anyways..I just do not readily interpret text as pictures and I see nothing wrong with wanting to have a visual of what I am doing..so I can make a reference to what I type and what the end result is. I know it is the code that is doing it all but I simply like to be able to see in the form of the visuals what is happening..which is why I use the combo of the Design view and Code view in DW to see what precisely is happening.
Speakin' of which..I uploaded a index page that I made using XHTML and had it validated by the W3school site's validator tool... I almost fell over when I seen all the discrepancies the validator found....and I thought I was doing alright....(sobs..) :p
Anyways..I just do not readily interpret text as pictures and I see nothing wrong with wanting to have a visual of what I am doing..so I can make a reference to what I type and what the end result is. I know it is the code that is doing it all but I simply like to be able to see in the form of the visuals what is happening..which is why I use the combo of the Design view and Code view in DW to see what precisely is happening.
Speakin' of which..I uploaded a index page that I made using XHTML and had it validated by the W3school site's validator tool... I almost fell over when I seen all the discrepancies the validator found....and I thought I was doing alright....(sobs..) :p
Aronya1
08-21-2003, 06:53 PM
Hi Charles,
Seems like you're quite the purist, and I applaud you for the sentiment. But sometimes practicality has to win out. In my opinion, tracking nested <div>s with notepad is no easier than tracking nested tables.
For a beginner, which I consider myself to be, even though I have begun to make a few dollars here and there with web design, WYSIWYGs are possibly the only realistic way to go. Yes, study the specs, if you can stand it. Yes, use the validators, take classes, join the user groups, join forums like this one... But hand coding a 15 page site with HTML, CSS, javascript, frames, templates, forms, etc., all with notepad? It won't happen in my little world.
If one line doesn't validate, but it's the only thing that gets my table to center properly, guess what? I don't care.
To comment on your comment about the page not being a visual thing at its core; it's NOT, at its core, but it IS in the end. I'm with DD on this one. Most of us aren't creating sites for the visually impaired. We're creating visual product, and if it looks right to the majority, we're probably satisfied.
Just my 2c. Not looking to start a flame war.
Regards,
Aronya1
Seems like you're quite the purist, and I applaud you for the sentiment. But sometimes practicality has to win out. In my opinion, tracking nested <div>s with notepad is no easier than tracking nested tables.
For a beginner, which I consider myself to be, even though I have begun to make a few dollars here and there with web design, WYSIWYGs are possibly the only realistic way to go. Yes, study the specs, if you can stand it. Yes, use the validators, take classes, join the user groups, join forums like this one... But hand coding a 15 page site with HTML, CSS, javascript, frames, templates, forms, etc., all with notepad? It won't happen in my little world.
If one line doesn't validate, but it's the only thing that gets my table to center properly, guess what? I don't care.
To comment on your comment about the page not being a visual thing at its core; it's NOT, at its core, but it IS in the end. I'm with DD on this one. Most of us aren't creating sites for the visually impaired. We're creating visual product, and if it looks right to the majority, we're probably satisfied.
Just my 2c. Not looking to start a flame war.
Regards,
Aronya1
Dark Dragon
08-21-2003, 06:59 PM
Well...what really bugs me is that these WYSIWYG programs don't even code in compliant HTML 4.0/or XHTML..it uses its owm proprietary code and tags....I wonder if DW MX is better in that regards....
Anyways..I am more of a visual person I suppose..I'd like to be able to see right away what is happening and I also like to be able to do these things with mouse clicks rather than typing in code after code..it's just me though :D
Anyways..I am more of a visual person I suppose..I'd like to be able to see right away what is happening and I also like to be able to do these things with mouse clicks rather than typing in code after code..it's just me though :D
LarryMBuck
08-21-2003, 09:15 PM
I used to hand code in notepad when Im started, then moved to more "hand coding" with HomeSite version 4 and 5. I now use Dreamweaver MX.
It made it easier to start off by hand and then move on up to something like Dreamweaver. This way you have an idea of what the HTML really does when you see it in Dreamweaver.
Also, using Dreamwever really speeds things up for creating larger sites. (Since my typing is so S-L-O-W.)
In Dreamweaver I paste a "correct" DocType over the Doctype Dreamweaver puts in there on the web page depending on what I want to code for etc.
:) My two cents...
It made it easier to start off by hand and then move on up to something like Dreamweaver. This way you have an idea of what the HTML really does when you see it in Dreamweaver.
Also, using Dreamwever really speeds things up for creating larger sites. (Since my typing is so S-L-O-W.)
In Dreamweaver I paste a "correct" DocType over the Doctype Dreamweaver puts in there on the web page depending on what I want to code for etc.
:) My two cents...
PeOfEo
08-21-2003, 09:21 PM
Dream weaver is great for beginners too, It is a great way to teach them proper doc type and it can help them catch many syntax errors. I dont aggree with the design view and the drag into position crap though. Notepad is still the fastest in my opinion though for just doing html, usually I am just updateing one or two links and I dont want to wait for dreamweaver and its slow butt to load. I dont care how much cache, ram, and how fast ur proc is, if you are running windows blinds dreamweaver takes forever to load (windows blinds takes up a crap load of resources, but it looks nice :D )
webdeveloper.com
Copyright Internet.com Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Copyright Internet.com Inc., All Rights Reserved.