comparable hmtl editor to frontpage on the mac?


Recommended Posts

I would also go with Dreamweaver, but Adobe GoLive has somethings that Dreamweaver doesn't, including full integration with Photoshop (Dreamweaver fully integrates with Fireworks instead), W3C validation checking (Dreamweaver has a similar system of it's own), an outline editor, supports authoring of Quicktime movies and you can set up, fully customise and save your layout (Dreamweaver just has a code view or a designer view (wysiwyg).

Adobe GoLive does not support server-side authoring, nor does it have live data views, nor does it include manual code editing or script references.

dreamweaver is a piece of **** on the mac, and it'll tell you why

it behaves like a ported PC app. in that i mean, on the mac, it acts like a PC app. controls function like PC controls. keyboard shortcuts are PC shortcuts (ie: F2 to rename instead of enter). it doesnt behave properly with expose.

it is an absolutely PAINFUL experience using dreamweaver under OS X

and now that i've seen this thread it's time to check out GoLive

i have used go live and dreamweaver extensively, all of the latest versions. Both are not as great at dreamweaver for PC, but DW is 100 times better than Go live.

however if you know nothing aboutweb design and dont care to learn, GL is a nice alternative to learn to do things you want with little to no effort. Only it creates huge documents and is a pain to do anything consistant.

it works primarily with CSS and Layers, which is fine, but there isnt the same control that you would have editing the sheets manually with CSS.

no sense in web designing ont he mac, unless you have primarily mac viewers on your web page.

The differences between IE/win and Safari are so many that your code will fall apart a lot of the time when viewed in IE. I would buy a cheap pc and get dreamweaver, unless you have a mac fan base.

p.s. I am a graphic designer and work on 3 macs. 2x dual 1.25's and a pbook. 1 for video, 1 for print, one for portability.

i use my PC for web design. athlon 1800+ plenty of speed

no sense in web designing ont he mac, unless you have primarily mac viewers on your web page.

The differences between IE/win and Safari are so many that your code will fall apart a lot of the time when viewed in IE.  I would buy a cheap pc and get dreamweaver, unless you have a mac fan base.

585682458[/snapback]

a) the other reason for web design on a mac is if you... you know... own one...

b) a good designer can design pages that look right in all of them... www.cinemaworkshop.com looks the same on IE and Safari, so does my personal page

i have used go live and dreamweaver extensively, all of the latest versions.? Both are not as great at dreamweaver for PC, but DW is 100 times better than Go live.?

however if you know nothing aboutweb design and dont care to learn, GL is a nice alternative to learn to do things you want with little to no effort.? Only it creates huge documents and is a pain to do anything consistant.

it works primarily with CSS and Layers, which is fine, but there isnt the same control that you would have editing the sheets manually with CSS.

no sense in web designing ont he mac, unless you have primarily mac viewers on your web page.

The differences between IE/win and Safari are so many that your code will fall apart a lot of the time when viewed in IE.? I would buy a cheap pc and get dreamweaver, unless you have a mac fan base.

p.s. I am a graphic designer and work on 3 macs.? 2x dual 1.25's and a pbook.? 1 for video, 1 for print, one for portability.

i use my PC for web design. athlon 1800+ plenty of speed

585682458[/snapback]

Dreamweaver is really only better if you plan on coding lives pages using ASP or Coldfusion. PHP coding isn't all that hot in Dreamweaver. You're better on coding PHP by hand than letting Dreamweaver do it. For doing the actual design of sites, GoLive provides better WYSIWYG in-page editing and a better CSS editor.

Of course, every web designer wishes Internet Explorer on Windows would be more compliant with W3C standards, but there are ways around it. You can keep a PC or run Virtual PC just to test your sites on Windows browsers. As a matter of fact, I find designing sites that work with all browsers 100 times easier on Mac OS X than on Windows.

Edited by jagedEdge

The same as most people have said, Dreamweaver is probably your best route for WYSIWYG, but it is a very bloated app and un-macish (if you even care about that). What other's haven't mentioned is its steep price compared to other shareware alternatives out there.

I'd really recommend learning html+css handcoding as you will always get the best results, and then using an app like BBEdit, skEdit, SubEthaEdit, CSSEdit, etc.... But, if you really want something with WYSIWYG, here are two Mac shareware programs that should work really well for you:

Tag

GoodPage

Check out RapidWeaver

http://www.realmacsoftware.com/software/ra...rapidweaver.php

It looks fantastic - great OS X interface, easy to use and seems pretty powerful at the same time. Gotta give that a go ;)

585682252[/snapback]

That app looks awesome for making simple sites.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • It is silly there is no simple way to check whether this profile has been activated. CFRs are normal, but trying to even hide the fact if it's on / off seems silly, especially for something so user-facing. Surely Microsoft is "proud" of their engineering efforts on this one and ought to display it somwhere in the GUI.
    • Many Linux distros are not known for excellent battery life, so I'm not sure that is the best example. A more apt example may be Apple, but Apple's CPUs are simply far more efficient than Intel & AMD at single-threaded tasks like these, so "boosting" is not as power-hungry and less heat-inducing. Not to mention Apple will hardly engage P-cores for basic UI tasks; they use a pretty complicated QoS scheme to only activate P-cores for more serious workloads like HTML / JS execution or decompression or application launch. Microsoft is (smartly) doing it for launch, but also for UI tasks, which is the more nonsensical part: why ... do Windows 11's UIs need modern CPUs to boost? It should load so quickly that there's not even time for the CPU to boost.
    • I've not seen any controlled testing and, judging by Microsoft's mentality, within a year, they'll have added so much more bloat, it'll undo any perceptible latency benefit and we'll have boosted the CPU clocks for nothing.
    • It depends: heat soak is a thing. Initially on cold boot-up, the heatsinks & heatpipes are at ambient temp. After heatsinks & heatpipes warm up (through normal usage), they don't immediately cool to ambient temp when the load goes away. So their baseline is higher and the trigger point for fans is much less stress. Add a few more CPU spikes → it's too hot to stay at the same fan RPM → fans get triggered to start up up much sooner / get triggered to ramp much more quickly.
    • Can LibreOffice just shut up and worry about themselves and stop comparing themselves? Do we see Microsoft complaining about euro office?
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      slackerzz earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      highriskpaym earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      highriskpaym earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      highriskpaym earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      FBSPL earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      501
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      198
    3. 3
      +Edouard
      157
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      84
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      74
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!