Full Version: comparable hmtl editor to frontpage on the mac?
i just switched to the mac, and everything's been great except on the html front. i've been creating websites on frontpage all my life, and was just wondering what the most comparable program on the mac is (dreamweaver, golive, etc.)
I have never used Frontpage, so not sure how it looks like.
But you've already mentioned two programs, which might be comparable. NVU might be worth a try as well.
But you've already mentioned two programs, which might be comparable. NVU might be worth a try as well.
well I'd go Dreamweaver 
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.
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
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
Try Dreamweaver
I agree Dreamweaver on OS X is painful, The app feels bloated and slow, it crashes more often than i'd like and overall it just doesn't feel right unfotunately...
dreamweaver
Despite what people have said, Dreamweaver is still your best bet.
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
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
GoLive. 
Dreamweaver on OS X just sucks (not that it's really that great on Windows).
Dreamweaver on OS X just sucks (not that it's really that great on Windows).
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
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
I like Dreamweaver on the PC more, but also use it on the Mac.
QUOTE(i3iz @ Mar 27 2005, 20:31)
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.
[right][snapback]585682458[/snapback][/right]
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.
[right][snapback]585682458[/snapback][/right]
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
QUOTE(i3iz @ Mar 27 2005, 20:31)
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
[right][snapback]585682458[/snapback][/right]
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
[right][snapback]585682458[/snapback][/right]
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.
Learn HTML/CSS, WYSIWYG is... trash. Most WYSIWG editors arent W3C standard. Especially dreamweaver. Once you got HTML/CSS down, move onto a text editor.. i am a whore for SubEthaEdit...
Just my $.02
Just my $.02
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
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
QUOTE(nuggetman @ Mar 28 2005, 13:14)
b) a good designer can design pages that look right in all of them...
Exactly, it doesn't matter what platform the site is designed it.
QUOTE(Phillip @ Mar 27 2005, 16:38)
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
[right][snapback]585682252[/snapback][/right]
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
[right][snapback]585682252[/snapback][/right]
That app looks awesome for making simple sites.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.