which web design software to use?

Usually HTML Kit, a nice free smooth running programme probably wouldn't use this if you don't have much html knowledge

dreamweaver is what we used at college and (apart from the stupid code) it's a very nice programme
 
i normally use frontpage also used dreamweaver. notepad is long and you waste so much time but if u have a love for doing with note pad then its ok other wise get a software
 
Inquisitor said:
Why on Earth would you use Notepad? It's possibly the worst program you can use for any kind of coding.
Click to expand...
I alternate between notepad/wordpad and notepad++ as sometimes I get colour syntax-blindness :D.
 
Edit plus. But if you are building a basic html site, then notepad will easily suffice. HTML consists of such a simple syntax (even with css attached) that syntax highlighting is almost overkill.
Eitherway, use software which makes you code rather than allows you to drag tables in etc and generates the code for you.
 
Until recently I was a FrontPage 2003 user.
I've been a fan of FrontPage from when it was first released.
In the early days it used to play around with the code something rotten, however it still worked which was the main thing.

My latest web sites are all built under FrontPage 2003 and are all fully HTML 4.01 validated with regards code.
It's quite a cheap product, well supported and there are a 101 books out there on the application.

Microsoft have however now stopped production of FrontPage - Version 2003 is the final one.
The replacement product is "Expression Web" - you can download a trial version from Microsoft.
The interface is quite similar, so if you know FrontPage you'll soon get into Expression.
It is however a totally new beast underneath, a lot more powerful than FrontPage ever was - however still quite friendly and gets the job done.
It isn't as cheap as FrontPage was (although FrontPage users do get a good upgrade price).

There will be many people who tell you "notepad" (the cool answer) or a more advanced text editor (the answer from those who can and do code their own websites).
If you want to learn about the code then that is the ultimate way forward.
However I see GUI based web design packages quite similar to a car.
Most people use and drive a car and know the basics of what goes on under the hood.
However you really don't need to know how it works to drive your car, so long as it does.
If you want to create professional looking sites and you really don't care "how" you did it, then the GUI design packages are to be looked at.
 
rubin1961 said:
how much dose it cost for someone to do a website
Click to expand...
You get what you pay for ;) Expect a well made website to cost £600, that will be a few pages depending on the content of them (wouldn't expect much more than 10 though), a nice design (you'd get 3-5 designs to choose from), using web standards (mobile phones, screen readers for the blind, etc, will be able to use it), and compatibility across IE and FireFox at least (unfortunately you can't guarantee compatibility across all browsers). The more you want, the more it will cost - so message boards, user accounts, contact forms, etc, will all add to the cost. Think of a basic website as something you can read, and not much else.

You have to think with a cheap website; why is it cheap? how long are they going to spend on it? how well will it be made?

A cheap website will most likely be made by someone who is not very good at making websites.

Also, most people can turn a design into a website - the place where you earn real money is dynamic sites and databases (php, asp, sql, etc).

Remember a decent web designer will be working for a decent wage. Nobody's going to want to work hard for nothing, unless they're not very good at what they're doing.

To be honest, I get quite fed up with when someone asks what I do and I say "I'm a web developer", they always say "Oh yeah my brother does that part time" :rolleyes: Really, anyone can learn to shove a few little website together. It's a completely different kettle of fish when you can do it properly :) Kinda strikes a nerve when people say that they can make websites and try to give me advice etc, when they clearly don't know much at all... It's like, yeah I've spent years doing this properly, and you downloaded Dreamweaver a few months ago and think you're Mr. Expert because you made a website for your uncle and his mate :mad:

(apologies for the little rant at the end there! just to be clear - it's talking about people at the college I went to, not any of the people at these here forums :))
 
furnace said:
You get what you pay for...
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, thats just not true - I know of many, many businesses and people who know nothing about websites and get taken in by some flashy presentation and all the latest gimmicks - then spend many thousands on a site which is essentially rubbish (rubbish usability, horrible code, ugly hacks, non-validating, etc)

But of course, you're not going to make much progress pointing out all the flaws with the site, since they have invested a large amount of money in it and dont want to admit that its rubbish, especially since I'm only an 'amataur', not a 'professional' web designer...

Makes it difficult for people like me who really know web design and prefer non-flashy, subtly-well-designed, standards-complient sites with css etc to get the recognition they deserve...

furnace said:
A cheap website will most likely be made by someone who is not very good at making websites
Click to expand...
Thats simply not true either - I do little sites for charities etc, sometimes volunteery and sometimes for a small fee, but I know for a fact that I'm 10x better at it than many so-called web design 'professionals'.

PS. I also do PHP, Oracle/MySQL, Perl, CSS + a bit of XML, oh and image processing/creation as well... ;)
 
Last edited:
notepad 2 is the best!

By using notepad you know your code, know your website, know how it works and is easy to maintain etc.

Dreamweaver and all these other programs are terible, then do all the HTML code compleatly wrong, java is poor and when you put you page through the validator you will know what i mean...it totaly ignores standards and deprecated code.
 
Depends on how you want to work - there are at least 3 sorts of web designers.

Those that design on photoshop and let dreamweaver chop it up.

Those that buy a template, unknown to client, and slot a logo and text in (cheapest way).

Those that hand code everything - I fall into this one purely because the client gets cross-browser compatibility, and it's a bespoke site to the clients. It takes me quite a bit of time, because each client is different. That's a bit of cliche' but one job i'm currently on demands a 2-stage horizontal flyout menu, complete with graphical style backgrounds on every layer, and custom alignment on the second level to centre it vertically. All that and client doesn't want Javascript on the site. Had to learn how to do it in pure CSS. Done it and client was dead happy but had to pay for the large amount of customisation time.

I was once asked what software I used to develop on, and I said notepad. Guy said he'd never heard of that design software.
 
Rocker said:
Dreamweaver and all these other programs are terible, then do all the HTML code compleatly wrong, java is poor and when you put you page through the validator you will know what i mean...it totaly ignores standards and deprecated code.
Click to expand...

Not entirely true. It would be foolish to brand Dreamweaver and Frontpage as terrible entirely. As long as the code is managed by a human, the results will turn out fine. Think of it as a text editor but with a preview and design view available for a bit of visual feedback when required.
 
iCraig said:
Not entirely true. It would be foolish to brand Dreamweaver and Frontpage as terrible entirely. As long as the code is managed by a human, the results will turn out fine. Think of it as a text editor but with a preview and design view available for a bit of visual feedback when required.
Click to expand...
This man speaks the truth :)

@nightwish;

I'm not saying if you pay lots you'll get lots, either - certainly not! I've seen flashy websites with all the flash gimmicks that are pants, and like you say, someone's paid a lot of money for it and doesn't want to think they've gotten something bad. Heck, they don't even realise it's bad. But yeah, I wasn't saying that if you pay a lot you will get a lot - I was saying the opposite - if you don't pay much, you won't get much. Schools, charities, etc, are the obvious exception ;) I'm scheduled to make a website for a preschool who's registered as a charity, and of course I'm giving them a huge discount over my normal pricing. But it's not free, I can't afford to do that unfortunately - I'm still a startup. A skint one, at that :p

But what I am saying, is that sometimes people are shocked that their site is going to cost them another humans wage. Once an (amature) bands manager (who is 45ish) asked me to make them a website, I knew they didn't have much money so I said I'd make them a basic one for £150. Now that's almost slave labour tbh, and he was shocked at the price - he said "oh, my drummers brother can do one for £40". So I was like "let him do it if you want - it'll be nothing like what I'll be able to do for you". So he did, and it was absolute rubbish.
 
Last edited:
iCraig said:
Not entirely true. It would be foolish to brand Dreamweaver and Frontpage as terrible entirely. As long as the code is managed by a human, the results will turn out fine. Think of it as a text editor but with a preview and design view available for a bit of visual feedback when required.
Click to expand...
I would say that is pretty much a bang-on description.

One of the harshest lessons that any amateur who buys Dreamweaver and thinks it makes him Mr Bigshot has coming to him is that the Design view is often just an approximation of what you see in a browser. You cannot build even static sites and expect them to work in the majority of browsers without knowing about the intricacies of HTML and CSS.

If we're talking about GUI-based apps that turn out bad code, then look no further than GoLive - I used this back before Adobe bought the app when it was called CyberStudio. It was awful and switching to Dreamweaver was a revelation - out of curiosity I tried a demo of it after Adobe had had it for a while and things hadn't improved much. I'm glad to see that Adobe have quietly stopped working on it - when they bought Macromedia, the idea of them creating some sort of bastardized GoWeaver hybrid was the stuff of nightmares ...

When it comes down to it though, I s'pose it's the same as any trade - there's no such thing as bad tools, only bad workmen ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom