Which Web Design program to buy?
Ron Blocher
heard that FrontPage is easy to learn but all professional web designers
hate it. I'm not considering being a professional, but I would like to learn
to use a program that is considered of professional quality.
Any information will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
Ron Blocher
LauraK
>heard that FrontPage is easy to learn but all professional web designers
>hate it. I'm not considering being a professional, but I would like to learn
>to use a program that is considered of professional quality.
Why did you post this in a prepress newsgroup? Just curious.
Macromedia's Dreamweaver and Adobe's GoLive are the top WYSIWYG applications.
More information:
http://www.webmonkey.com
lau...@madmousergraphics.com
http://www.madmousergraphics.com
web design, print design, photography
Mxsmanic
"Ron Blocher" <rtb...@attbi.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
oaPi9.343563$kp.10...@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...
Mxsmanic
MPG.17f6414ef...@news.newsguy.com...
> Flash is vulnerable if Adobe can catch up, and
> if you don't need the extra capabilities in Flash,
> LiveMotion is already a better choice.
Of course, if good site design is important, you won't be using Flash or any
other form of animation in the first place.
Ted
> Quite to the contrary, GoLive is an excellent web tool. I switched
> from Dreamweaver a couple of years ago.
Dreamweaver is better most laugh at GoLive.
>
> Both products like to integrate with other tools from their
> parent company. Coming from a print world, if you already have
> some Adobe products, you'll get some benefit from transfer of
> knowledge, plus the ability to embed .psd and .ai files directly
> into web pages, have them be converted automatically (if you want
> that) for web use, manage slicing, etc., and still be able to
> go back and edit the originals in Photoshop or Illustrator.
>
> Adobe's LiveMotion still seems to run behind Flash on such
> things as scripting and accessibility, but it is a hugely
> better graphic development and animation tool than Flash.
Again bullcrap. Livemotion is all but dead it seams. If you know how to
program Flash can do almost anything.
> Flash's graphics and animation tools are the worst I've seen
> in anything. Flash is vulnerable if Adobe can catch up, and
> if you don't need the extra capabilities in Flash, LiveMotion
> is already a better choice.
Flash is rock solid and it isn't vulnerable. Adobe is laughed at in the web
world.
Ted
>
> Diane
Mxsmanic
slrnaop9f...@sweetpig.hayseeds.ca...
> Yep, acutally CSS2 will be taking up more and
> more of the design, not just the structure.
Just remember to create a text-only version of your site, especially if you
receive any government funds.
> I'm working on a page where all the positioning
> of elements/blocks etc. are done with CSS, no
> images at all.
I've been doing it that way for years. Every browser worth using supports
CSS, and CSS does not increase download time, and CSS does not reduce
accessibility, and CSS does not require active components on the client
machine that could serve as vectors for viruses (Flash means none of these
criteria, BTW); therefore there is no reason not to use it.
I'm surprised by the number of sites still using old tags like FONT.
Apparently web-authoring programs are fond of doing it the old way (and
sometimes are incapable of doing it any other way). A lot of people still
feel compelled to support Netscape 4.x, even though that browser effectively
disappeared years ago.
> Because of the advanced CSS used, Mozilla >1 is
> recommended, looks good mostly in IE 6, however
> IE doesn't render it /all/ properly.
Unfortunately, if IE doesn't render it properly, you need to make it a bit
less advanced, because that affects 96% of your visitors.
> More and more we're going to see pages done without
> heavy images.
That would be fine with me. I'd like to see all the Flash disappear, too.
> The content is going to be more prominent than
> a fancy design, which one can argue as being
> quite wasteful.
The content has _always_ been more prominent than the design, on sites that
are actually worth visiting.
Mxsmanic
> Not as long as you have to be functional with
> people who use Netscape 4 and insist that they
> don't need anything more than that.
Unless you are working on an intranet with an unusual user community,
Netscape 4.x is dead. Looking at my logs, for example, the total number of
Netscape users visiting the site is less than three percent, and Netscape
4.x users are less than 1.6% of the total. This is consistent from month to
month, and year to year. Hardly anyone is using Netscape at all, and of
those who do, only a fraction are still using Netscape 4.x.
That's fine with me, since Netscape 4.x is one of the buggiest browsers ever
to hit the market. You essentially have to write one version of each page
for Netscape 4.x, and one version for all other browsers. Two years ago,
after examining my logs over a long period, I decided that putting all sorts
of tweaks into each page just to get around Netscape bugs was not worth my
time, given the vanishingly small number of Netscape 4.x users still on the
Web, so I dropped all support for 4.x--that is, I started writing all pages
in standard HTML. Browsers that can render standard HTML (such as MSIE,
Opera, and the more recent versions of Netscape) work fine; Netscape 4.x
makes a mess. But I've received virtually no complaints, because nobody is
really using 4.x anymore, anyway.
> Yup. Accessibility requirements and guidelines
> are going to force this more and more.
Good. Maybe it will kill off Flash.
Mxsmanic
slrnaop9r...@sweetpig.hayseeds.ca...
> Most professionals use Macromedia's products for
> web development. I think that says it all.
Not for the largest sites. Extremely large sites usually have handwritten
HTML.
If you _need_ something like Dreamweaver to create a site, the site is
probably too complicated. Visit the site with Lynx to see; if you can't
understand or navigate it with Lynx, there is a problem.
Mxsmanic
> Here's a tutorial that you might find interesting. Note the
> subject. Then note the instructors!
Neither instructor's name rings any bells. I do note, however, that the
site itself does not appear to use Flash, so someone was obviously thinking
clearly.
> Flash has its uses.
If you want an ersatz video game effect to attract the young males to your
site, yes, it has its uses.
If you want to inform visitors to your site as efficiently as possible,
Flash has no place.
> It can be very good as a presentation tool,
> especially when a well-crafted, high-quality
> interactive presentation is required.
Unless, of course, your visitor is blind, or has ActiveX disabled on his
machine, or simply doesn't care to download huge Flash files so that he can
see your tedious and bloated substitute for a simple text page.
> Animation is necessary for some things, but it is
> also highly inappropriate in most instances
> where it is used.
Animation is necessary for cartoons, but not much else.
> It is a very reasonable choice for loading
> large vector images, even static images if a
> .swf is compact and the equivalent .gif or
> .jpg wouldn't be.
The nature of vector images (large expanses of unchanging color) is such
that they can compress pretty well as JPEG or GIF. And the advantage of
using JPEG or GIF is that it does not require a potential virus vector to be
running on the user's machine.
> Just because 99% of the Flash that's out there
> is bad, doesn't mean the concept is bad.....
It does mean, however, that 99% of the Flash that's out there should be
removed.
My biggest pet peeve is sites that won't even let you in unless you run a
Flash animation. Needless to say, with my secured browser, I can't visit
such sites at all. Sometimes I can look at source code and find a way into
the real site, but not always.
Mxsmanic
uoqc5mj...@corp.supernews.com...
> Flash is rock solid and it isn't vulnerable. Adobe
> is laughed at in the web world.
Sites that use a lot of Flash or other competing animation technologies are
laughed at in themselves, by people with more and better experience in site
design.
Eric Gill
news:_E0j9.187928$5r1.7...@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com:
There is no particular reason that one cannot design excellent sites using
Flash and no or minimal animation. Such sites are likely smaller than the
closest equivelent in html and can be made to fit any browser window size.
I thought you didn't do web design?
Del Tree
Blocher <rtb...@attbi.com> writes
Textpad is the most professional programme you can buy and it's FREE.
--
Del Tree
Matthew Taylor
"Mxsmanic" <mxsm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MUfj9.206411$AR1.8...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
That is a huge generalisation.
In its place Flash (& other technologies) are the only way of achieving many
things. However, overuse by people that don't know what they are doing /
don't need to use the product in the first place gives the product a bad
reputation.
Saying that all flash pages are laughed by those with more experience in
site dsign at is a ridiculous statement to make. Do you think that there are
no Flash users, who also have extensive experience in site design using
other programs as well?
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
>
> I've been doing it that way for years. Every browser worth using supports
> CSS, and CSS does not increase download time, and CSS does not reduce
> accessibility, and CSS does not require active components on the client
> machine that could serve as vectors for viruses (Flash means none of these
> criteria, BTW); therefore there is no reason not to use it.
Flash in itself does not increase download time for pages.
For many layouts, using Flash can make a far smaller site than it would have
been with .gif images.
It is only misuse of flash that leads to bulky sites that take ages to load.
Furthermore, if flash is used correctly, it is easy to have more of the site
pages loading in the background, while you are looking at the first page, so
that once you have read the first page, there is almost no delay when you
move on to subsequent pages.
> I'm surprised by the number of sites still using old tags like FONT.
> Apparently web-authoring programs are fond of doing it the old way (and
> sometimes are incapable of doing it any other way). A lot of people still
> feel compelled to support Netscape 4.x, even though that browser
effectively
> disappeared years ago.
We still get about 5% of the hits to our office website from NS4 machines.
Remember that a lot of places install a system across the board and then
never bother to upgrade the software until they upgrade the computers.
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
> "Stephen" <s...@netscape.net> a écrit dans le message de news:
> slrnaop9r...@sweetpig.hayseeds.ca...
>
> > Most professionals use Macromedia's products for
> > web development. I think that says it all.
>
> Not for the largest sites. Extremely large sites usually have handwritten
> HTML.
Most extremely large sites that I can think of are almost entirely held in
databases, with only a loose framwork into which the data is inserted at the
time the user asks for that specific page.
Bits of the pages may be hand coded, but to say that the site is handcoded
would generaly be inaccurate.
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
>
> Unless, of course, your visitor is blind, or has ActiveX disabled on his
> machine, or simply doesn't care to download huge Flash files so that he
can
> see your tedious and bloated substitute for a simple text page.
If we are talking about minorities of users & not developing sites to be
compatible with NS4, is this section of users that you are talking about any
larger than NS4 users? You only have to download a Flash plugin once, if at
all, as they are included with the latest versions of most browsers.
> > It is a very reasonable choice for loading
> > large vector images, even static images if a
> > .swf is compact and the equivalent .gif or
> > .jpg wouldn't be.
>
> The nature of vector images (large expanses of unchanging color) is such
> that they can compress pretty well as JPEG or GIF. And the advantage of
> using JPEG or GIF is that it does not require a potential virus vector to
be
> running on the user's machine.
But how easily can you implement a zoomable vector image on your page using
jpeg or gif images?
>
> > Just because 99% of the Flash that's out there
> > is bad, doesn't mean the concept is bad.....
>
> It does mean, however, that 99% of the Flash that's out there should be
> removed.
& the same could also apply to the large percentage of bad HTML based pages
as well?
Matthew
Eric Gill
news:MUfj9.206411$AR1.8...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com:
1) Urban legend snobbery is just as useful as most things derived from
urban legends.
2) Commcercial web sites aren't produced to please web designers.
LauraK
>Flash and no or minimal animation. Such sites are likely smaller than the
>closest equivelent in html and can be made to fit any browser window size.
>
>I thought you didn't do web design?
>
He probably doesn't. However, "Mxsmanic" considers himself to be the authority
on everything and will consider no opinions except his own. I have seen many
posts from him in photo newsgroups.
He is a prolific poster who engages in arguments for his own amusement.
Del Tree
<di...@firelily.com> writes
>> Textpad is the most professional programme you can buy and it's FREE.
>
>comparing hand-editing with WYSIWYG editing, professional tools
>such as GoLive and Dreamweaver offer huge productivity enhancements,
>and make it very easy to standardize layout and components across
>a site in a way that makes broad updates of whole sections of
>a site very easy and quick.
Total bollocks. Textpad will do a search and replace on any code or
string in a fraction of the time it would take Dreamwangler or the even
more dreadful GoBlight. What is more, if you are adding serious
interactive content via Javascript or php DWW is a RPITA as it will move
your declarations all over the place, delete string constants and create
all manner of mayhem at the drop of a mouse. And as for it's HTML coding
I fear to say anything at all lest I say too much and offend you even
further.
Suffice it to say that
<font></font><font></font><font></font><strong></strong><font></font><str
ong></strong><font></font> is not unusual in Dreamwangled pages. I
recently re-coded one DWW abortion down from 20kb to 2Kb with *NO*
change of content at all just by removing spurious and redundant tags.
I am afraid that DWW is all very well for the young tyro and for quickly
roughing out layouts (which is all we use it for) but for finished work
it's utter pants, as are all the other so-called "wysiwyg" editors. Not
one of then produces clean code and all of them are bug-ridden. A prime
example is Dreamwangler's so-called "behaviours". These sad excuses for
JavaScript take 10 lines to call a function that I could code in 1. Why?
Because they're written by tyros for tyros, or more probably, because
Macromedia are too tight-fisted to pay a professional programmer to
write the scripts properly.
>Choosing Textpad as your primary tool for web building is like
>choosing Textpad as your primary tool for print layout, so you
>can hand-code the postscript yourself. Yes, you can do it, but
>you shouldn't accept money for it as a professional.
I am happy to inform you that not only *DO* we accept money for the
pages we create with Textpad it is *VERY* good money too. Our average
current budget for a new interactive site is $24,000.
TTFN,
--
Del Tree
Del Tree
<lk...@aol.com11o1al1> writes
And why not? Why should we be so uncharitable as to deprive him of a
little light relief? <G>
--
Del Tree
Del Tree
And why not? Why should we be so uncharitable as to deprive the poor lad
of a little light relief from the rigours of his professional life? :-)
--
Del Tree
Del Tree
Matthew Taylor <matthew....@NOSPAM.mtaylor.co.uk> writes
>
>"Mxsmanic" <mxsm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:9Mfj9.106804$216.4...@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
>> "Stephen" <s...@netscape.net> a écrit dans le message de news:
>> slrnaop9r...@sweetpig.hayseeds.ca...
>>
>> > Most professionals use Macromedia's products for
>> > web development. I think that says it all.
>>
>> Not for the largest sites. Extremely large sites usually have handwritten
>> HTML.
>
>Most extremely large sites that I can think of are almost entirely held in
>databases, with only a loose framwork into which the data is inserted at the
>time the user asks for that specific page.
Which still have to be *hand-coded*, or at the very least have existing
code modified and adapted.
>Bits of the pages may be hand coded, but to say that the site is handcoded
>would generaly be inaccurate.
My experience is the exact opposite. I know of *NO* professional website
designers (as opposed to tyros and wannabees) who use Dreamwangler or
any other so-called "wysiwyg" editor as their *primary* content creation
tools. I'm afraid that those of use who have used DWW (and I have used
it since version 1.0) know that it is sadly limited in many important
areas and the present version (MX) is no exception. Without an
underlying understanding of HTML and other scripting languages it is
quite impossible to built truly cross-platform, cross-browser compatible
interactive sites. OTOH, if all you want to do is to knock up a homesite
to showcase your burning obsession with collecting hat-pins Dreamwangler
is the perfect tool for the job.
Just my 4 pennorth, Matthew ;-)
--
Del Tree
LauraK
>authority
>>on everything and will consider no opinions except his own. I have seen many
>>posts from him in photo newsgroups.
>>He is a prolific poster who engages in arguments for his own amusement.
>
>And why not? Why should we be so uncharitable as to deprive him of a
>little light relief? <G>
Oh, please do! That was simply an advisory.
Mxsmanic
message de news: vgkj9.202458$z91.8...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> Bits of the pages may be hand coded, but to say that
> the site is handcoded would generaly be inaccurate.
To say that the site is created with Dreamweaver would be far more
inaccurate.
Mxsmanic
> Well, my company does some quite large sites. The
> designers don't hand code, they use GUI editors -
> heck even the programmers often use something like
> Homesite.
Your company isn't doing large sites, then.
> Very few people handcode in a text editor. It's
> too time consuming to write code by hand.
Not when the code will be executed 25 million times a day, and must be
secure, bug-free, compatible with twenty different browsers and 24 different
display configurations, accessible to disabled visitors, and downloadable in
less than 4 seconds on a dial-up connection.
In that case, you either consume the time to do it, or you get replaced by
someone who does.
> I don't consider html btw to be "code".
What you consider it and how it works in practice may be two different
things.
> And exactly how many people other than hardcore
> Unix users use, a text editor like Lynx?
Lynx is a browser, not a text editor. It is text-based, meaning that you
can use it to test the accessibility of your site, and its fundamental
navigation capabilities. These are things you do with truly large sites.
> Less than those that use NN4. With accessibilty a
> requirement nowdays, one can do both /without/
> creating two designs.
You can check accessibility with Lynx.
> ... it's what the customer wants and wants suitable for
> that customers message in his/her website.
Really large sites aren't build by third-party contractors, as a general
rule. The owner has its own staff that builds them in house, since it can
easily justify the expense (in fact, a full-time staff is cheaper for really
large sites).
> I agree, there are many people using Flash, whom aren't
> good at it.
At least 99.9% of all sites do not need Flash, and should not incorporate
any Flash elements. It is a marginal technology.
> Not all sites need flash, and it should be used
> sparingly for effect IMHO.
I can't think of any kind of site that _needs_ Flash, and only an extremely
small fraction of sites can profit from it to any extent. Flash content in
a site is usually evidence that it was designed by young males, or clueless
newbies (the two are often one and the same).
Mxsmanic
> Jakob Nielsen? *THE* guru of web usability?
Ah ... I don't worship gurus, sorry. That explains it.
> I would not call that useful.
Nor would I, unless you are selling video games or something through your
site.
> That's a rather jaundiced viewpoint.
Jaded would be a better term. I've been surfing the Web for just about as
long as it has existed, and the novelty of time-consuming kiddie toys like
Flash was long ago exhausted in my eyes. I don't want cartoons or music
videos, I just want information. Most veteran Web surfers feel the same
way; and we all end up as veteran Web surfers eventually, so this is
significant.
> Since you mention the blind, it's worth noting
> that much of the computing world has systematically
> excluded the blind.
No reason to make it worse by putting Flash on every site.
> So if you are marketing visual programming tools,
> for instance, a Flash demo wouldn't necessarily
> exclude the blind, because they've already been
> excluded anyway.
Of course, if they are ever included, your Flash elements will exclude them
again.
> It can be very effective at demonstrating
> processes that must be seen to be understood.
There are _very_ few such demonstrations on the Web.
> That's a limited perspective on what vector tools
> can do.
They can't do bitmaps, and the images that compress the least are complex
bitmaps. So saying that vector images save lots of bandwidth is debatable.
Of course, you can save a lot more bandwidth by skipping all the wasteful
graphics in the first place.
Mxsmanic
slrnaorrc...@sweetpig.hayseeds.ca...
> I thought that dubious honour belonged to Jeffery
> Zeldman and Eric Meyer.
It depends on your religion.
Mxsmanic
message de news: xgkj9.202459$z91.8...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> If we are talking about minorities of users &
> not developing sites to be compatible with NS4,
> is this section of users that you are talking
> about any larger than NS4 users?
People running Netscape 4.x can upgrade. Blind people can make themselves
see through any upgrade process.
> You only have to download a Flash plugin once,
> if at all, as they are included with the latest
> versions of most browsers.
But you must download Flash content from every site that uses it, and you
must run trusted software on your computer to animate it. The former wastes
resources, the latter is a security breach.
> But how easily can you implement a zoomable vector
> image on your page using jpeg or gif images?
I use text instead. And it works for blind visitors, too. Visitors past
eighth grade may not have time to zoom around in vector images.
> & the same could also apply to the large percentage
> of bad HTML based pages as well?
It is only necessary to replace the bad HTML with good HTML.
Mxsmanic
message de news: sgkj9.202456$z91.8...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> That is a huge generalisation.
And an accurate one.
> In its place Flash (& other technologies) are the
> only way of achieving many things.
Examples and percentages?
> Saying that all flash pages are laughed by those
> with more experience in site dsign at is a ridiculous
> statement to make.
It's a true statement; although I suppose that they actually just smile
and/or shake their heads instead of laughing out loud, unless they are
brought in to remove the kiddie stuff.
> Do you think that there are no Flash users, who
> also have extensive experience in site design using
> other programs as well?
I think that the more experience they have, the more they move away from
Flash and other toys and concentrate in the essentials of a good design,
such as content, navigation, simplicity, readability, accessibility, and so
on.
Mxsmanic
slrnaorrk...@sweetpig.hayseeds.ca...
> Take a look here, minimal use of flash but
> done wisely and prudent considering the
> audience the site is for.
The security restrictions on my machines do not allow the use of Flash.
Mxsmanic
Xns929178574A5DC...@24.28.95.158...
> 2) Commcercial web sites aren't produced to
> please web designers.
That's why they are so much less likely to contain Flash elements.
Mxsmanic
Xns92914DE5D2184...@24.28.95.158...
> There is no particular reason that one cannot
> design excellent sites using Flash and no or
> minimal animation.
Nor is there any particular reason why one cannot design excellent sites
without Flash. And so Flash is usually redundant.
> I thought you didn't do web design?
What made you think that?
Mxsmanic
eFi7eaCj...@spamnot.fsnet.co.uk...
> Textpad is the most professional programme you
> can buy and it's FREE.
What is its advantage over Notepad? I don't recall ever having tried it.
Mxsmanic
MPG.17f790d74...@news.newsguy.com...
> Aside from any discussion comparing hand-editing
> with WYSIWYG editing, professional tools such as
> GoLive and Dreamweaver offer huge productivity
> enhancements, and make it very easy to standardize
> layout and components across a site in a way that
> makes broad updates of whole sections of
> a site very easy and quick.
Sounds exactly like an argument trying to justify Word as a replacement for
Quark. I've certainly heard it in that context before.
> ... so you can hand-code the postscript yourself.
I've done that! But only very, very rarely, and not recently.
> Yes, you can do it, but you shouldn't accept money
> for it as a professional.
Why not? Professionals get that way by accepting money for the work they
do.
Mxsmanic
3t2xU7Fy...@spamnot.fsnet.co.uk...
> Suffice it to say that
> <font></font><font></font><font></font><strong></strong>
> <font></font><strong></strong><font></font> is not
> unusual in Dreamwangled pages.
Yes. I've removed lots of those, for $100 an hour. I start with 56K
Dreamweaver-generated HTML, and pare it down to 5K with identical
functionality.
> I recently re-coded one DWW abortion down from 20kb
> to 2Kb with *NO* change of content at all just by
> removing spurious and redundant tags.
Ten-to-one reductions seem typical for this type of garbage collection.
> Our average current budget for a new interactive
> site is $24,000.
You must work fast.
Mxsmanic
slrnaose7...@sweetpig.hayseeds.ca...
> Who uses font tags now?
WYSIWYG web-authoring tools, mainly!
> Use CSS2.
CSS isn't supported by the oldest browsers, although it is now so commonly
supported that I use it for everything.
Mxsmanic
message de news: ugkj9.202457$z91.8...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> Flash in itself does not increase download time for pages.
How do you avoid downloading Flash content and yet still view it?
> We still get about 5% of the hits to our office
> website from NS4 machines.
That's awfully low when you have to practically rewrite a page in order to
make it render properly for Netscape 4.X.
I got tired of not being able to use standard HTML because Netscape 4.x
couldn't render it. It was a choice between the HTML standard and all
browsers other than NN4, or NN4. Needless to say, the HTML standard and the
other browsers won.
Eric Gill
@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com:
> "Eric Gill" <eric...@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
> Xns92914DE5D2184...@24.28.95.158...
>
>> There is no particular reason that one cannot
>> design excellent sites using Flash and no or
>> minimal animation.
>
> Nor is there any particular reason why one cannot design excellent sites
> without Flash. And so Flash is usually redundant.
You are ware of a competing technology that will retain formatting as well
as flash at different browser sizes? Please, share.
<snip>
Del Tree
Mxsmanic <mxsm...@hotmail.com> writes
It is to Notepad what a BMW M5 is to a Lada Riva. Check it out and
you'll see why it is so highly regarded by those who know.
Best wishes,
--
Del Tree
Brian
>
>
He is only mistaken in that it is free - TextPad is shareware, and costs
$27 to use it for any purpose other then evaluation (shame on you, Del!).
As a text editor it is easily one of - if not THE - best available for
Windows.
> Choosing Textpad as your primary tool for web building is like
> choosing Textpad as your primary tool for print layout, so you
> can hand-code the postscript yourself. Yes, you can do it, but
> you shouldn't accept money for it as a professional.
Huh? What kind of crapola is that? The tool is irrelevant, it is the
result and its satisfaction to your customer that defines you as a
professional - you don't tell the carpenter what type of hammer to use,
do you? If someone came to you for web design and then declined to use
your service for the sole reason that your tool of choice was GoLive I
guarantee you'd view that as an unfair and irrelevant judgement of your
service.
There are many - MANY! - web folks who prefer to code 100% by hand, and
I can tell you with no hesitation their stuff looks a helluva lot better
than what I just saw at www.firelily.com
Another point to keep in mind is that a large proportion of the web
design firms I've associated with separate the art/design portion from
the coding; the coders most often code manually, or significantly tweat
the WYSIWYG code that the designers generate as they rough out their
concepts. And virtually no one uses the WYSIWYG code from any program as-is.
Brian
Del Tree
<nofrea...@nofreakinspam.com> writes
>>>Textpad is the most professional programme you can buy and it's FREE.
>> In that, you are strongly mistaken.
>
>He is only mistaken in that it is free - TextPad is shareware, and costs
>$27 to use it for any purpose other then evaluation (shame on you, Del!).
Well... $27.00 is to all intents and purposes "FREE" when you compare it
to the cost of Quirk Depress. And in case you're wondering our copies
are *ALL* licensed. I never mind paying for good quality software. It's
the bloated, overpriced stuff that brings out my criminal tendencies -
mentioning no names - of course!
if ((softwareName == "GoBlind" && browserVer >= "3")||(browserName ==
"Netscrape" && browserVer >= "X"))
{
version = "KILL";
}
else
{
version = "CRAP";
}
...and so on!
>As a text editor it is easily one of - if not THE - best available for
>Windows.
A fellow fan I see!
>There are many - MANY! - web folks who prefer to code 100% by hand,
>and I can tell you with no hesitation their stuff looks a helluva lot better
>than what I just saw at www.firelily.com
Absolutely - you tell 'em! <G>
>Another point to keep in mind is that a large proportion of the web design
>firms I've associated with separate the art/design portion from the coding;
>the coders most often code manually, or significantly tweat the
>WYSIWYG code that the designers generate as they rough out their
>concepts. And virtually no one uses the WYSIWYG code from any
>program as-is.
<strong>Never a truer word spoken.</strong>
You are a true webhamster, Sir and have my profoundest admiration and
compliments!
TTFN
--
Del Tree
Lauren...@pandora.be
d...@spamenot.freeuk.com says...
That is a Lada Niva, not Riva (or does the English version have both the
steering wheel and the name wrong?). I still see those driving around
from time to time. They rust but if you are not ashamed to use a car
only for driving, it gets the job done. I hardly see any old BMWs
though. They all probably end up parked against trees or underneath
trucks.
Anyway, besides harassing the honourable Mr Tree a bit, I just wanted to
say that TextPad is indeed great and thank you all for proving me right:
I bought it last week. I had been using it for 2 years, finally got
annoyed with the 'Please pay for me' splash screen and decided that it
is well worth the money. I thought only Claris software had that effect
on me!
Brian
> steering wheel and the name wrong?).
LOL...
Del Tree
Lauren...@pandora.be writes (snipped a bit):
>> It is to Notepad what a BMW M5 is to a Lada Riva. Check it out and
>> you'll see why it is so highly regarded by those who know.
>
>That is a Lada Niva, not Riva (or does the English version have both the
>steering wheel and the name wrong?).
Well you would say that as the Belgians don't make any cars, or much of
anything except red tape and chocolate. <g>
> I still see those driving around
>from time to time. They rust but if you are not ashamed to use a car
>only for driving, it gets the job done. I hardly see any old BMWs
>though. They all probably end up parked against trees or underneath
>trucks.
No, they are bought by West Indian drug dealers who have the upholstery
covered in fur, fit tinted glass and cruise around our quiet English
villages importuning innocent young maidens with the lure of their
illicit substances.
TTFN,
--
Del Tree
Del Tree
<d...@spamenot.freeuk.com> writes (sniped a chunk):
>Well you would say that as the Belgians don't make any cars, or much of
>anything except red tape and chocolate. <g>
Bugger - I forgot Detectives with ridiculous moustaches. Sorry about
that.
--
Del Tree
Lauren...@pandora.be
d...@spamenot.freeuk.com says...
> In message <MPG.17f985e35...@newsbin.telenet.be>,
> Lauren...@pandora.be writes (snipped a bit):
>
> >> It is to Notepad what a BMW M5 is to a Lada Riva. Check it out and
> >> you'll see why it is so highly regarded by those who know.
> >
> >That is a Lada Niva, not Riva (or does the English version have both the
> >steering wheel and the name wrong?).
>
> Well you would say that as the Belgians don't make any cars, or much of
> anything except red tape and chocolate. <g>
One large Ford factory in Genk (took over the production of Ford
Dagenham (or so) in the UK), largest Volvo factory outside the Nordic,
the Volkswagen factory is tooling up for the next generation Golf and
the Opel factory in Antwerp is also pretty big. The Toyota Yaris was
designed in their European design centre in ... Belgium. Those nicely
stiled new Skoda's are also designed by a Belgian and the BMW design
team used to be led by a Belgian (Maybe it still is, I don't know for
sure).
There just don't happen to be any Belgian car manufacturers anymore. All
that is left are production plants for big international groups.
Ooops, I just described the English car industry :-)
Matthew Taylor
>
> But you must download Flash content from every site that uses it, and you
> must run trusted software on your computer to animate it. The former
wastes
> resources, the latter is a security breach.
You must download flash content in the same way as you must download image &
text??
>
> > But how easily can you implement a zoomable vector
> > image on your page using jpeg or gif images?
>
> I use text instead. And it works for blind visitors, too. Visitors past
> eighth grade may not have time to zoom around in vector images.
It rather depends what the purpose of your site is.
If you would like to show me how I can display building plans accurately &
clearly using text then feel free.
Just because flash is unnecessary in the market where you are working, it
doesn't mean that it is the same for everyone.
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
> "Matthew Taylor" <matthew....@NOSPAM.mtaylor.co.uk> a écrit dans le
> > Do you think that there are no Flash users, who
> > also have extensive experience in site design using
> > other programs as well?
>
> I think that the more experience they have, the more they move away from
> Flash and other toys and concentrate in the essentials of a good design,
> such as content, navigation, simplicity, readability, accessibility, and
so
> on.
If you are talking about sites based on textual content then -possibly- you
are correct, but there are many sites that have to display other things than
ust text & in some cases, flash is the clearest / simplest way for them to
do this.
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
"Del Tree" <d...@spamenot.freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:3t2xU7Fy...@spamnot.fsnet.co.uk...
>
> Total bollocks. Textpad will do a search and replace on any code or
> string in a fraction of the time it would take Dreamwangler or the even
> more dreadful GoBlight. What is more, if you are adding serious
> interactive content via Javascript or php DWW is a RPITA as it will move
> your declarations all over the place, delete string constants and create
> all manner of mayhem at the drop of a mouse. And as for it's HTML coding
> I fear to say anything at all lest I say too much and offend you even
> further.
I'll agree with you on this to a certain extent. However, if you are wanting
to edit html/js/asp/php code easily, I would prefer either Homesite, or
Emacs.
Homesite has many more web friendly features than textpad, & is better at
such things as showing a structure outline of the document that you are
working on & highlighting areas where there may be problems. Etc...
Emacs can do everything that textpad can, but is far more customisable, so
can entirely be adapted to your exact requirements. It is awkward to learn
though, if you are only used to Windows / Mac apps, as many of its features
operate in very different ways, & there are a lot of new shortcut keys to
learn.
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
What are the advantages of Notepad over any other text editor in existence?
The only one I can think of is that it may be faster if you have a
particularly slow machine, but there are still loads of DOS editors that are
way faster if that is the case (& if your machine is really that slow then
you ought to upgrade.)
For anything other than the most occasional stuff I could not see why you
would use Notepad.
Advantages of Textpad include (from memory) (but are not limited to)
Visible spaces (useful when you are programming Python)
Syntax highlighting
Macros
Line numbering
Automatic indenting
Spell check
Block selection of text
Powerful search & replace
Tabbed interface for switching between multiple files open
Automatic appending of lines that have been broken
Customisable workspace / language settings
Auto preview in web browser
Comparing two files
Converting read only files to writable without going outside the program
-- & many other features that I have missed.
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
> "Matthew Taylor" <matthew....@NOSPAM.mtaylor.co.uk> a écrit dans le
> message de news: ugkj9.202457$z91.8...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
>
> > Flash in itself does not increase download time for pages.
>
> How do you avoid downloading Flash content and yet still view it?
>
> > We still get about 5% of the hits to our office
> > website from NS4 machines.
>
> That's awfully low when you have to practically rewrite a page in order to
> make it render properly for Netscape 4.X.
>
It depends a lot how the page was written in the first place, whether or not
it needs to be rewritten for NS4.
If you are so worried about the precise appearance of the site (I thought
you said that te content was far more importance than the appearance of the
site) then Flash looks the same in NS4 on the Mac as it does in IE6 on the
PC.
Matthew
Don McCahill
Mxsmanic wrote:
> Of course, if good site design is important, you won't be using Flash or any
> other form of animation in the first place.
Not true. Flash has its place. I am working out a site for a transit authority.
It uses Flash to show the bus routes. You click on any bus stop, and it tells
you the time of the next two buses. This is providing functionality that can't
be done otherwise, except through a plugin, applet or SVG (which few people can
access). And it is much easier to develop in Flash than in any of the above.
That said, I will not be using a Flash splash page for the site ... which is
where Flash is generally misused on the web.
--
Don McCahill
Mxsmanic
slrnaouhv...@sweetpig.hayseeds.ca...
> Unless of course data intensive sites for a bank
> or financial services insitution aren't considered
> data intensive or /large/ by you.
Correct, they are not considered large by me.
> Perhaps you should restrict your comments to subjects
> you actually have some experience with.
I do.
> Yes, but the point stands, how many people browsing
> a site, use it?
Everyone "browsing" a site is using it.
> And what exactly was your point about Lynx?
That it is a good tool for determining whether or not the fundamental
architecture of a site is sound and logical.
> That's correct - or use a validator to check
> against your DTD.
I prefer to have a real person use a site to evaluate usability. It's easy
to design a totally unusable site that validates perfectly.
> B$ most are done on a contract basis.
Perhaps the ones you deal with are, but the larger the site, the less sense
this makes.
> It's not marginal at all. Look on the big sites
> like Yahoo etc.
Yahoo's home page contains only 29K bytes and no Flash content.
Additionally, it is very clean in Lynx. And the HTML is fairly clean and
tight, although it is more bloated than it used to be.
> Many of those ads are created in Flash.
What ads?
> Well you can think all you want, I'd love to see
> kind of glamour you can make of an Ad, without it.
You can make an effective advertisement with text alone, if you are
talented.
> There's always animated gif I suppose, but it
> has some copyright restrictions, that makes many
> leary of using it anymore.
You don't create your own graphics?
Mxsmanic
message de news: KoMj9.248722$AR1.10...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> You must download flash content in the same way
> as you must download image & text??
Yes. How do you think it gets from the Web site to the PC?
> It rather depends what the purpose of your site is.
My site exists to inform, like most sites.
> If you would like to show me how I can display
> building plans accurately & clearly using text
> then feel free.
If you can explain to me why you need Flash just to display building plans
accurately, feel free.
> Just because flash is unnecessary in the market
> where you are working, it doesn't mean that it is
> the same for everyone.
The markets that _need_ Flash are very rare indeed.
Mxsmanic
> If you are talking about sites based on textual
> content then -possibly- you are correct, but there
> are many sites that have to display other things than
> ust text & in some cases, flash is the clearest
> / simplest way for them to do this.
Virtually all sites are based on text. If you disagree, try visiting sites
in Chinese and see how much you can understand of them without reading the
language (I assume you don't read Chinese, of course).
Mxsmanic
slrnaouij...@sweetpig.hayseeds.ca...
> Such an obstinate fool.
Such a persuasive argument.
> Won't even turn them off to view an example.
That's right. That's why I've never caught a virus on any machine I've had,
anywhere.
> Only fools consider that they've finished learning
> and can live the rest of their life without learning
> anything new.
Only people who have run out of cogent arguments to support their position
resort to ad hominem.
> You don't have anything worthwhile to say, and
> like I said you're a fool.
See above.
> I don't wish to read anything more from you
> as it's obvious that you're a friggin wanker.
So why are you telling me this? (Hint: See above.)
> It's quite doubtful that you'll ever contribute
> anything useful in any discussion forthwith so
> consider yourself...
See above.
> <plonked>
People who really killfile me typically don't bother to announce it. They
just stop replying to my posts.
Mxsmanic
> You are ware of a competing technology that
> will retain formatting as well as flash at
> different browser sizes? Please, share.
CSS
Mxsmanic
> It is to Notepad what a BMW M5 is to a Lada Riva.
> Check it out and you'll see why it is so highly
> regarded by those who know.
Okay ... but where do I find it?
Mxsmanic
message de news: QoMj9.248728$AR1.10...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> What are the advantages of Notepad over any
> other text editor in existence?
It's free, and it's always there.
> For anything other than the most occasional stuff
> I could not see why you would use Notepad.
I don't. I use the text editor in Visual InterDev 1.0 (I've never
upgraded), since it handles coding-style editing functions much better.
Mxsmanic
> It depends a lot how the page was written in the
> first place, whether or not it needs to be rewritten
> for NS4.
Nowadays I write everything in standard HTML. It's up to browsers to render
it correctly. MSIE and Opera, for the most part, do indeed render standard
HTML correctly.
> If you are so worried about the precise appearance
> of the site (I thought you said that te content was
> far more importance than the appearance of the
> site) then Flash looks the same in NS4 on the Mac
> as it does in IE6 on the PC.
Most of the problems I've had with NN4 are with CSS, which I use
exclusively, and which NN4 handles very, very poorly.
Mxsmanic
3D8F9504...@rogers.com...
> Flash has its place. I am working out a site for
> a transit authority. It uses Flash to show the
> bus routes. You click on any bus stop, and it
> tells you the time of the next two buses.
I guess a simple GIF or JPEG with a client-side map wouldn't do, eh?
> This is providing functionality that can't
> be done otherwise, except through a plugin,
> applet or SVG (which few people can access).
Why not a server-side script?
Eric Gill
@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com:
> "Don McCahill" <don...@rogers.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
> 3D8F9504...@rogers.com...
>
>> Flash has its place. I am working out a site for
>> a transit authority. It uses Flash to show the
>> bus routes. You click on any bus stop, and it
>> tells you the time of the next two buses.
>
> I guess a simple GIF or JPEG with a client-side map wouldn't do, eh?
Assuming the Flash file is made properly, it would be scalable - as any
vector graphic - pannable - automatic feature of the Shockwave plugin - and
probably load faster even if vastly more detailed.
I really doubt you've experimented with the technology to any extent.
<snip>
Eric Gill
@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com:
Nope.
The base of Flash is vectors; Flash also interactively up or downsamples
bitmaps on the fly, so while they will become soft instead of fracturing.
Here:
http://users2.ev1.net/~nightskycreative/
This is a Flash fluff piece, done in about three minutes. Try re-sizing
your browser window. Try right or control clicking and panning around. Now
consider it looks *exactly* the same in any browser that supports Shockwave
(on this machine, the latest Opera, Netscape, Mozilla, and IE, plus an
older version of Netscape).
And weighs in at 20K, plus 1.01K for the html wrapper.
CSS is an excellent evolution for html. It doesn't replace Flash, nor vice-
versa.
Del Tree
Lauren...@pandora.be writes
>> Well you would say that as the Belgians don't make any cars, or much of
>> anything except red tape and chocolate. <g>
>
>One large Ford factory in Genk (took over the production of Ford
>Dagenham (or so) in the UK), largest Volvo factory outside the Nordic,
>the Volkswagen factory is tooling up for the next generation Golf and
>the Opel factory in Antwerp is also pretty big. The Toyota Yaris was
>designed in their European design centre in ... Belgium. Those nicely
>stiled new Skoda's are also designed by a Belgian and the BMW design
>team used to be led by a Belgian (Maybe it still is, I don't know for
>sure).
>
>There just don't happen to be any Belgian car manufacturers anymore. All
>that is left are production plants for big international groups.
>
>Ooops, I just described the English car industry :-)
Not quite...
Jaguar (owned by Ford but designed and built by Brits).
Aston Martin (owned by Ford but designed and built by Brits)
TVR (owned, designed and built by Brits) who arguably *STILL* build some
of the finest sports cars in the world...
Lotus..
Morgan...
And then there are:
Rolls Royce...
Bentley...
Mclaran...
need I go on...? <g>
--
Del Tree
Del Tree
Mxsmanic <mxsm...@hotmail.com> writes
Try this.
1.Sit in front of a working PC or mac with a modem.
2.Dial up your ISP
3.Fire up your browser
4.Type: "http://www.google.com" into the location bar
5.Enter the word "Textpad" into the search string box.
6. Be prepared to be amazed at the power of technology...
How's that? <G>
--
Del Tree
Mxsmanic
> Nope.
Yup. You asked about formatting, not graphics. You can format to your
heart's content with CSS.
> CSS is an excellent evolution for html. It doesn't
> replace Flash, nor vice-versa.
CSS does, however, do just about anything you'd want to do in just about any
Web page.
Mxsmanic
> How's that?
Odd that you would recommend a program, and yet not know where you got it.
Mxsmanic
Xns9292EA60E7059...@24.28.95.158...
> Assuming the Flash file is made properly, it
> would be scalable - as any vector graphic -
> pannable - automatic feature of the Shockwave
> plugin - and probably load faster even if vastly
> more detailed.
So?
> I really doubt you've experimented with the
> technology to any extent.
I don't bother with marginal technologies. I have to build pages that
download quickly, and work reliably and more or less identically for
_everyone_. Additionally, they must not breach security, and they must be
accessible. All of this excludes gadgets like Flash.
Eric Gill
news:OQVj9.174427$216.6...@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com:
> "Eric Gill" <eric...@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
> Xns9292ED6824242...@24.28.95.150...
>
>> Nope.
>
> Yup. You asked about formatting, not graphics. You can format to
> your heart's content with CSS.
Ah. Hairsplitting.
There are none so ignorant as those who will not learn.
<plonk>
<snip>
Eric Gill
news:lUVj9.253409$5r1.10...@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com:
> "Eric Gill" <eric...@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
> Xns9292EA60E7059...@24.28.95.158...
>
>> Assuming the Flash file is made properly, it
>> would be scalable - as any vector graphic -
>> pannable - automatic feature of the Shockwave
>> plugin - and probably load faster even if vastly
>> more detailed.
>
> So?
Two words: superior technology.
Two more words: preconceived notions. You are drowing in yours.
>> I really doubt you've experimented with the
>> technology to any extent.
>
> I don't bother with marginal technologies.
IOW, "No, I haven't and have no idea what I'm talking about."
You don't bother with certain mainstream, established technologies,
either, but you bitch about them a lot.
> I have to build pages that
> download quickly, and work reliably and more or less identically for
> _everyone_. Additionally, they must not breach security, and they
> must be accessible. All of this excludes gadgets like Flash.
Of course, you completely ignored the concrete example I posted that
showed exactly the opposite and are now acting like it doesn't exist.
Don't you ever worry about credibility when you hose your opinion around
so much?
tsucker
> > Assuming the Flash file is made properly, it
> > would be scalable - as any vector graphic -
> > pannable - automatic feature of the Shockwave
> > plugin - and probably load faster even if vastly
> > more detailed.
>
> So?
>
> > I really doubt you've experimented with the
> > technology to any extent.
>
> I don't bother with marginal technologies. I have to build pages that
> download quickly, and work reliably and more or less identically for
> _everyone_. Additionally, they must not breach security, and they must be
> accessible. All of this excludes gadgets like Flash.
Yea whatever, anyway I doubt you can write code that can load this
fast even with all those graphics.
http://www.liquidgeneration.com/home.html
Tsucker
LauraK
>> How's that?
>
>Odd that you would recommend a program, and yet not know where you got it.
>
>
>
Give a man a fish and you feed him once.
Teach a man to fish and he can feed himself.
Slap a man in the face with a fish and he'll go away and leave you alone.
lau...@madmousergraphics.com
http://www.madmousergraphics.com
web design, print design, photography
Jay Chevako
"LauraK" <lk...@aol.com11o1al1> wrote in message
news:20020924132002...@mb-fw.aol.com...
> Give a man a fish and you feed him once.
> Teach a man to fish and he can feed himself.
> Slap a man in the face with a fish and he'll go away and leave you alone.
>
>
Build a man a fire and keep him warm for the nite.
Set a man on fire and keep him warm for the rest of his life.
Jay
Del Tree
Mxsmanic <mxsm...@hotmail.com> writes
I know where I got it and I know where you can get it. But that doesn't
mean I'm going to find it for you. Tell me, does someone hold your willy
when you take a piss or can you manage that yourself?
--
Del Tree
Del Tree
<lk...@aol.com11o1al1> writes
>>
>>> How's that?
>>
>>Odd that you would recommend a program, and yet not know where you got it.
>>
>>
>>
>
>Give a man a fish and you feed him once.
>Teach a man to fish and he can feed himself.
>Slap a man in the face with a fish and he'll go away and leave you alone.
Not if he's called "mxsmanic" He'll probably argue about what sort of
fish it is, who it's parents were, and whether or not it is a suitable
fish for slapping faces with.
--
Del Tree
Del Tree
<jayxre...@chevako.net> writes
What's that got to do with fish?
--
Del Tree
Matthew Taylor
"Stephen" <s...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:slrnaov7q...@sweetpig.hayseeds.ca...
> matthew....@NOSPAM.mtaylor.co.uk Mon, 23 Sep 2002 22:16:15 GMT
(Matthew Taylor):
> >
> > I'll agree with you on this to a certain extent. However, if you are
wanting
> > to edit html/js/asp/php code easily, I would prefer either Homesite, or
> > Emacs.
> > Homesite has many more web friendly features than textpad, & is better
at
> > such things as showing a structure outline of the document that you are
> > working on & highlighting areas where there may be problems. Etc...
>
> <nod> Exactly. Having never used textpad, can't comment, is it similar
> to BBedit? When I used Macintosh it was one of my favourite apps.
>
Similar kind of thing. Its a couple of years since I used BBedit, but from
what I remember, like Textpad it is a fairly feature rich easy to use text
editor.
>
> It also is an IDE - pretty good, so I hear. One of the things I kept
putting
> off was learning Emacs, I'm just getting to feel comfortable in Vi[m]
after
> taking about 3 years to learn it. I'm looking forward to learning Emacs -
one of
> these days. =)
I love the customisability of Emacs. I have something of an advantage when
customising it, in that I already use Lisp (which EmacsLisp is based on) on
a day to day basis for creating AutoCAD customisations, so although there
are differences in the syntax & the features, much of the knowledge can be
transfered across relatively
easily.
There is a lot more to Emacs than there is to VI, although there are also a
lot of good books & tutorials. Pretty much anything can be accomplished with
it if you can take the time to write the extra code. Normally though, if you
look around someone else will already have written the code anyway.
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
news:wVNj9.250566$AR1.10...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> > There's always animated gif I suppose, but it
> > has some copyright restrictions, that makes many
> > leary of using it anymore.
>
> You don't create your own graphics?
>
I think that he is refering to the Unisys patent issue on LZW compression
used in Gifs. Pressure from Unisys demanding royalties on the technology
(which was not developed by them in the first place) is the reason that some
software manufacturers have in the last few years dropped support for gif &
compressed tif files.
Generaly the trend now by people wanting to steer clear of this is to use
png graphics instead, but browser & edditing software support for all the
png features is still lacking.
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
> "Matthew Taylor" <matthew....@NOSPAM.mtaylor.co.uk> a écrit dans le
> message de news: KoMj9.248722$AR1.10...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
>
> > You must download flash content in the same way
> > as you must download image & text??
>
> Yes. How do you think it gets from the Web site to the PC?
Yes - It gets downloaded to the machine - as do the text & graphic content.
So why is having to download it not a problem with the text & graphics?
> > If you would like to show me how I can display
> > building plans accurately & clearly using text
> > then feel free.
>
> If you can explain to me why you need Flash just to display building plans
> accurately, feel free.
>
I don't get which bit of this you don't understand.
I want to show building plans that are very detailed. Therefore users need
to be able to zoom in on them to see all the detail. Also it is convenient
to be able to quickly highlight areas of the plan by clicking on the key at
the side, or to be able to turn the labels on & off to see it more clearly.
I realise that there are many ways of achieving this if you have the time &
patience, but maybe you could explain to me how I can do it without Flash, &
stop the creation process taking at least 5 times as long?
> > Just because flash is unnecessary in the market
> > where you are working, it doesn't mean that it is
> > the same for everyone.
>
> The markets that _need_ Flash are very rare indeed.
>
Yes, but that doesn't mean that they don't exist.
I realy don't get what your problem is with Flash. Sure, some sites might
use it to excess, but it doesn't mean that the technology is worthless
because of this.
This attitude is not much different to that of the people who have never
been near a computer, who assume that everyone on the internet is
downloading child pornography.
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
So this is meant to be a good thing that they are harder to understand if
you don't read the language??
Surely using graphics & animations will make sites more accessable to people
who only have a partial knowledge of the language you are writing the site
in? Why is this a bad thing?
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
>
> That's right. That's why I've never caught a virus on any machine I've
had,
> anywhere.
Can you find me anyone who has caught a virus from opening a web page with
Flash content on it?
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
Bzzt - Wrong
The page will not look identical at different browser sizes, using CSS, no
matter what you do.
For some pages this migt be possible, but if this is one of the things you
wish to achieve, why is a graphic designer going to want to spend hours
fiddling about with HTML code, if they could do the same thing in 5 minutes
in Flash.
Give us an example of a page that looks identical at different sizes, using
CSS, as I don't believe that such a thing is easily achieved.
Remember - no word wrap changes, no patches of white space appearing, all
the text alignment the same & all the images the same size & position
relative to the text?
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
>
> CSS does, however, do just about anything you'd want to do in just about
any
> Web page.
>
Maybe everything that -YOU- would want.
How do -YOU- know what it is that other people are wanting to do?
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
> "Del Tree" <d...@spamenot.freeuk.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
> lvUV0nB7...@spamnot.fsnet.co.uk...
>
> > It is to Notepad what a BMW M5 is to a Lada Riva.
> > Check it out and you'll see why it is so highly
> > regarded by those who know.
>
> Okay ... but where do I find it?
>
>
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
"Del Tree" <d...@spamenot.freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:SvuYU1CM...@spamnot.fsnet.co.uk...
> Try this.
> 1.Sit in front of a working PC or mac with a modem.
> 2.Dial up your ISP
> 3.Fire up your browser
> 4.Type: "http://www.google.com" into the location bar
> 5.Enter the word "Textpad" into the search string box.
> 6. Be prepared to be amazed at the power of technology...
>
> How's that? <G>
>
Wow, you learn something new every day.
Thanks for the tip Del!
- Alternatively go to www.google.com & type in "go to hell" (including the
quotes)
See what companies come up in the top 5 pages.
(I'm not joking about this either, it just shows the power of the fuzzy
logic that these search engines must have now.) VBG
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
> "Matthew Taylor" <matthew....@NOSPAM.mtaylor.co.uk> a écrit dans le
> message de news: QoMj9.248728$AR1.10...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
>
> > What are the advantages of Notepad over any
> > other text editor in existence?
>
> It's free, and it's always there.
>
I'd rather carry around another editor on a floppy disk, or download one
from the net than use notepad for typing more than five lines of code.
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
>
> > It depends a lot how the page was written in the
> > first place, whether or not it needs to be rewritten
> > for NS4.
>
> Nowadays I write everything in standard HTML. It's up to browsers to
render
> it correctly. MSIE and Opera, for the most part, do indeed render
standard
> HTML correctly.
>
& what the heck is -Standard HTML- ?
could you give me a list of what tags it includes & what it doesn't?
> > If you are so worried about the precise appearance
> > of the site (I thought you said that te content was
> > far more importance than the appearance of the
> > site) then Flash looks the same in NS4 on the Mac
> > as it does in IE6 on the PC.
>
> Most of the problems I've had with NN4 are with CSS, which I use
> exclusively, and which NN4 handles very, very poorly.
So don't use CSS. Use Flash instead NN4 works fine with this <G>
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
> "Don McCahill" <don...@rogers.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
> 3D8F9504...@rogers.com...
>
> > Flash has its place. I am working out a site for
> > a transit authority. It uses Flash to show the
> > bus routes. You click on any bus stop, and it
> > tells you the time of the next two buses.
>
> I guess a simple GIF or JPEG with a client-side map wouldn't do, eh?
>
& this is mant to be a simpler option?
I'd love to find anyone that could do this faster this way than they could
in Flash
> > This is providing functionality that can't
> > be done otherwise, except through a plugin,
> > applet or SVG (which few people can access).
>
> Why not a server-side script?
& this is mant to be a simpler option?
Added to this is tha fact that many people are unable to run server-side
scripts, & the compatability problems that these create if at a later point
in time you want to change to different server software.
Why should you have to fiddle about with learning these technologies anyway,
just to satisfy he tiny minority of people who have an irrational phobia of
Flash.
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
> > I really doubt you've experimented with the
> > technology to any extent.
>
> I don't bother with marginal technologies. I have to build pages that
> download quickly, and work reliably and more or less identically for
> _everyone_. Additionally, they must not breach security, and they must be
> accessible. All of this excludes gadgets like Flash.
>
I have to build pages that download quickly, work reliably & are more or
less identical for _everyone_.
This is why I use Flash.
Can you explain why Flash is a marginal technology?
Have you looked at the figures for the percentage of machines that have
Flash installed recently?
Can you elaborate on the security breaches of Flash, rather than just
repeating that there are so many security problems with it?
Most people are opening up -far- more security holes by merely connecting to
the web, than they are through opening pages that use Flash.
Matthew
Matthew Taylor
"Eric Gill" <eric...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns92936F00E2E5B...@24.28.95.158...
> "Mxsmanic" <mxsm...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:lUVj9.253409$5r1.10...@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com:
> > download quickly, and work reliably and more or less identically for
> > _everyone_. Additionally, they must not breach security, and they
> > must be accessible. All of this excludes gadgets like Flash.
>
> Of course, you completely ignored the concrete example I posted that
> showed exactly the opposite and are now acting like it doesn't exist.
>
> Don't you ever worry about credibility when you hose your opinion around
> so much?
>
You just have to hope that none of your clients read this NG I guess.
Matthew
Del Tree
Matthew Taylor <matthew....@NOSPAM.mtaylor.co.uk> writes
>
>"Del Tree" <d...@spamenot.freeuk.com> wrote in message
>news:SvuYU1CM...@spamnot.fsnet.co.uk...
>
>> Try this.
>> 1.Sit in front of a working PC or mac with a modem.
>> 2.Dial up your ISP
>> 3.Fire up your browser
>> 4.Type: "http://www.google.com" into the location bar
>> 5.Enter the word "Textpad" into the search string box.
>> 6. Be prepared to be amazed at the power of technology...
>>
>> How's that? <G>
>>
>
>Wow, you learn something new every day.
Some of us do. I have my doubts about others.
>Thanks for the tip Del!
You're welcome.
>- Alternatively go to www.google.com & type in "go to hell" (including the
>quotes)
>See what companies come up in the top 5 pages.
>(I'm not joking about this either, it just shows the power of the fuzzy
>logic that these search engines must have now.) VBG
I suggest you type "Matthew+Taylor" instead. A much *BIGGER* laugh.
Del Tree
Matthew Taylor <matthew....@NOSPAM.mtaylor.co.uk> writes
>
You bar-steward! Next you'll be offering to hold his willy when he takes
a piss instead of taking the piss when he's talking through his willy.
--
Del Tree
Jono Moore
d...@spamenot.freeuk.com wrote on 24.9.02 12:07 PM:
You can cook the fish while the man is on fire.
...Jono
Del Tree
<jdoh...@null.com> writes (snipped a bit):
>My goodness! What on earth has gotten into the dear, sweet Mr. Tree
>we had come to know and love?
I can only repeat what I replied to Matthew Taylor who was similarly
thoughtless enough to provide the URL I witheld: "You bar-steward! Next
you'll be offering to hold his willy when he takes a piss instead of
taking the piss when he's talking through his willy."
Now do you get it, John? <G>
If anyone's to blame for my new testiness, it's you. You know you are my
hero.
>Someone shopping for a decent windows editor might take a look at
><http://www.editplus.com), too. One nifty feature it has that
>Textpad seems not to is a built-in FTP client, which is actually
>pretty handy.
No it's not. It's as handy as a swiss army knife which is not very handy
at all when you want a professional tool to do a professional job.
Frankly I'm amazed that a stickler for excellence like you should even
suggest such a thing. If you want a pukka ftp client - buy one - don't
buy a text editor with a half-arsed ftp client bolted onto it.
Both Cuteftp and wsftp-pro (which I use) are the business. I suggest you
try them.
TTFN,
--
Del Tree
Jono Moore
Taylor at matthew....@NOSPAM.mtaylor.co.uk wrote on 24.9.02 12:27 PM:
> There is a lot more to Emacs than there is to VI,
VI... <shudder>
...Jono
Del Tree
<jo...@udoprinting.com> writes
Good idea. You can see I don't cook much fish over open fires.
--
Del Tree
Mxsmanic
Xns92936DFB6CD93...@24.28.95.158...
> Ah. Hairsplitting.
No, correction.
> There are none so ignorant as those who will not learn.
>
> <plonk>
Hmm.
Mxsmanic
> Two words: superior technology.
Two rules of Web design: Be conservative in what you expect, and liberal in
what you accept. Flash violates the first rule.
> IOW, "No, I haven't and have no idea what I'm
> talking about."
I know very well what I'm talking about. But Flash, like Netscape 4.x, is
marginal. The very vast majority of Web sites do not use it, thank
goodness.
> Of course, you completely ignored the concrete
> example I posted that showed exactly the opposite
> and are now acting like it doesn't exist.
The example fails to show exactly the opposite.
> Don't you ever worry about credibility when you
> hose your opinion around so much?
Do you ever attempt to support your own position without personal attacks?
Del Tree
>> Both Cuteftp and wsftp-pro (which I use) are the business. I suggest you
>> try them.
>
>I ain't using a program called "CuteFTP," thanks.
Silly of me. I should have known better. Please blame it on the lateness
of the hour and a lack of alcohol. Wsftp-pro is much more your
mint-julep.
You can find it here:
http://www.ipswitch.com/products/WS_FTP/index.html
Good night and sleep tight :-)
--
Del Tree
Mxsmanic
message de news: s03k9.251435$z91.10...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> Generaly the trend now by people wanting to steer
> clear of this is to use png graphics instead, but
> browser & edditing software support for all the
> png features is still lacking.
If perfect support for PNG in browsers and editing software magically
appeared tomorrow, I'd still have to wait ten years before I could safely
use it on a Web site.