redoing my old, nasty website

[williamdruid]

Hey all! Willy here. Want to finally update my old "website" after about three years. Would like to use Xara but from what I have heard, I still need to use the same irritating choices for html editing, ( Dreamweaver,irritating...Go-Live,crash testing...or Frontpage,nervewracking. I hear it's easier to design in Webstyle. What makes Webstyle easier? Not try'ing to be sarcastic, just would really like to know. Thanks, Willy
www.willyprints.com

[spondoolix]

Webstyle is easy to collate and theme all the graphics that you need. However, you still need an HTML editor to get the pages ready for the web. When using Webstyle formatted pages, I then use CoffeeCup HTML editor for the final stages.
If you are looking for a really easy program to produce a good site fast, without much knowledge or skill, you could try Web Easy 6.0 from VCOM. I use this all the time and I also use it with Webstyle graphics. It is more than adequate and extremely easy to use. Our current site uses both programs.
The link below is for UK sales, but Web Easy is produced and marketed in the States.

http://shop.avanquest.com/uk/prod.ph..._WEPUPG_1105Re

[williamdruid]

Cool, I'll check those out. Appreciate it. Later, Willy

[calypsoblade]

I use Namo WebEditor 2006 after having used Dreamweaver MX (don't own it and wanted a product I felt would be around and competitive to Adobe/Macro without the high cost). I find Namo to be easier and fun to use (Compared to Dreamweaver MX) with a strtaightforward and clean interface. I hear many complaints of WebEditor 6 being unstable but I have 2006 and and don't have these problems. It works like a word processor or design app and utilizes tables and layers for easier positioning of elements. Cost is $99 but to me was worth every penny.

[williamdruid]

Thanks for the advice, I'll check that out too. Willy

[w00dy]

I'll go with Namo as well. WebEditor 2006 comes with loads of utilities, including a "vector drawing package"... not quite Xara though.... and like calypsoblade, it doesn't fall over for me either. I use it with Webstyle quite a bit for quick jobs.

[stlewis]

William

It so depends on what sort of web site you want.

For a simple one, Webstyle is quite clever, but it is wasteful in how it creates separate folders for the graphics of each page - so really you ought to get into the code and redirect the links to a set of folders where you have merged the graphics.

I have been using DW for a long time - and the new release since it came out, and if you want a database to help manage the Gallery or add other tricks then the application development features in DW, for example using MySQL and PHP have really come of age. It is a ghastly Americanism but it *does* make a lot of the work a "snap".

But I use DW with X1/Xtreme to design the pages - and create the graphic to use in DW.

[jnerf]

I use virtual mechanics sitespinner
it is a wsiwyg editor,
very easy to use.

http://www.virtualmechanics.com/products/spinner/

[Albacore]

Hi I seen these people who state GoLive crashes well it does if you have wrong graphics card and you don't have oodles of memory but on the other hand if you do and wnat to publish stuff to mobiles then this is the programme for you. If you want to have a dynamic site then you will have to go back to GL6. Why do I pay Adobe my money just to have a programme whiich does static sites because I donn't have the interest to learn HTML, what a mug.

[John Rayner]

I go with the cheapest and the best... learned to sling the code. So I get to use wordpad/notepad. There is not anything on the web that can not be done with wordpad/notepad, except graphics... so I use xara x/xtreme and a bit o flash.

90% of the folks here will disagree. It is all personal preference...