I am sick of using notepad to create my HTML pages and I want somthing better. Are there any programs available that are easier to use than notepad for html editing. If so i wolud like to know about them. Thanx

Reply

Wells theirs the commecial software like dreamweaver, adobe go live, Ms frontpage. But of course you could always get notepad++ has some more features then notepad, but in my experiance in designing I always use notepad and anyone can agree with me on that of course then you go the wysiwyg editors some are ok but the others put in source code that is pretty much out dated with the xhtml standard.

But best thing for you to do is just search around and see whats to your liken.

Reply

I agree, notepad is traditional, and it's good for simple stuff. It's nice to have syntax highlighting and good tabbing. Notepad ++ is what I use. I find it to be a very good free editor. Tabbing is great, has lots of extra features such as searching by using regular expressions. Syntax highlighting is good too. Help isn't so great on it, so you have to figure out stuff on your own. Which it's not too complicated to use the simple stuff. I use to use HTML kit, which you can get at download.com The tabbing was a bit weird but i found the preview to come in handy for standard html documents.

As far as wysiwyg editors, I'd try dreamweaver. Haven't tried it, but I hear it's good. Cuts down on a lot of trivial coding I hear. Good Luck.

Reply

Same with what the other two members said earlier. If you know your html code, Notepad is probably the best way to go...

I used Dreamweaver before and gotta say, it's good. Never liked Microsoft Frontpage that much. Dreamweaver costs like $100 I think.

If you want to go with a free alternative, give First Page a try. You can download it at http://www.evrsoft.com/

As with most other html editors, you might get some "junk" code (unnecessary code) unlike using Notepad where you have full control of the code.

Reply

I'm using HTML-kit. It's a very good html editor. You can preview your pages, it got's syntax highlighting, a build-in FTP program and syntax- and html-validation. And it's freeware.
If you want a good WYSIWYG you can go with Macromedia Dreamweaver, it's simply the best you can get, but it's quite exspensive. If you don't want to spend all your money on a license, you'll should try NVU. It's of course not as good as Dreamweaver, but it does his job and I think it's a really nice alternative.

-=jeroen=-

Reply

I prefer to use emacs for all my coding projects. It works for C++, Java, JavaScript, HTML, Perl, etc... It provides syntax highlighting for all languages and a plethora of other features like auto indent, split screen, etc... and plus its free. I believe its one of the standard text editors on the unix machines but it has been ported to the windows platform. Very powerful in my opinion.

Reply

HTML Kit is for HTML editing really great, I used Arachnophilia for years and then tried HTML Kit and never went back. HTML kit will not put phamtom characters into your code, and has many plugins for your use.

I also use PHP Designer 2006 for my PHP which has sped up my development of PHP and quck debugging of PHP scripts or snippets.

The built in ftp of HTML kit is great because if I want to edit a page or pages on my site I just download it into the HTML Kit editing window make the changes and PRESTO after reupload it is done. I have had trouble using the ftp feature of PHP Designer, probably because I have not really tried to use it and am used to how HTML kit works.

If you want a full featured HTML editor with quick preview of what you have done then get HTML Kit and also if you want to work with PHP then get PHP Designer also, they are free and small and quite handy without costing you a thing other than diskspace and the time it takes to download and install them.

Reply

You'll need to decide whether you want a text-based editor or a WYSIWYG one. Since you say that you're sick of Notepad (which is a text-based editor), then you might want to go with WYSIWYG. In any case, most WYSIWYG editors also come with source-code editing capabilities, so you should easily be able to switch to a text-based editing style if you want. Sometimes, though, a text-based editor would be more informative and useful if your intent is to learn how to code in HTML.

Just take your pick. =^^=

Text-based editors

• Notepad++ (freeware) features: syntax highlighting, syntax folding
• CSE HTML Validator Lite (freeware) features: syntax highlighting, syntax checking, HTML validation
• HTML-Kit (freeware) (recommended) features: syntax highlighting, syntax checking, HTML validation, active preview, built-in FTP workspace
• WebTide (freeware)

WYSIWYG editors

• Microsoft Frontpage (commercial)
• Macromedia Dreamweaver (commercial)
• Nvu (freeware) (recommended)
• Blaze Composer (freeware)
• Alleycode (freeware)
• Trellian WebPage (freeware)

 

 

 

Reply

This topic is one that can be debated on. Some webmasters say that it is not advisable to use WYSIWYG Editors as a beginner. They may have many reasons to do so . I feel we need not know any language.. I feel that knowing a programming language like H.T.M.L. (Hyper Text Markup Language) is not required to make a website of any caliber.
I myself started designing my first website on a WYSIWYG Editor .In this you can design your page like you are drawing on paper and it will automatically get decoded into H.T.M.L, you can then sit and study the coding and analyse asto what work each code does. The WYSIWYG Editors that I would recomend are Microsoft Frontpage and Macromedia Dreamweaver. These software in colaboraton with other softwares like Macromedia Flash, Macromedia Fireworks and even Microsoft Paint can be used to design ultimate webpages.
After creating this basic part of a webpage extra-ordinary effects can be added by using programming languages like Javascripts, PHP, ASP, CSS and many more...The same way like HTML need not be learnt to make websites so are Javascripts and the other above mentioned languages. Ready made scripts of these languages are available for free in many websites like :
www.wsabstract.com
www.thefreesite.com
and many more search results can be found on Google. At thefreesite.com any begginer will get all the features that are required for his/her website.Also : additional features like guest book, site search, and member's area are also available on various websites like www.bravenet.com and the like. Now let me tell you the importance of know all the above mentioned programming languages .
Firstly, it increases your knowledge on programming .
Secondly, it lets you be independent : you need not depend on other sites for various features.
Thirdly, it lets your site be free from the forced adds that are put by the websites who privide you with this feature. And even if they put adds for other features you can remove it by HTML commands.
Forthly, it lets you to design it according to your means and fancies instead of choosing from one of their pre-designed templates.
The disadvantage is that you spend more time learning instead of designing your website. I have explained to you the advantages and disadvantages of knowing programming languages. For more queries on this issue you can e-mail me at rohanramanath@gmail.com
For your information, I am the Dean of Solutions4u and am presently re-designing my site.
Rohan Ramanath

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would advise you to learn HTML and then your site will rock. Your site will be more detailed as you can give commands to even blend colours. You should know some basic commands like:
<a> - Hyperlink
<HTML> - Start of a page
<BR> - Break Line
<FONT> - Font size and style
<H1> - Header size
<IMG SCR = " "> - To insert an image
<P> - Paragraph
<TABLE> - Table
<TD> - Cell
<TH> - Table Header
<TR> Table Row
<HEAD> - Heading
<FORM> - to create a form
<META> - Meta tags

Reply

I use Evrsoft. It may be a little slow and comes up with a nag screen, but it has lots of feature and I find it does the job quite well.

Reply