What's the best web design application out there??

[NurseRN]

I?m interested in a good, stable, garbage-code free (as much as possible), visually driven interface, web design application. I just want to be able to write quickly (or access/edit already written pages) w/o going through the pain of swimming through HTML code.

Any ideas???

Thanks,

Nurse

 

[Zenmervolt]

Macromedia Dreamweaver is #1. Expensive though.

ZV

 

[payjo]

Yeah gotta go with Dreamweaver MX. It allows for FTP access thus saving you upload/download time. I highly recommend it!

 

[Lars]

Dreamweaver is very good. If you have the extra cash you can also get Fireworks with it to make some nice graphics.

 

[ScottMac]

I like Adobe GoLive! (so far), but I'm fairly new to the GUI web-creation software stuff.

Has the ftp/web upload/download, script support/interfaces, editors, excellent online (F1) and Online (Internet) help, and generates very clean code (IMHO).

So far, I'm likeing it.

FWIW

Scott

 

[NurseRN]

Thanks guys!

N

 

[geoff2k]

Here's another vote for dreamweaver. We tried several different ones before settling on it.

 

[ynotravid]

Dreamweaver.

 

[ojai00]

I vote Dreamweaver also.

 

[Mucman]

For God's sake, please do not use MS FrontPage

 

[sciencewhiz]

Your brain is the best designer out there.

 

[bob332]

another vote for go live, i just work better with it. i have tried dreamweaver, but it doesn't "feel" good. try and d/l the demo for each and make your own decision. the two best are dreamweaver and go live. and go live does have ftp support in also.

 

[Beau]

Dreamweaver MX is very nice. I also like MS Visual InterDEV.

 

[Samsonid]

Guys.... guuuyys.. hold your horses.

Have you tried Namo WebEditor yet?
www.namo.com

When I was evaluating web authoring software (Dreamweaver vs Golive vs FrontPage vs Namo) I felt that Namo had the best price/performance ratio.

At least give it some attention before you decide to go with the commonly known authoring tools.

 

[sciencewhiz]

Originally posted by: Samsonid

When I was evaluating web authoring software (Dreamweaver vs Golive vs FrontPage vs Namo) I felt that Namo had the best price/performance ratio.

Remember that most people here will not pay anything for whatever software package they choose...

 

[dukdukgoos]

TopStyle is good for designing CSS driven sites...

 

[mrbass]

not true ...I had my company buy me Dreamweaver MX (installed it today) from newegg..it was $354...it's worth it. I can only do so much with vi. Mostly just touch up stuff. This is the only software I need. I use open office and freeware for most everything else. In other words some get Office XP Pro OEM for $295 or whatever and I get Dreamweaver MX.

 

[NurseRN]

Sciencewhiz meant something totally different

Thank you guys for all ur help!

N

 

[NurseRN]

Dreamweaver MX is the winner in my book! Tried it and simply loved it!

Thanks again!

N

 

[aircooled]

How much does Dreamweaver MX differ from 4.0? I use 4.0 now...

 

[Rilescat]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Macromedia Dreamweaver is #1. Expensive though.

ZV

Dead On......We use Macromedia Dreamweaver 4.0 UltraDev.....wouldn't use anything else. I am not sure if UltraDev has a MX equivalent yet.

 

[Superwormy]

Dreamweaver, but you should learn to hand code. It's faster and cleaner than any GUI web design app.

 

[NurseRN]

Thank you all for your feedback. A question i have though... What is the difference between Dreamweaver MX and Dreamweaver 4.0 UltraDev?

Tk u

N

 

[paulpaul]

Dreamweaver MX-code is better, cleaner...don't knock 'all' WYSIWYG programs until you get a peek at MX's code. It has FTP built-in, too.

There's not going to be an 'MX-UltraDev'...MX has all the features of UltraDev; ASP etc.

I've used them both, MX has a steeper learning curve than Dreamweaver 4, but is easier to use than UltraDev.

 

[dukdukgoos]

Dreamweaver MX is better than 4, but it still rewrites code now and then. And it doesn't easily create standards-compliant structural markup (although it can be done with extra work). Hand coding using CSS/structural markup is the best solution, but it won't look too good in elderly, non-standards-compliant browsers.