PDA

View Full Version : Amateur web builders wanting a better WYSIWYG editor



L4U
January 8th, 2010, 11:31 PM
I'm an amateur who uses Frontpage to build websites for fun and I'm transitioning to Linux to get as Windows-free as I can. However, I and other amateur web builders who favored amateur-oriented web builders like Frontpage feel that the few WYSIWYG web editors available for Linux just don't quite match up enough to user-friendliness and convenient features found in editors like Frontpage.

I'm starting this thread to campaign to the current Linux WYSIWYG html editor projects to adopt some of the features that made editors like Frontpage a favorite among amateur web builders, such as myself.

I filed a suggestion for this to OpenOffice to improve on their simple html editor app (which many think is the most Frontpage-like web editor), but they declined (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1375432) saying they don't currently have the resources to add additions to their HTML editor.

If you support the idea of this campaign, please voice your support in this thread and also help campaign to the existing Linux web editor projects to add more Frontpage-like features to their editors.

The current true WYSIWYG web editors for Linux that I know of are:

1. KompoZer (http://kompozer.net/) (their community page (http://kompozer.net/community.php))
2. Amaya (http://www.w3.org/Amaya/) (how to contribute (http://www.w3.org/Amaya/Actors.html#contribute1))
3. SeaMonkey (http://www.seamonkey-project.org/) (their support page (http://www.seamonkey-project.org/community#support))
4. OpenOffice Writer/Web (http://www.openoffice.org/) (current aren't interested in expanding their html editor)


Also, list the features in this thread you'd like to see any of the above Linux web editors adopt so others can see what features we liked in editors like Frontpage that the Linux editors don't have, or we couldn't find.



PS - To Frontpage haters, please don't think I'm asking for a Linux WYSIWYG editor to be exactly like Frontpage that produces horrible code and all. I'm just wishes for some of their better features to be adopted.

L4U
January 8th, 2010, 11:47 PM
These are some of the features I really liked on Frontpage:

1. Auto Thumbnails (awesome feature! such a time saver.)
2. Shared Borders (very convenient for my 20+ page website)
3. Drag n Drop images
4. Art editor (great for adding lines, arrows, callouts, etc)

CJ Master
January 9th, 2010, 07:33 AM
While I'd love a free WYSIWYG editor as much as the next guy, your best (and probably only) bet is finding a freelance programmer and paying him to make one.

gsmanners
January 9th, 2010, 08:12 AM
IMHO visual editors are good for web site mock ups, but for a really professional and polished look, nothing really beats hand-tuned HTML.

Frak
January 9th, 2010, 08:47 AM
IMHO visual editors are good for web site mock ups, but for a really professional and polished look, nothing really beats hand-tuned HTML.
I accept your "hand-tuned HTML" and raise you an "It's not difficult to learn".

HappinessNow
January 9th, 2010, 09:13 AM
if you use Firefox try Xinha Here (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1449)!

Redache
January 9th, 2010, 09:21 AM
HTML would take you as long to learn as a WYSIWYG editor and would be cleaner and far more efficient.

Most websites created with WYSIWYG editors are bloated and have horrible compatibility.

In the world of Web 2.0 there are more than enough free tools on the internet if you just want a personal website. For anything more, then you need HTML/XHTML and CSS. There is no alternative to that.

3rdalbum
January 9th, 2010, 10:37 AM
It's all very well to say "just hand-code it", but even professionals use Dreamweaver. In the proper hands it's a very powerful tool, and even in the wrong hands it still works pretty well.

We do desperately need a good WYSIWYG web development program that has an easy learning curve and a lot of power under the bonnet. I'm hoping Google gets involved in writing one (possibly web-based?), because it's The Final Frontier on Linux after video editing. And it makes sense for Google to make a tool for developing web sites. A whole lot of sense when you think about the possibilities.

betrunkenaffe
January 9th, 2010, 11:03 AM
w3schools.com - Learn to hand code it.

Sorry, but anything less is uncivilized.

Nerd King
January 9th, 2010, 11:12 AM
It's all very well to say "just hand-code it", but even professionals use Dreamweaver. In the proper hands it's a very powerful tool, and even in the wrong hands it still works pretty well.

We do desperately need a good WYSIWYG web development program that has an easy learning curve and a lot of power under the bonnet. I'm hoping Google gets involved in writing one (possibly web-based?), because it's The Final Frontier on Linux after video editing. And it makes sense for Google to make a tool for developing web sites. A whole lot of sense when you think about the possibilities.
Tbh I used Dreamweaver when I started, but as I started using more PHP, CSS, javascript, SQL and god knows what else I got to hand-coding and my sites were better for it. Plus, with clever use of CSS you can have any layout you want. Using WYSIWYG tools just doesn't give that level of flexibility without a lot of workarounds and fiddling.

NoaHall
January 9th, 2010, 12:14 PM
It's all very well to say "just hand-code it", but even professionals use Dreamweaver. In the proper hands it's a very powerful tool, and even in the wrong hands it still works pretty well.

We do desperately need a good WYSIWYG web development program that has an easy learning curve and a lot of power under the bonnet. I'm hoping Google gets involved in writing one (possibly web-based?), because it's The Final Frontier on Linux after video editing. And it makes sense for Google to make a tool for developing web sites. A whole lot of sense when you think about the possibilities.

I use the coding side of Dreamweaver, not the "hack it and make it almost pretty but unusable" of it. I never have, never will.

ikt
January 9th, 2010, 01:36 PM
w3schools.com - Learn to hand code it.

Sorry, but anything less is uncivilized.

We make tools to make our lives easier, if a dreamweaver like editor can help a simple site be easier to make than so be it.

If we extend on the premise that doing something by hand is easier than by automation:

Why make an ipod? people can play their music at home on the stereo, after all mp3 is usually lower quality.
Why make an easy to use video editor, people can pay $99999 for adobe professional video suite 9, as the videos that come from easier to use video editors are lower quality.
Why use vBulletin? Lets use mailing lists.

etc

The argument that dreamweaver produces bad code is met with the fact that the majority of websites run non-valid code.. including this one:

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.ubuntu.com/&charset=(detect+automatically)&doctype=Inline&group=0#result

The lack of a decent WYSIWYG just adds another negative point against linux, regardless of how we feel about coding standards and programs.

gsmanners
January 9th, 2010, 04:26 PM
Indeed, the iPod allows people to tune their music preferences by hand, rather than rely on the studio's idea of how music can be presented. It is not easier, but it gives people greater control, which is why people like it.

I think you may be confusing more power and flexibility with "easier" (which are frequently mutually exclusive). For example: Why fly airplanes and drop bombs on the enemy when you can hit them over the head with a stick? Surely the stick is an easier option?

The lack of sophisticated web sites only proves how many sites there are, not whether there is virtue in hand-tuned coding.

Frak
January 9th, 2010, 05:30 PM
It's all very well to say "just hand-code it", but even professionals use Dreamweaver. In the proper hands it's a very powerful tool, and even in the wrong hands it still works pretty well.

We do desperately need a good WYSIWYG web development program that has an easy learning curve and a lot of power under the bonnet. I'm hoping Google gets involved in writing one (possibly web-based?), because it's The Final Frontier on Linux after video editing. And it makes sense for Google to make a tool for developing web sites. A whole lot of sense when you think about the possibilities.
I've seen professionals use Dreamweaver's code editor. It's very good. I've seen professionals use the WSYWIG side, but I haven't seen one that was proud of it.

Personally, Textmate/Coda/Aptana RadRails is all I need.

betrunkenaffe
January 9th, 2010, 06:57 PM
We make tools to make our lives easier, if a dreamweaver like editor can help a simple site be easier to make than so be it.

If we extend on the premise that doing something by hand is easier than by automation:

Why make an ipod? people can play their music at home on the stereo, after all mp3 is usually lower quality.
Why make an easy to use video editor, people can pay $99999 for adobe professional video suite 9, as the videos that come from easier to use video editors are lower quality.
Why use vBulletin? Lets use mailing lists.

etc

The argument that dreamweaver produces bad code is met with the fact that the majority of websites run non-valid code.. including this one:

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.ubuntu.com/&charset=(detect+automatically)&doctype=Inline&group=0#result

The lack of a decent WYSIWYG just adds another negative point against linux, regardless of how we feel about coding standards and programs.

My statement in no way indicated whether one way is easier than another, we aren't talking about the same thing at all.

There is a serious disregard for learning how to do something properly, having the underlying knowledge and being able to apply it within tools. It's the difference between using a tool to make your life easier and being limited by the tool's capabilities.

Personally, for (x)html programming, I use a basic text editor and toss down a basic template and build it up from there. Most sites have the same template based on how it's being oriented. That being said, I'm usually also interweaving it with php code so normally I'd rather have full control over it.

That all being said, your examples are erroneous for the following reasons:

Ipod - Has clear size, capacity and feedback superiority over steroes with same or near same functionality (ff/rw functions slightly differently due to current software limitations)

Video Editor - Adobe is unavailable on Linux.

vBulletin - Using vBulletin in no way prevents you from using mailing lists.

This thread is about amateur web building and WYSIWYG editors, I personally disagree that any amateur would be producing enough websites to warrant this being a complaint on why moving to Linux is a difficulty (the op assertation). For professionals, it's a tool, for amateurs, it's a crutch.

Ms_Angel_D
January 9th, 2010, 07:24 PM
I started out learning to develop websites using frontpage 10 years ago, eventually I switched to dreamweaver, and now I know how to code by hand, but I probably would have never learned had it not been because I had something like frontpage at my disposal.

There is nothing wrong with having an easy interface, for people to start out learning on, for some it can inspire them to go further and learn more, as it did with myself.

I understand everyone's need to "teach" but not every learns things in the same manner.

starcannon
January 9th, 2010, 07:36 PM
I use Dreamweaver 8 through Wine myself, and then go back through with Geany and tune things up. Kompozer is great for basic pages, and will get you some HTML to tweak using Geany as well.

The best way to learn is to get into the HTML/CSS/JS and learn it. A wysiwyg is a tool that can quickly become a crutch(I have fallen for it myself).

I know that sometimes we just want to spit out a page in 30 minutes, and that is doable both hand editing and wysiwyg editing, but great pages take time to create, and they take knowledge of the code that your working with.

Never quit being an Amateur, there is always something new to learn with web design/programming.

I find I learn a lot by looking at the source of other peoples pages, and a wysiwyg can help in that endeavor, but a text editor is imo the proper tool for that sort of thing.

Anyway, I'm not saying we couldn't use a better wysiwyg in the FOSS world, but for now, if one really wants a decent wysiwyg editor, then it may be worth buying Dreamweaver and running it in Wine; that, or build one...

GL and HF

Edit: Frontpage in my opinion is not a good wysiwyg, I'm not bashing MS, I'm simply saying that I think the code it spits out is trash, and the Frontpage extensions are terriible, I think it is better use something else.

Oh, and +1 to this:

I started out learning to develop websites using frontpage 10 years ago, eventually I switched to dreamweaver, and now I know how to code by hand, but I probably would have never learned had it not been because I had something like frontpage at my disposal.

There is nothing wrong with having an easy interface, for people to start out learning on, for some it can inspire them to go further and learn more, as it did with myself.

I understand everyone's need to "teach" but not every learns things in the same manner.

NoaHall
January 9th, 2010, 07:42 PM
I use Dreamweaver 8 through Wine myself, and then go back through with Geany and tune things up. Kompozer is great for basic pages, and will get you some HTML to tweak using Geany as well.

The best way to learn is to get into the HTML/CSS/JS and learn it. A wysiwyg is a tool that can quickly become a crutch(I have fallen for it myself).

I know that sometimes we just want to spit out a page in 30 minutes, and that is doable both hand editing and wysiwyg editing, but great pages take time to create, and they take knowledge of the code that your working with.

Never quit being an Amateur, there is always something new to learn with web design/programming.

I find I learn a lot by looking at the source of other peoples pages, and a wysiwyg can help in that endeavor, but a text editor is imo the proper tool for that sort of thing.

Anyway, I'm not saying we couldn't use a better wysiwyg in the FOSS world, but for now, if one really wants a decent wysiwyg editor, then it may be worth buying Dreamweaver and running it in Wine; that, or build one...

GL and HF

Edit: Frontpage in my opinion is not a good wysiwyg, I'm not bashing MS, I'm simply saying that I think the code it spits out is trash, and the Frontpage extensions are terriible, I think it is better use something else.

Oh, and +1 to this:

It's because Frontpage's code is optimized for IE.

betrunkenaffe
January 9th, 2010, 07:55 PM
It's because Frontpage's code is optimized for IE.

Really? That is scary because that means IE is optimized to read trash....

Frak
January 9th, 2010, 08:05 PM
Really? That is scary because that means IE is optimized to read trash....
Ding ding ding, we have a winnar!

NoaHall
January 9th, 2010, 08:11 PM
Really? That is scary because that means IE is optimized to read trash....

What? You expected Microsoft to make a website design application which made code vaild by the w3c but not by IE? Yeah, like they were ever going to do that.

L4U
January 9th, 2010, 09:04 PM
It's all very well to say "just hand-code it", but even professionals use Dreamweaver. In the proper hands it's a very powerful tool, and even in the wrong hands it still works pretty well.

We do desperately need a good WYSIWYG web development program that has an easy learning curve and a lot of power under the bonnet. I'm hoping Google gets involved in writing one (possibly web-based?), because it's The Final Frontier on Linux after video editing.
+1

(except for the Google part. ;) )

L4U
January 9th, 2010, 09:13 PM
I get the sense that a lot of experienced html editors here on Linux fear an easy-to-use feature-rich WYSIWYG web editor for Linux. Why is that?

NoaHall
January 9th, 2010, 09:19 PM
I get the sense that a lot of experienced html editors here on Linux fear an easy-to-use feature-rich WYSIWYG web editor for Linux. Why is that?

Fear? No. Dislike? Yes. They are worthless(in the sense you can't do further things with them) and a lazy way of doing things.

starcannon
January 9th, 2010, 09:22 PM
I get the sense that a lot of experienced html editors here on Linux fear an easy-to-use feature-rich WYSIWYG web editor for Linux. Why is that?
I don't think it's a "fear of", I think it's more of trying to give good advice. It is true that knowing how to write a page using a text editor WILL make one a better web developer; and it is true that a wysiwyg when abused will ruin a website.

I think most of us who build web pages, would like a nice wysiwyg; but at the same time, we already have tools that we use, and I have personally recommended Dreamweaver 8 using Wine(I can't speak of later versions, because I can't afford to upgrade).

So, like I said, I don't think anyone is afraid of having a nice native client(so imo there is no why), but it's more of a no one is interested in stopping what they are doing to help make one. I think Kompozer could end up being very good, it certainly has all the basic features that one could wan't, it just needs to keep on maturing.

Just my .02

L4U
January 9th, 2010, 09:30 PM
They are worthless and a lazy way of doing things.
What an elitist response.

So I guess you use a type writer to type a letter instead of a using an easy convenient and lazy computer with an easy convenient and lazy word process app like OpenOffice, right?

Or maybe a type writer is too modern and lazy for you and you write letters the really old fashion way of pen and paper?

Twitch6000
January 9th, 2010, 09:35 PM
I accept your "hand-tuned HTML" and raise you an "It's not difficult to learn".

I see your "It's not difficult to learn" hand and raise a learning some CSS is even easier.

Anyways Linux does lack a decent WYSIWUG editor,but I hear Dreamweaver CS works fine for most. If you want a Linux Native one Seamonkey is probably best.

L4U
January 9th, 2010, 09:36 PM
I don't think it's a "fear of", I think it's more of trying to give good advice. It is true that knowing how to write a page using a text editor WILL make one a better web developer; and it is true that a wysiwyg when abused will ruin a website.
I had a 20+ page website of simple .html pages using nothing but Frontpage to create it and I never had a problem with my pages and never had someone email and say my pages were coded bad.

NoaHall
January 9th, 2010, 09:36 PM
What an elitist response.

So I guess you use a type writer to type a letter instead of a using an easy convenient and lazy computer with an easy convenient and lazy word process app like OpenOffice, right?

Or maybe a type writer is too modern and lazy for you and you write letters the really old fashion way of pen and paper?

Are you trying to claim that a WYSIWYG is better than coding it yourself? I have one thing to say to that : I bitterly disagree.

betrunkenaffe
January 9th, 2010, 09:42 PM
What an elitist response.


And with that showing the thread direction.

/thread

orlox
January 9th, 2010, 09:57 PM
What an elitist response.

So I guess you use a type writer to type a letter instead of a using an easy convenient and lazy computer with an easy convenient and lazy word process app like OpenOffice, right?

Or maybe a type writer is too modern and lazy for you and you write letters the really old fashion way of pen and paper?

I think you're missing the point. The general view is that WYSIWYG editors for web are not an easier tool. If you try to get to any level of refinement on a web-site, learning to do that in a WYSIWYG editor is as hard as learning basic HTML.

I know it, cause I have experienced it. A long time ago I used dreamweaver for a good time, only using the WYSIWYG part, and I never got anywhere decent unless I did a lot of work. At the moment I thought that was the easy way, but after learning a bit of html, I could immediately notice that it was actually the hard way to do it...

So I think your analogy is just a reduction to the absurd...

Exodist
January 9th, 2010, 10:10 PM
IMHO most of the WYSIWYG editors (NVU-now->Kompozer and Amaya) for Linux are pretty basic. They are excellent for helping you get the site started and layed out. They are also not big on bloat as Frontpage was. But they also dont add a lot of features and stuff that you got by point and click like frontpage. My suggestion is use w3's page that is packed full of tutorials and learn to add your own tweaks and changes in.

So basicly your not jumping head in on HTML learning, but just enough at a time you will learn it in time.

L4U
January 9th, 2010, 10:21 PM
Anyways Linux does lack a decent WYSIWUG editor,but I hear Dreamweaver CS works fine for most.
I did load up DW 8 under Wine and it seemed stable, but Win apps under Wine just don't look good. Makes the graphics and fonts look lousy.

Plus DW was too much of an advanced WYSIWYG editor for this amateur. Too many bells and whistles for my taste. Frontpage was the right balance for me.

I actually was able to install Frontpage Pro under Wine, but it was too unstable and crashed all the time and also looked lousy under Wine.

I have a dual boot with Win XP, so running Win apps under wine is a little redundant for me.

L4U
January 9th, 2010, 10:25 PM
Are you trying to claim that a WYSIWYG is better than coding it yourself?
Where did you ever see me say that?

I never even claimed Frontpage produced great code. I just think it had great easy and time-saving features for amateurs like me that I wish could be incorporated into some Linux web editors, hence the point of this thread.

L4U
January 9th, 2010, 10:27 PM
I think you're missing the point. The general view is that WYSIWYG editors for web are not an easier tool. If you try to get to any level of refinement on a web-site, learning to do that in a WYSIWYG editor is as hard as learning basic HTML.
You are missing the point of this thread:

"Amateur web builders wanting..."

CharmyBee
January 9th, 2010, 10:29 PM
Kompozer is the best WYSIWYG editor I know of. There used to be a whole mess of these in the late '90s for Windows when subjecting to CSS and w3 "standards" elitism wasn't a big concern. Even if you made a page for yourself and others to enjoy, you will still get hounded by standards critics anyway even if it does look as intended in the browser youuse.

NoaHall
January 9th, 2010, 10:30 PM
Where did you ever see me say that?

I never even claimed Frontpage produced great code. I just think it had great easy and time-saving features for amateurs like me that I wish could be incorporated into some Linux web editors, hence the point of this thread.

It's faster, better and easier to do it html wise. Trust me, and the others :)
Once you make one, you can easily apply it again and again.

L4U
January 9th, 2010, 10:40 PM
It's faster, better and easier to do it html wise. Trust me, and the others :)
One you make one, you can easily reply it again and again.
Don't get me wrong, I understand your good intentions, but you got to understand that most computer users are not very computer-literate and/or too busy (or too lazy) to learn how to code.

Maybe in due time, but I'm more of a computer user than a computer tweaker.

Think of it like a cyclist who likes to bike a lot, but either has no mechanical skills or time to tune-up their bike and would just prefer to take it to a bike shop for a tune-up. I'm sure the bike shop owners don't mind. ;)

hessiess
January 9th, 2010, 11:07 PM
Frontpage(ugh)? That thing produces terrible HTML.

Use A CMS and store all the content in a database. Static HTML websites, even small ones are an absolute nightmare to maintain because threes a lot of code duplication, even with CSS. HTML has no include statement or macro functionality on its own which massively helps to reduce duplication.

With a CMS based website you have a single HTML template that the content gets filled with content from a database by a server side program.

The whole WYSIWYG paradigm is fundamentally flawed because it requires that all styling be in lined. WYSIWYM (what you see is what you mean) on the other hand is a vastly superior model and is what HTML is based around. Instead of defining the look of everything, you define the meaning of sections of a document (paragraphs, headers etc) and separately define visual styles for those. Thus if you want to change the look of something, you only ever have to change ONE thing.

I have completely discarded word processors and write using HTML for electronic documents and LaTeX for print, its a much better way to manage documents.

phrostbyte
January 9th, 2010, 11:22 PM
Why not just use a CMS like Drupal? It has a WYSIWYG interface to editing pages and your website will actually look professional and use CSS and the like, and also be interactive in many ways. You do not need to know HTML to have a nice looking website with a good CMS.

L4U
January 9th, 2010, 11:25 PM
Frontpage(ugh)? That thing produces terrible HTML.
Yeah, I know. That's not what I want from Frontpage.


Use A CMS and store all the content in a database. Static HTML websites, even small ones are an absolute nightmare to maintain because threes a lot of code duplication, even with CSS. HTML has no include statement or macro functionality on its own which massively helps to reduce duplication.

With a CMS based website you have a single HTML template that the content gets filled with content from a database by a server side program.
You might as well have written that in French, hence the title "Amateur web builders..."

phrostbyte
January 9th, 2010, 11:26 PM
Yeah, I know. That's not what I want from Frontpage.


You might as well have written that in French, hence the title "Amateur web builders..."

http://drupal.org/

hessiess
January 9th, 2010, 11:41 PM
As above, look into Dropal, Joomla and Wordpress(by no means an exhaustive list).


You might as well have written that in French, hence the title "Amateur web builders..."

The word `Amateur' means `without professional training' or `not professional/not making a living from it', It does not necessarily mean `inexperienced' or `at a beginner level'. I am an amateur web developer and 3D artist, and have bean writing HTML/CSS/PHP by hand since I started learning web design/development.

starcannon
January 9th, 2010, 11:43 PM
The word `Amateur' means `without professional training' or `not professional/not making a living from it', It does not necessarily mean `inexperienced' or `at a beginner level'. I am an amateur web developer and 3D artist, and have bean writing HTML/CSS/PHP by hand since I started learning web design/development.
Good call, though "benefit of the doubt rule" applies here, and his implied meaning of "inexperienced" was quite evident.

Dragonbite
January 10th, 2010, 04:15 AM
What an elitist response.

So I guess you use a type writer to type a letter instead of a using an easy convenient and lazy computer with an easy convenient and lazy word process app like OpenOffice, right?

Or maybe a type writer is too modern and lazy for you and you write letters the really old fashion way of pen and paper?

that's nothing.. try ink and a quill! ;)


Use A CMS and store all the content in a database.


Why not just use a CMS like Drupal?

CMS's like Drupal are a good option, but to really get your site the way you like it you need to tweak the theme and I don't think there is a WYSIWYG for that. So you end up hand-coding it in the end.

Now, if there was an easy, WYSIWYG, Frontpage-easy to arrange, line-up, color/embed images and setting up sections then I'm all for it!

For those that don't know Content Management Systems, they are practically drop-in, usually PHP pages and database that includes an interface to provide content, and the placement/design is left to the theme so that adding content is very easy and the style is consistent across the website.

Cope57
January 10th, 2010, 04:44 AM
Netscape / Mozilla (http://www.mozilla.org/editor/) Composer.
Openoffice (http://www.openoffice.org/) HTML editor.
Amaya (http://www.w3.org/Amaya/).
GINF (http://ginf.sourceforge.net/) (Ginf is not Frontpage)
JXHTMLEDIT (http://www.tecnick.com/public/code/cp_dpage.php?aiocp_dp=jxhtmledit) (Java).

betrunkenaffe
January 10th, 2010, 05:19 AM
As above, look into Dropal, Joomla and Wordpress(by no means an exhaustive list).



The word `Amateur' means `without professional training' or `not professional/not making a living from it', It does not necessarily mean `inexperienced' or `at a beginner level'. I am an amateur web developer and 3D artist, and have bean writing HTML/CSS/PHP by hand since I started learning web design/development.

Refute time: amateur means you are not making a living from it/getting pay from it. If you are paid for it, then you are doing it professionally, even if you do an amateurish job :P Technically you can have training and still be an amateur.

am⋅a⋅teur
  /ˈæməˌtʃʊər, -tʃər, -tər, ˌæməˈtɜr/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [am-uh-choor, -cher, -ter, am-uh-tur] Show IPA
Use amateur in a Sentence
See web results for amateur
See images of amateur
–noun
1. a person who engages in a study, sport, or other activity for pleasure rather than for financial benefit or professional reasons. Compare professional.
2. an athlete who has never competed for payment or for a monetary prize.
3. a person inexperienced or unskilled in a particular activity: Hunting lions is not for amateurs.
4. a person who admires something; devotee; fan: an amateur of the cinema.

betrunkenaffe
January 10th, 2010, 05:20 AM
So to summarize L4U's points:

He would like Frontpage for Linux.

ikt
January 10th, 2010, 12:40 PM
Video Editor - Adobe is unavailable on Linux.

Yes, and it along with dreamweaver make up reasons why people don't use linux...


vBulletin - Using vBulletin in no way prevents you from using mailing lists.

Neither does using dreamweaver, in fact it may even help people get into coding..


This thread is about amateur web building and WYSIWYG editors, I personally disagree that any amateur would be producing enough websites to warrant this being a complaint on why moving to Linux is a difficulty (the op assertation).

http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS2756049592.html


Adobe Photoshop, Autocad, and Macromedia Dreamweaver continue to run 1-2-3 in the balloting, according to the online survey currently in progress on Novell's CoolSolutions community website.

You can disagree, but the numbers speak for themselves..

sdowney717
January 10th, 2010, 12:49 PM
http://modxcms.com/
http://wiki.modxcms.com/index.php/Installation_Guide
ModX looks interesting
some possibilities I found are
Expression Engine, Silverstripe, typolight, CMS made simple

L4U
January 10th, 2010, 08:57 PM
Netscape / Mozilla (http://www.mozilla.org/editor/) Composer.
Amaya (http://www.w3.org/Amaya/)
These, along with KompoZer, all seemed virtually the same.


Openoffice (http://www.openoffice.org/) HTML editor.
The most like Frontpage IMO, bot OOo just said they don't have any resourses right now to make improvements to OOWeb.


GINF (http://ginf.sourceforge.net/) (Ginf is not Frontpage)
Too old. Doesn't work anymore. I tried to (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1373147).


JXHTMLEDIT (http://www.tecnick.com/public/code/cp_dpage.php?aiocp_dp=jxhtmledit) (Java).

Never heard of this one. Is it Linux compatible?

NoaHall
January 10th, 2010, 08:59 PM
Never heard of this one. Is it Linux compatible?

Yes.

L4U
January 10th, 2010, 09:35 PM
3. a person inexperienced or unskilled in a particular activity

I hope it was obvious to everyone it was this.

geoken
January 11th, 2010, 12:53 AM
I have to agree with the people talking about CMSes.

IMO, the rise of great CMSes is what killed off the amateur WYSIWYG user. There is simply no need for them anymore. The niche of people who for some reason don't want to use a CMS+great theme and also don't want to learn HTML+CSS is probably too small.

I think most people could probably get a usable grasp of HTML+CSS, to the point were you could at least match the capabilities of most WYSIWYG's, in about a week.

NoaHall
January 11th, 2010, 01:33 AM
I have to agree with the people talking about CMSes.

IMO, the rise of great CMSes is what killed off the amateur WYSIWYG user. There is simply no need for them anymore. The niche of people who for some reason don't want to use a CMS+great theme and also don't want to learn HTML+CSS is probably too small.

I think most people could probably get a usable grasp of HTML+CSS, to the point were you could at least match the capabilities of most WYSIWYG's, in about a week.

It took me a hour for html and half a hour for CSS.

k64
January 11th, 2010, 01:49 AM
What would be even better is a WYSIWYG Cloud editor. In other words: a WYSIWYG editor that can run from the Web - and be able to write HTML 5, besides being written in HTML 5 itself.

Dragonbite
January 11th, 2010, 02:54 AM
What would be even better is a WYSIWYG Cloud editor. In other words: a WYSIWYG editor that can run from the Web - and be able to write HTML 5, besides being written in HTML 5 itself.

Maybe Mozilla Bespin will eventually become a WYSIWYG. It already is a stab a cloud-based IDEs.

hoppipolla
January 11th, 2010, 03:02 AM
I use Kompozer because it's simple and flexible, and I use text editors like Kate a lot too for working on my site, but then my sites don't tend to be too complex in a way that having a more powerful editor would aid their development.

I have a lot of sites and they all have different focuses, but yeah I haven't needed a really powerful editor in years.

I would say that it's between Kompozer, Quanta+ and Amaya, although I'll admit that Dreamweaver owns them hands down, but then is very complex and costs hundreds of dollars. It also probably runs in Wine with some persuasion (I've never tried), and it's things like this which is why I still dual boot :)

Specialist software still tends to be better closed source right now, IMO.


EDIT -- and yeah maybe openoffice... is it any good for web editing? :)

lykwydchykyn
January 11th, 2010, 03:37 AM
It doesn't really matter whether or not WYSIWYG editors are better, worse, evil, good, for noobs, for pros, whatever. They exist, and where they exist people seem to want them. So it's worthwhile for one to exist even if it's not the preferred way of creating a web page (for the record, I code HTML/CSS/PHP/etc. by hand in emacs).

That said, starting a "campaign" to have one written is silly. REALITY: major FOSS projects rarely succeed and reach maturity motivated solely by the purpose of making Linux more accessible to newbies and "average users". People write and maintain major FOSS applications for two reasons:

- Because the contributors have a personal or business need for a certain type of software (see GIMP/cinepaint/apache/Linux kernel)
- Because doing so is part of a larger business plan for a sponsoring company (see MySQL/OpenOffice.org/QT)

For a WYSIWYG HTML editor, you can rule out the first motivation; a person possessing the requisite knowledge to code such a program has no need or interest for a WYSIWYG, which as you can see here are largely panned by people who know even rudimentary HTML and CSS.

So you're probably looking more at the second scenario. Nvu, for example, was originally funded by Linspire and developed by a coder they employed. Presumably its existence made the Linspire product more interesting to consumers.

In any case, a campaign isn't going to get anywhere.

orlox
January 11th, 2010, 04:09 AM
Maybe Mozilla Bespin will eventually become a WYSIWYG. It already is a stab a cloud-based IDEs.

Not probable...From the bespin page:


Code in the cloud
Bespin proposes an open extensible web-based framework for code editing that aims to increase developer productivity, enable compelling user experiences, and promote the use of open standards.

I don't think something aimed for general code editing (though I believe they promote it a lot for web development) will ever become a WYSIWYG editor. Since it's meant mostly for collaborative work, I doubt they put some work on a very amateur feature like that, and to get a decent WYSIWYG editor you need A LOT of work...

kilosan
January 11th, 2010, 05:01 AM
most user i know would just use a blog account to make their webpages.

though im fine with Kompozer. now that they added repository builds for latest ubuntu so it wont suffer the 0.7 gnome crashes anymore, during those gnome crushes i used to use sea monkey.

i think forcing people to know html is like saying that you learn the terminal.

Mornedhel
January 11th, 2010, 06:12 AM
i think forcing people to know html is like saying that you learn the terminal.

Well...

They want to design a web site, they learn HTML. They want to administrate a Linux machine, they learn the terminal.

They want to use preexisting templates, they learn to click around. They want to run the machine and not administrate it, they learn to click around.

The only other option is taking the web site to a professional designer/taking the machine to a computer shop.

All three options (learning, copypasting, and having a professional do it) are fine as long as you don't mix them (don't administrate a machine by clicking around).

betrunkenaffe
January 11th, 2010, 06:52 AM
Yes, and it along with dreamweaver make up reasons why people don't use linux...

You can disagree, but the numbers speak for themselves..

Quoting Starcannon in this thread: I use Dreamweaver 8 through Wine myself, and then go back through with Geany and tune things up. Kompozer is great for basic pages, and will get you some HTML to tweak using Geany as well.

Since Dreamweaver works through wine (no, I haven't tested it for fairly obvious reasons), I stand behind my statement.

ikt
January 11th, 2010, 07:39 AM
Since Dreamweaver works through wine (no, I haven't tested it for fairly obvious reasons), I stand behind my statement.

rofl, do you think playing WoW through wine = world of warcraft is playable on linux as well?

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18110

And the sad fact is this is probably as close as linux is going to get to a good editor as well..

Wine is a band aid, not a solution.

ade234uk
January 11th, 2010, 09:37 AM
I use Dreamweaver 9 using Wine and have no issues whatsoever. However It is still beyind me after using Ubuntu for the last 2 years why there is still no quality WYSIWYG editor in Linux. I have bought myself up on Dreamweaver and anything else seems rubbish. Also lazyness on my part too for not learning to code the hard way. Its probably quite satisfying to know you dont need to rely on thing like Dreamweaver to create a webpage.

I just like the flexibility that Dreamweaver gives me with the php tags and other stuff.

tom66
January 11th, 2010, 09:55 AM
Try Seamonkey. It's Netscape Navigator for 2009. I think it had a HTML editor in it. Plus you can preview it while you're editing it. It's based on the Gecko engine.

(I hand code all my HTML in gedit. The main reason for this is because it gives me more control, and it is easier to embed PHP, JavaScript and other languages in it. All the other editors I've found mess up PHP code.)

starcannon
January 11th, 2010, 10:49 AM
rofl, do you think playing WoW through wine = world of warcraft is playable on linux as well?

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18110

And the sad fact is this is probably as close as linux is going to get to a good editor as well..

Wine is a band aid, not a solution.

I run Dreamweaver 8 without issue through Wine. It is speedy, and perfect. I realize that some people have issues, but not all of us do. That said, Wine is both a valid solution, and a band aid; until we get native versions of this software, I find it to be a very apt way of running the few Windows Programs I deem necessary.

For me I have been able to use Wine on MS Office and Dreamweaver for quite some time now, and not "kinda working" but full on working, no problems. Thats my personal anecdotal experience, and I could make a youtube video or something if I am expected to show evidence.

GL and use what works for you, for me it's GNU/Linux of the Ubuntu variant.

P.S. I think were discussing productivity software of a particular sort at the moment, not a graphics intensive 3D game, which by the way using wine, happens to be very playable given the right system specifications. I will say thought that my productivity software requires no messing around on my part to get working(other than adding the winehq repositories so that I can have the latest stable version).

Dragonbite
January 11th, 2010, 03:15 PM
I must be missing out on something.. I've never used Dreamweaver.

I went from FrontPage 2000 -> 2003 (for ASP) to Visual Studio (for ASP.NET).

While it may be considerably heavier than the mentioned stand-alone applications, Netbeans is supposed to have a PHP module and it has a GUI builder for Java. I don't know the PHP module includes any part of the GUI building tools though.

whiskeylover
January 11th, 2010, 03:21 PM
Dreamweaver is an amazing tool for web design. IMO, it produces the cleanest and the most compliant code than any other WYSIWYG HTML tool.

Saying that web developers should code raw HTML is like saying that statisticians should use an abacus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abacus) instead of a calculator.

dmizer
January 11th, 2010, 04:09 PM
Why not just use a CMS like Drupal? It has a WYSIWYG interface to editing pages and your website will actually look professional and use CSS and the like, and also be interactive in many ways. You do not need to know HTML to have a nice looking website with a good CMS.

I agree, I think the best solution to this problem is to move beyond the constraints of your basic, and fundamentally flawed HTML WYSISWYG editor. And a CMS like Drupal has a team of coders behind it, keeping it safe and easy to use.

That said, about 5 years ago I got so frustrated trying to learn how to get things looking right in Drupal that I finally just downloaded a basic CSS/xhtml template (http://www.alphastudio.pl/szablony-xhtml/1) and plugged in "Cutenews (http://cutephp.com/)". Super simple, super easy, and I didn't have to know squat about code. Took 10 minutes to get my site looking exactly the way I wanted it.

Sometimes knowing that something is inadequate and inferior (even if it is easy) can motivate you to look for better and sometimes easier alternatives. So, while I understand the motivation for wanting a WYSIWYG editor (I still know very little about HTML, and almost nothing about PHP and CSS), I also somewhat agree with those who have indicated that they think the desire is misguided.

ryaxnb
January 12th, 2010, 12:04 AM
hi all. My opinion on this topic is that Frontpage is the absolute worst example of a WYSIWYG editor you could pick, L4U. Even MS agrees; it's been replaced with Expression Web. Dreamweaver is the perfect amateur and pro HTML WYSIWYG editor, and works well in wine, even CS4 with some tricks. Dreamweaver 8 works excellent. Progress is being made on getting CS4 running on Wine, but few will work on Frontpage in wine, as it isn't developed any more :).
Kompozer is definetely the best WYSIWYG free-software editor. However, all of them are somewhat more limited than dreamweaver. I recommend supporting Kompozer First and Foremost!

J V
January 12th, 2010, 12:10 AM
w3schools.com - Learn to hand code it.

Sorry, but anything less is uncivilized.Hear, hear!

ikt
January 13th, 2010, 04:28 PM
I also somewhat agree with those who have indicated that they think the desire is misguided.

That is the thing, I don't really care that it is misguided, my impression is that if I want a wysiwyg editior, I want to find one, instead I was linked to the likes of komposer.. definitely a sour taste I remember coming to ubuntu.

thatguruguy
January 13th, 2010, 04:41 PM
Ubuntu isn't for everyone. It's not a free version of Windows. I think that a willingness to use any Linux-based OS implies (or should imply) a willingness to learn how to do things for oneself. I use Ubuntu because Windows is bloated and prone to certain problems intrinsic in the OS. Back when I wrote html code for a living, I used a text-based html editor (HomeSite) for the same reason. Moreover, my biggest client at the time (a Fortune 50 company) didn't want unnecessarily bloated code, because bandwidth costs money.

Although I realize YMMV.

dmizer
January 14th, 2010, 02:29 AM
That is the thing, I don't really care that it is misguided, my impression is that if I want a wysiwyg editior, I want to find one, instead I was linked to the likes of komposer.. definitely a sour taste I remember coming to ubuntu.
Keep in mind, I did say that I "somewhat (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=8646844#post8646844)" agree.

As I said in my post, I understand this thinking. I've been there. The thing I'm trying to say is not that users shouldn't be looking for a WYSIWYG editor, I'm saying that they should keep their mind open to other alternatives which (as in this case) may be better in the long run anyway.

New Linux users who want/demand "Windows program Y = Linux program X" or even "Windows function Y = Linux function X" are rarely going to be satisfied.

MasterNetra
January 14th, 2010, 04:58 AM
HTML would take you as long to learn as a WYSIWYG editor and would be cleaner and far more efficient.

Most websites created with WYSIWYG editors are bloated and have horrible compatibility...

Well That could also be attributed to the designer. I've created a site before that functioned perfectly in all the browsers and I used Dreamweaver CS3 to make it. So don't blame the tool! Blame the user! Its like claiming a hammer is a safety hazard because you accidently hit your thumb with it.

Ms_Angel_D
January 14th, 2010, 01:32 PM
I don't understand Why this even has to be a discussion? The OP and many others around these forums, didn't ask for advice on anything they only expressed their desire to use a tool that makes things easier for themselves, and yet somehow this has turned into a 2 page discussion on how people should be "willing to learn" to do things themselves.

Not everyone has the time want or desire to Learn something new all the time, some people are hobbyist and just want a simple tool to do help them with their hobby. It's great if you know how and had the desire to learn to code by hand, but not everybody wants to go this far.

I use Linux I love Linux, but I don't have the desire to learn to write a kernel from the ground up someday, I use it because it works and is stable.

There is no reason why a tool couldn't and shouldn't be made to fill this gap, quanta is part of the way there if it had a few more developers to bring it up to date it could be an awesome Dreamweaver replacement tool, unfortunately because it's suffering currently from lack of developers it's not quite there yet.

Not to insult anybody as most of you I have read your posts before and I'm familiar with your posting style So I know your not, but to any outsider reading this thread all of you who are saying "Learn to code by hand" sound a bit on the elitist side. Not everyone wants to learn to code by hand. But sometimes the tools that make it easy do encourage some to learn more.

To be quite honest Dreamweaver is an awesome tool, I've used it to design templates in the past for various CMS's, build websites from the ground up, script hacking and in numerous other cases. It does not create bloated code and can be quite a handy tool.

samh785
January 14th, 2010, 02:02 PM
I accept your "hand-tuned HTML" and raise you an "It's not difficult to learn".
Yeah, I learned how to do it in a few weeks. It's really a rewarding experience to just type text and see it manifest itself as a webpage.

Back on topic however, I would love to see a WYSIWYG editor for linux that could compete with dreamweaver. So many people design websites in a visual fashion that it would be a real boon for our community to have a good program to offer these people if they transition to a linux desktop.

Dragonbite
January 14th, 2010, 02:54 PM
Even working with Drupal, when I am trying to make a Page or Story, and I want to make it look nice I found going to Kompozer to lay it out easily and drag the image to the left.. to the right... what about resizing... try a bigger font... try a smaller font... etc. Then I took that code and put it into the Drupal field or at least look at whether images use "float" or "align" so I could write it correctly.

I like using the WYSIWYG to move things around and change them until it looks the way I like. Then I can tweak it by hand.

ikt
January 14th, 2010, 07:15 PM
New Linux users who want/demand "Windows program Y = Linux program X" or even "Windows function Y = Linux function X" are rarely going to be satisfied.

But I don't think we're after a dreamweaver clone, I think most people are just expressing disappointment with what we've got when it comes to WYSIWYG editors on linux period, same with video editors.. and photo editors.. and music editors.. and flash performance (http://ikt.id.au/?p=5) etc.

Ms_Angel_D
January 14th, 2010, 07:44 PM
But I don't think we're after a dreamweaver clone, I think most people are just expressing disappointment with what we've got when it comes to WYSIWYG editors on linux period, same with video editors.. and photo editors.. and music editors.. and flash performance (http://ikt.id.au/?p=5) etc.

+1

I agree with this, I don't want Dreamweaver for linux, I want a WYSIWYG editor on Linux that will do more than what the current offerings can. Something that can do some of the following would be nice and Yes some Ideas are inspired by dreamweaver.

Database Connectivity for mysql, postgresql
ability to set up a testing server.
Remote FTP/SSH file browsing
Works with Html, PHP, CSS, Python, Ruby, ASP, Java, Javascript, JSP, C#, ASP.net etc..etc..etc..
Split view (ie code/design viewable at the same time)
Extendability via Plugins
Easy to insert common items (tables, lists, pictures, Form items.
Ability to create and save Templates
Built in CVS management
Built in Terminal integration


Quanta is so close to being all this, it just needs developers to help bring it up, because as it stands right now half the plugins do not work with kde 4, as well a few of the items I listed above are missing.

|{urse
January 14th, 2010, 08:12 PM
I've never used WYSIWYG html editors. Here's what i do when i do quick visual html editing. I'm just going to assume that you are smart developers and have your windows xp and OSX virtual machines up and running a bunch of web-browsers also for testing.

1. you open index.html or what the hey ever you use w/ a text editor

2. then you open index.html with a web browser or 4.

3. You code and paste and edit stuff in the text editor.

4. you hit refresh on the browser to see the changes you made.

5. you FTP it up when things look right.

#-o

NoaHall
January 14th, 2010, 08:17 PM
I use Opera for quick html editing - it lets you edit it from the browser.

|{urse
January 14th, 2010, 08:22 PM
Isn't opera amazing? That browser is like a swiss army knife.

Dragonbite
January 14th, 2010, 08:31 PM
I use Opera for quick html editing - it lets you edit it from the browser.

Is that a widget, or feature built in, or what do you use fro quick html editing?

NoaHall
January 14th, 2010, 08:39 PM
Is that a widget, or feature built in, or what do you use fro quick html editing?

It's a built in feature. For example, for one of the sites I'm working on, I open the html file with Opera, then click "view source", and I then get this (see attachment). I can click "apply" to apply to the page in the web browser, or to save, to make a permanent change to the file in my local documents. Then sync with my server, and there we go.

There is also dragonfly(which is GREAT), which looks like(see second attachment). Notice how it highlights certain objects in the browser, as to do with <div>s and <h1> etc. When you click on a object(text, background, button), it takes you to the code which is for that button. To get to dragonfly, which is also built in -> Tools -> Advance -> Developer Tools
To change the site, open a new site in a tab, then click the dragonfly icon.

Mornedhel
January 14th, 2010, 08:57 PM
+1

I agree with this, I don't want Dreamweaver for linux, I want a WYSIWYG editor on Linux that will do more than what the current offerings can. Something that can do some of the following would be nice and Yes some Ideas are inspired by dreamweaver.

Database Connectivity for mysql, postgresql
ability to set up a testing server.
Remote FTP/SSH file browsing
Works with Html, PHP, CSS, Python, Ruby, ASP, Java, Javascript, JSP, C#, ASP.net etc..etc..etc..
Split view (ie code/design viewable at the same time)
Extendability via Plugins
Easy to insert common items (tables, lists, pictures, Form items.
Ability to create and save Templates
Built in CVS management
Built in Terminal integration


Quanta is so close to being all this, it just needs developers to help bring it up, because as it stands right now half the plugins do not work with kde 4, as well a few of the items I listed above are missing.

Heh, Emacs has all this, except the first two items (which you should really manage yourself anyway), and obviously it isn't WYSIWYG.

Emacs rules.

Sorry, carry on.

Dragonbite
January 14th, 2010, 09:12 PM
It's a built in feature. For example, for one of the sites I'm working on, I open the html file with Opera, then click "view source", and I then get this (see attachment). I can click "apply" to apply to the page in the web browser, or to save, to make a permanent change to the file in my local documents. Then sync with my server, and there we go.

There is also dragonfly(which is GREAT), which looks like(see second attachment). Notice how it highlights certain objects in the browser, as to do with <div>s and <h1> etc. When you click on a object(text, background, button), it takes you to the code which is for that button. To get to dragonfly, which is also built in -> Tools -> Advance -> Developer Tools
To change the site, open a new site in a tab, then click the dragonfly icon.

Does dragonfly allow you to make changes and "apply" or preview it?

NoaHall
January 14th, 2010, 09:13 PM
Does dragonfly allow you to make changes and "apply" or preview it?

Yes, it changes it while you're editing it.

fatality_uk
January 14th, 2010, 09:16 PM
But I don't think we're after a dreamweaver clone

I'd personally love a DreamWeaver clone. It's a fantastic application.

geoken
January 16th, 2010, 09:37 AM
Not everyone has the time want or desire to Learn something new all the time, some people are hobbyist and just want a simple tool to do help them with their hobby. It's great if you know how and had the desire to learn to code by hand, but not everybody wants to go this far.


I agree not everyone has the time. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending who you are) CMSes have satisfied a large group of people who 'just wanted to get something out there'.

I think WYSIWYG's were more popular in the past because they were the fastest route to get your voice out there for people who didn't have the time/desire to code. I think with CMSes becoming more advanced a large portion of previous WYSIWYG users have migrated to them and the market for people still wanting to use those apps (for the reasons you listed above) has shrunk considerably.

Paqman
January 16th, 2010, 10:53 AM
Fear? No. Dislike? Yes. They are worthless(in the sense you can't do further things with them) and a lazy way of doing things.

If by "lazy" you mean "fast", then yay for lazy. As long as the code output is good, then why do it the slow way?

I love Dreamweaver in split-screen mode. For anything that's better coded in directly, then I do that. For the stuff that's quicker and better done using the tools, I use that.

A lot of folks criticise WYSIWYG editors for the quality of output they produce. I think that's only a valid criticism when they're used by someone who doesn't really know what they're doing anyway. Such folks probably aren't likely to be producing decent code that actually works if they're doing it by hand anyway.

I actually think giving a newbie a good WYSIWYG editor to use alongside a good HTML/CSS book is a really fast way to learn HTML anyway.

Primefalcon
January 16th, 2010, 11:18 AM
Tbh I used Dreamweaver when I started, but as I started using more PHP, CSS, javascript, SQL and god knows what else I got to hand-coding and my sites were better for it. Plus, with clever use of CSS you can have any layout you want. Using WYSIWYG tools just doesn't give that level of flexibility without a lot of workarounds and fiddling.
I started on dreamweaver on windows XP and decided to go hand coding, I actually learned HTML in a matter of a days and css in about a week..... and so when I switched to linux this is an issue I never had, but yes a decfent wysiwyg would be nice for the designers only

lykwydchykyn
January 16th, 2010, 08:40 PM
I agree not everyone has the time. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending who you are) CMSes have satisfied a large group of people who 'just wanted to get something out there'.

I think WYSIWYG's were more popular in the past because they were the fastest route to get your voice out there for people who didn't have the time/desire to code. I think with CMSes becoming more advanced a large portion of previous WYSIWYG users have migrated to them and the market for people still wanting to use those apps (for the reasons you listed above) has shrunk considerably.
I think this is very true. On top of that, you have sites like facebook, myspace, blogspot, flickr, etc. that allow people to have their own web presence quickly and easily without having to build a site from scratch.

And now that we're in the "web 2.0" days (sorry, I hate that term too), it's hardly worth the cost of admission to chuck a few static html pages
out on the web. You need dynamic content, and traditionally WYSIWYG's don't do that (yes, you CAN do it in Dreamweaver, but you're not going to do it without knowing code).



I actually think giving a newbie a good WYSIWYG editor to use alongside a good HTML/CSS book is a really fast way to learn HTML anyway.

That's actually the way I learned, though I think it's a bit more motivating to have a BAD WYSIWYG editor that forces you to fix code all the time :).

Primefalcon
January 17th, 2010, 12:30 AM
I think it's a bit more motivating to have a BAD WYSIWYG editor that forces you to fix code all the time :).

There already is that.... it's called dreamweaver and it can be run in wine

geoken
January 17th, 2010, 10:11 PM
A few pages back someone mentioned something about Opera Dragonfly being able to save the content you're tweaking. This got me pretty excited, I'm a long time FireBug user and the idea of directly saving my edits sounded cool.

After playing with it for a few minutes it doesn't seem like this is the case (unless I'm missing something).

L4U
January 21st, 2010, 11:27 PM
Anyone know the big differences between Kompozer, Amaya, and Seamonkey?

The only thing I can see is that Seamonkey doesn't have a site manager to manage multiple webpages.

Other than that, they seem to be all the same.