On 16 Feb 2004, at 14:13, Jason Dixon wrote:
On Feb 16, 2004, at 8:43 AM, Martin Alderson wrote:
On 16 Feb 2004, at 13:34, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
vim or (x)emacs. Highly commended.
Your kidding, right?
There is no way you can design a heavily graphical site using a text editor.
That's a load of crap. I'm not going to suggest that using text editors suits everyone, but there's NOTHING stopping a talented designer from coding sites "by hand". It helps to ensure compliancy with HTML/CSS and really allows the developer to become much more familiar with the intracacies of his/her code.
Obviously, some folks prefer the ease-of-user and management capabilities of Dreamweaver, et al, but there are others who are just as happy with vi, cvs and ssh. Looking at your site, I don't see anything that couldn't be rewritten in vi within a matter of hours.
I still use vi and The Gimp on my Powerbook to design sites. :)
Ok, basically I should of said 'design a heavily graphical site _efficently_.
I'm sure you can create a site with a text editor (and I do it sometimes over SSH if I'm out of measures) and it will work fine.
However, I use Dreamweaver because a) it has a half decent 'source' tab to edit with (which I do most of my stuff in) and b) I can lay stuff out graphically without constantly having to redo CSS. Also, I find that being able to use split screen code and design view allows me to code as I usually would but also have the benifit of not having to save, go to a webbrowser and refresh every 15 seconds is a great benifit.
Also, there is a real lack of vector based graphic tools (like Fireworks) on Linux. I can't stand using The GIMP or Photoshop for anything more than editing a photo.
It's also good to see a fellow Apple user here :), btw.
Martin Alderson, IntechHosting
Email: martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Web: http://www.intechhosting.co.uk
