Linked by Adam S on Sat 28th Jan 2006 13:23 UTC, submitted by Rory Griffin
Apple "I put up my review for iWeb, the newest part of iLife from Apple Computers. My enitre personal page was designed with iWeb and a few royalty free images I found scattered around the web to give it an atmosphere that I haven't been able to create before on my own. To be honest, I'm not big on web developing, so for anyone who wants to just build a small homepage, this is for you."
Thread beginning with comment 90328
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: XHTML 1.0 Compliant
by Adam S on Sat 28th Jan 2006 15:27 UTC in reply to "RE: XHTML 1.0 Compliant"
Adam S
Member since:
2005-04-01

That is the most arrogant thing I've ever heard. Real programmers use Notepad? Pshaw. Using Notepad doesn't make you elite, it makes you clueless. What you probably mean is writing code vs. using a code generation program. Most Windows progams you use were probably written in Visual Studio, by the way.

I used to use Notepad to write HTML, and then I found the plethora of Text Editors/IDEs that do syntax coloring.

For Windows, try http://pnotepad.org (OSNews itself was almost entirely written in this app)
For Mac, try http://smultron.sourceforge.net or http://barebones.com (OSNews is currently maintained in these two apps)
For Linux, try Bluefish, http://bluefish.openoffice.nl (Parts of OSNews were written in this app)

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 5

RE[3]: XHTML 1.0 Compliant
by Kroc on Sat 28th Jan 2006 15:42 in reply to "RE[2]: XHTML 1.0 Compliant"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Thanks for the direct attack, real professional.

By "use notepad" I was generalizing about hand-typing specifically without having to name a huge list of text-editors, when people who use dreamweaver/iWeb get the idea when I say just "notepad". If your text editor colours syntax you are still typing the code by hand regardless. Your attack is semantics and nothing more.

The most important point here is that using your noggin' and experience to write code is better than just saying a page validates and is thus "good code". We all know that iWeb is outputting some awful unsemantic rubbish under the guise of clean code to the uninformed via xHTML validation.

Edited 2006-01-28 15:43

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 2

RE[4]: XHTML 1.0 Compliant
by Adam S on Sat 28th Jan 2006 15:48 in reply to "RE[3]: XHTML 1.0 Compliant"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

Down, boy. It was just a comment.

You slammed the author of the web page (who is clearly commenting in this very forum). I think what you said - that real programmers can't use assisted development programs (or possibly any RAD tools), and what you implied - that iWeb and similar apps are somehow "bad" because they encourage the less technical to participate, is both exclusive and pompous. That's not a "direct attack," it's just my opinion. No need to freak out.

There's really nothing wrong with these programs at all. If you prefer to do it by hand (as I do), great. But don't slam everyone else for using the software. That simply IS arrogant.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 5

RE[4]: XHTML 1.0 Compliant
by sp29 on Sat 28th Jan 2006 17:28 in reply to "RE[3]: XHTML 1.0 Compliant"
sp29 Member since:
2006-01-04

no editor puts out "clean code", just look at Frontpage.

Yeah if you want to make simple pages, sure use your "notepade". Are you going to make a Flash animation or a Flash site for a client in "gay" notepad? Or CSS? I don't think so.

iWebs good enough for what it does and a average user can make a nice home page with it with ease, and it looks good.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 1