Re: Iwork/Pages

From: John McGhie (john_at_mcghie.name)
Date: 01/15/05 

Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:20:48 +1100

Hi Phillip:

I'm a little mystified... Would your suggestion of DreamWeaver *really*
come under the heading of "appropriate advice"?

The customer wants to play around with "two" web pages on his private home
website. You are suggesting he spends $390.00 and 275 MB on an HTML Editor
designed to enable graduate web developers to conduct commercial website
development? Seriously?

DreamWeaver is a great product. So is a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier.
But it's maybe not appropriate for home use in the bathtub: and that's what
we're really talking about here. This customer seeks recommendations for
something cheap and easy, to play with in his bathtub!

Sometimes, Phillip, I wonder if you read these posts :-)

Cheers

On 15/1/05 7:47 AM, in article #Ikc6on#EHA.2196@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl,
"Phillip M. Jones, CE.T." <pjones@kimbanet.com> wrote:

> John McGhie wrote:
>> Well, I think it is important for us to remember that you are not really
>> interested in whether the HTML "looks good" or not. You want your *website*
>> to look good.
>>
>> How the code achieves that is not important unless you happen to be a
>> highly-paid web solution designer. So if the code is a bit rough, who
>> cares? If you don't like it, don't look at it :-)
>>
>> I think you may find that John's comment was more aimed at the professional
>> publishing persons who frequent this rowdy bar. He and they work in the
>> high-end of the industry where the structure of the code would be a key
>> requirement for what they do.
>>
>> So he's pointing out, for those who need to know, that iWork's HTML is a bit
>> rough. So is Word's. Those of us who work with it know not to use Word
>> where the coding structure matters. I use Word to publish bulk web pages:
>> Word will easily create and publish an 800 page website in four hours. I
>> know of no other application that will get anywhere near that speed.
>>
>> If my client will pay for only four hours of effort and wants an 800 page
>> website, it's Word I use. If he opens the code and doesn't like what I
>> sees, I am likely to use quite a selection of different "words" :-)
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>> On 14/1/05 9:56 PM, in article BE0D0FA0.FE3%fjs08@zoominternet.net, "Dr.
>> Frank Stefanec" <fjs08@zoominternet.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>>>> It does not produce good looking Word doc format, nor good looking HTML<<
>>>>
>>>> Humm and thatıs what I was looking for. Something to use as a Word
>>>> substitute and also to do my simple HTML sheets that I might be able to use
>>>> with my .Mac Home Page web site.
>>>>
>>>> Frank
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> Have you tried Macromedia's DremWeaver? 

-- 
Please reply to the newsgroup to maintain the thread.  Please do not email
me unless I ask you to.
John McGhie <john@mcghie.name>
Consultant Technical Writer
Sydney, Australia +61 4 1209 1410