Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Developer Center > Anyone used Dreamweaver 8?

Anyone used Dreamweaver 8? (Page 2)
Thread Tools
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2005, 08:06 PM
 
What? The fact that Adobe bought Macromedia?

Yes, get the demo, it's actually the full program and can be upgraded with the purchase of a serial number.

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2005, 10:37 PM
 
I thought about the demo but was unsure if it would interfere with my existing DW installation. Ah, I'll give it a try, worst case I have to reload DW MX. Thanks!
     
funkboy  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2001
Location: North Dakota, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2005, 10:43 PM
 
I was worried about the demo and my current DW MX 2004 installation misbehaving. Let us know if it works ok.
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2005, 11:34 PM
 
Hi,

Here is a site that may be of interest:-

http://www.aaron.atte.southwerk.mcma.../AronFrnt.html

I have lost access to the site now and I did it a few years ago with, I think, DW 4 or 5, There is no CSS, so far as I know, and it uses frames, but as I recall there is a non frames version underneath it and which should display on any browser not supporting frames. I like frames and don't understand why they are not more popular than they are. It also has some sounds embeded and pops up larger pictures on mouse over. It has one Flash page (Not my Flash work but it fitted)

The seti animated gif on the front page I did in fireworks, ( before I knew about symbols) which as you know, also comes with MM Studio and which has improved.

I am trialing MM Studio 8, ( and trying to get my head around Flash again) which is just more of the same and, in my view, MM should just do version upgrades instead of re launching the whole thing like its band new and charging folks lots of money for it. But I guess its the old cash story.

One of the nice things about MM is the extentions and the extentions manager, which are small developments done by the user base and which allow you to do a range of twiddle bits. These can be free or paid for.

I would be interested to know your opinions about the site.

K.
     
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 19, 2005, 03:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by Knightrider
I like frames and don't understand why they are not more popular than they are.


The seti animated gif on the front page I did in fireworks, ( before I knew about symbols) which as you know, also comes with MM Studio and which has improved.

Originally Posted by Knightrider
I am trialing MM Studio 8, ( and trying to get my head around Flash again) which is just more of the same and, in my view, MM should just do version upgrades instead of re launching the whole thing like its band new and charging folks lots of money for it. But I guess its the old cash story.
If you are comparing MM Studio to Dreamweaver 4 or 5, it really IS a whole new deal, and not more of the same. The focus has been shifted to modern standards-based web design like it should.

Originally Posted by Knightrider
One of the nice things about MM is the extentions and the extentions manager, which are small developments done by the user base and which allow you to do a range of twiddle bits. These can be free or paid for.
Agreed. These are nice.

Originally Posted by Knightrider
I would be interested to know your opinions about the site.
I could give you one, but I don't think you'd like it very much

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 20, 2005, 07:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -


The seti animated gif on the front page I did in fireworks, ( before I knew about symbols) which as you know, also comes with MM Studio and which has improved.

It could be a smaller download.

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

If you are comparing MM Studio to Dreamweaver 4 or 5, it really IS a whole new deal, and not more of the same. The focus has been shifted to modern standards-based web design like it should.
Ok..... I'm not an expert... but the marketing pitch still itches.

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

I could give you one, but I don't think you'd like it very much
That bad ..... I was only learning..... Still am.

Anyway, I wish every one the seasons greetings especially for a peaceful and happy new year.

K.
     
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Great State of Texas
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 22, 2005, 02:18 AM
 
I just wanted to chime in about Dreamweaver 8. I'm a professional web developer working for a technology company. We HEAVILY rely on search engines such as Google for our business so we are very aware of how SE friendly all of our content is. We live and die by Dreamweaver 8.

Dreamweaver is a dual purpose tool. Development and Management. Hand coding simple pages or basic sites is great for learning, but in the real world there simply isint time to manage a several hundred page site by hand. This is where Dreamweaver shines. site wide changes, site wide searches, auto link rebuilding. I have better things to do with my time than search down renamed links.

Now on the development end, the live editing with a testing server in DW is a joke. its much easier and faster to just setup a remote server (or better yet, a pure FTP site) and develop in DW8 and view in your normal browser. Yes, there is lots of switching back and fourth, but being a web developer will never be able to get by without testing in real world browsers anyway.

The CSS in Dreamweaver is very good. Not quite as nice as Style Master (which simply views pages using Safari) , but is very usable. The previews in DW8 are much better.

The largest benefit of 8 over 7 is tabs. This one feature is worth the entire price of the upgrade for anyone who works on large sites. The ability to flip between 6-7 pages very quickly is a must have on complex PHP sites.

I used to be the same way ("Hand coding is ALWAYS better than some namby-pamby GUI editor") but ive been using Dreamweaver for years now (first purchased DW3) and it is a lifesaver for a pro. Dont get me wrong, hand coding still has its places. 80% of my day is spend hand coding PHP, but i get more code produced in that other 20% using DW.

Use DW to build the bulk of your code, then hand tweak and modify it until its perfect. No reason to hand write <HTML></HTML> tags, thats just junior.
nolo contendere: A legal term meaning: "I didn't do it, judge, and I'll never do it again."
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Clogland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 22, 2005, 03:29 AM
 
Excellent post Lucid.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Clogland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 22, 2005, 09:57 AM
 
Originally Posted by Lucidwray
I just wanted to chime in about Dreamweaver 8. I'm a professional web developer working for a technology company. We HEAVILY rely on search engines such as Google for our business so we are very aware of how SE friendly all of our content is. We live and die by Dreamweaver 8.
Wait, Dreamweaver has Search Engine compatability worked into it's coding?

Originally Posted by Lucidwray
Now on the development end, the live editing with a testing server in DW is a joke. its much easier and faster to just setup a remote server (or better yet, a pure FTP site) and develop in DW8 and view in your normal browser. Yes, there is lots of switching back and fourth, but being a web developer will never be able to get by without testing in real world browsers anyway.
That's where having two computers comes into it's own, I use a "live to ftp" text editor, hit save, then reach over and hit refresh on the other one's browser.

Originally Posted by Lucidwray
Use DW to build the bulk of your code, then hand tweak and modify it until its perfect. No reason to hand write <HTML></HTML> tags, thats just junior.
You've almost sold me on Dreamweaver ( the search engine question above is a biggie ), but I've found that re-using code works pretty well. An include file for the header ( <html> to <body> ), for example, just change the title and meta tags.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 22, 2005, 11:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by Lucidwray
I just wanted to chime in about Dreamweaver 8. I'm a professional web developer working for a technology company. We HEAVILY rely on search engines such as Google for our business so we are very aware of how SE friendly all of our content is. We live and die by Dreamweaver 8.
I'm reluctant to believe that it does well with search engines due to all the garbage code it has created in the past - stupid things like <td>&nbsp;</td> everywhere, etc. Using Contribute 3, I see that plenty of arguments that can be moved to CSS are not, and some garbage CSS classes seem to be created. Great, I don't know if shifting Dreamweaver garbage from HTML to CSS is any better than what it did before. Is Dreamweaver much better than Contribute? If not, I'm not sold on using this for actual work.

You say at the end of your message that you can use DW 8 to generate the bulk of your code, and then clean it up by hand later. What is the point of that? How is that faster than simply using a tool like BBEdit to assist you with syntax while you go along, and building the page piece by piece yourself? I hate trying to clean up the work of a tool like this, it gives me headaches.

Dreamweaver is a dual purpose tool. Development and Management. Hand coding simple pages or basic sites is great for learning, but in the real world there simply isint time to manage a several hundred page site by hand. This is where Dreamweaver shines. site wide changes, site wide searches, auto link rebuilding. I have better things to do with my time than search down renamed links.
You can do global search and replaces within BBEdit, and using tools like Quanta with are both cheaper, and centered around hand coding.

Now on the development end, the live editing with a testing server in DW is a joke. its much easier and faster to just setup a remote server (or better yet, a pure FTP site) and develop in DW8 and view in your normal browser. Yes, there is lots of switching back and fourth, but being a web developer will never be able to get by without testing in real world browsers anyway.
Does DW 8 now finally support SFTP? Why would anybody want to send their password in the clear over and over again each time they make a change? Using FTP sounds like a terribly bad idea.

Use DW to build the bulk of your code, then hand tweak and modify it until its perfect. No reason to hand write <HTML></HTML> tags, thats just junior.
There are tools that will assist you with the syntax, crafting chunks of this for you (e.g. BBEdit). To me, assisting with syntax is a much better approach than relying on a programing pretending to know what you want, and spewing code as best as it can.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Live at the BBQ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 2, 2006, 09:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by jay3ld
i dont think there is a way to view php live... just got to live with it. i only use it for my html which i do allot of on one site
DW7 would show PHP includes and such live in design mode, and DW8 shows live PHP and live database records in design view... that is a cool feature. Design view rendering, however, is still sh!tty.

Originally Posted by mania
you know I hope that rollover images will go away - they are a waste - I understand that anti-aliased text is not as pretty - but if you ever want to generate links on the fly from a database like in a shopping cart for example you really need to use text links - and you might as well for other sites to make maintenance easier.
Javascript rollover images are wasteful... but they do tend to be faster than CSS rollovers (which I prefer).

But I have been noticing more and more pages using PHP to create image buttons on the fly, with the image text grabbed from a database. The resulting images are used in javascript rollovers. The rollover is here to stay.

"Bill Gates can't guarantee Windows... how can you guarantee my safety?"
-John Crichton
     
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 2, 2006, 11:00 PM
 
it does live php?

wow... im going to have to find it on my harddrive and start up the app and see..
but i prefer to use php to create images. its nice because i found out if i download one i had php create my computer will not open the image.. which is nice means nobody is going to be stealing it.. its because you create the image though php and just putting blank text (ie spaces) and it will do it.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 3, 2006, 12:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by jay3ld
it does live php?

wow... im going to have to find it on my harddrive and start up the app and see..
but i prefer to use php to create images. its nice because i found out if i download one i had php create my computer will not open the image.. which is nice means nobody is going to be stealing it.. its because you create the image though php and just putting blank text (ie spaces) and it will do it.

What do you mean by using PHP to create images?


Do you guys ever use your own Mac for testing this stuff on (i.e. install PHP and MySQL and connect locally)?
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Clogland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 3, 2006, 05:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c
Do you guys ever use your own Mac for testing this stuff on (i.e. install PHP and MySQL and connect locally)?
One disavantage of doing that is that it's possible that the version of php on your own machine might not match the one on the actual server, which could lead to unexpected results.

Great for playing around with, but for the reason I mentioned, if I'm actually producing something I prefer to use a text editor with a "save to ftp" function.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Live at the BBQ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 3, 2006, 07:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by jay3ld
it does live php?

wow... im going to have to find it on my harddrive and start up the app and see..
but i prefer to use php to create images. its nice because i found out if i download one i had php create my computer will not open the image.. which is nice means nobody is going to be stealing it.. its because you create the image though php and just putting blank text (ie spaces) and it will do it.
Well, I don't think the php images will work in DW7... in fact the live php it does support is fairly small. I do know that DW7 will show php file inlcudes. DW8 may support the live php images and whatnot, but I'm not sure about that either.


Originally Posted by besson3c
What do you mean by using PHP to create images?
There is a library addition to PHP that lets it create images on the fly... jpgs, gifs, pngs, and a couple other formats. You can either create images from scratch, or use an existing image to work on top of. You've probably seen it here on these very boards. The "HaHa" image is one example, where someone types in some text in a web form, hits submit, and php spits out an image with that text... I've seen some of the sigs using this too. It's the same thing folks use on those submission forms when you have to type in the characters that show up in a grainy image to foil the web bots..

edit: more info on dynamic images using php

Originally Posted by besson3c
Do you guys ever use your own Mac for testing this stuff on (i.e. install PHP and MySQL and connect locally)?
That's how I work... I have php and mysql installed on my Mac, and I work directly from the webserver folder. So, DW grabs all of the mysql info locally, and I can view the updates in a browser right away without ftp'ing to a remote server. When everything looks good, I send to the remote server for more testing.

Originally Posted by skalie
One disavantage of doing that is that it's possible that the version of php on your own machine might not match the one on the actual server, which could lead to unexpected results.

Great for playing around with, but for the reason I mentioned, if I'm actually producing something I prefer to use a text editor with a "save to ftp" function.
That's true, but I've found that most web hosts worth the money they charge have a minimum set of php functions that include some additional libraries (like image and pdf creation), and my install is very basic, and not customized at all. I also don't upgrade to the latest versions of php/mysql... as long as the version I have installed is <= what the web host is using, things tend to work fine. I usually check what their php install looks like, and if they don't have any libraries that I do, I won't work with those functions. I can only forsee a problem if their install is older than mine.
( Last edited by himself; Jan 3, 2006 at 07:31 AM. )
"Bill Gates can't guarantee Windows... how can you guarantee my safety?"
-John Crichton
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 3, 2006, 09:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by skalie
One disavantage of doing that is that it's possible that the version of php on your own machine might not match the one on the actual server, which could lead to unexpected results.

Great for playing around with, but for the reason I mentioned, if I'm actually producing something I prefer to use a text editor with a "save to ftp" function.

Generally speaking, there are no feature changes in PHP version point upgrades - i.e. 4.4.0 to 4.4.1. These are just security fixes. In a given branch (4.x or 5.x), you'll be safe for a very long time since major upgrades happen so infrequently.

Using your own machine is fine for local testing, is faster than saving to a remote server, and allows you to work without being connected to the internet.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 3, 2006, 09:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by himself
There is a library addition to PHP that lets it create images on the fly... jpgs, gifs, pngs, and a couple other formats. You can either create images from scratch, or use an existing image to work on top of. You've probably seen it here on these very boards. The "HaHa" image is one example, where someone types in some text in a web form, hits submit, and php spits out an image with that text... I've seen some of the sigs using this too. It's the same thing folks use on those submission forms when you have to type in the characters that show up in a grainy image to foil the web bots..
I think the lib you are thinking of is gd.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the intarweb
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 3, 2006, 03:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by nica
No it cannot. You need to use a browser engine DW can only display layout. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

DW's built in preview won't show you PHP and the like in action, but if you define all your sites in dreamweaver to be within your "sites" folder, then you can access them via a web browser at "http://127.0.0.1/~<your user name>/Sites/<path to PHP file in question>*" and see the PHP working. provided:

1. you've enabled your apache webserver as "the artist formerly known as philzilla" suggests
2. set DW's preferences to NOT use a temporary file for previewing.

this is the way i work, when building dynamic pages and, while it's not as convenient as DW's live preview mode - you have to hit save in DW, then switch to your browser and reload the page, every time you make a change to the code - it's a helluva lot easier than having to upload to the 'intarweb' for testing.

* actually, i've edited my "/private/etc/httpd/httpd.conf" to include the following:

DocumentRoot "/Users/madra/Sites"

which means i can access anything in my "Sites" folder for testing by just typing "127.0.0.1" or "localhost" in a browser window, rather than having to use the full path.


on another note, one welcome development in dreamweaver 8 is that their behaviours are now *finally* coded in lowercase! this fixes the ridiculous situation whereby in previous versions of dreamweaver you could create a new page and tell DW to make it "XHTML compliant" - only to have the compliance instantly broken if you added [for example] a rollover to an image, because dreamweaver would write the handler as "onMouseOver" rather than "onmouseover".

as "any fule kno" - XHTML demands lower case for attributes!
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 3, 2006, 04:09 PM
 
Check out my guide for easy PHP and MySQL installation using DarwinPorts (software which automates the build, install, and update maintenance needed):

http://www.netmusician.org/wiki/inde...th_DarwinPorts
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Clogland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2006, 04:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by m a d r a
this is the way i work, when building dynamic pages and, while it's not as convenient as DW's live preview mode - you have to hit save in DW, then switch to your browser and reload the page, every time you make a change to the code - it's a helluva lot easier than having to upload to the 'intarweb' for testing.
I beg to differ, I save "live to ftp" and have an extra computer next to the development machine with the browser open.

Save, reach over and press refresh. Reckon I could be using one mouse click less.
     
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2006, 04:19 AM
 
Dreamweaver 8 is by far the best web creator for CSS, it does a much, much better job than Golive of display CSS content and letting you edit it in "display" mode. Version 8 is also geared toward generating XHTML compliant code better. I used GoLive almost exclusively but now have switched to dreamweaver 8
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the intarweb
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 4, 2006, 08:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by skalie
I beg to differ, I save "live to ftp" and have an extra computer next to the development machine with the browser open.

Save, reach over and press refresh. Reckon I could be using one mouse click less.
nah! - that having to reach over to the other machine sounds like far too much effort!

mind you - if you really want one click less, you could put a temporary "refresh" meta tag in the header for the page. then it would reload itself and save you all that physical effort of leaning across
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 11, 2006, 11:19 PM
 
I just bought Dreamweaver 8. I have 2 sites equalling 18,000 files with no database which I have spent 7.5 years on. I have used a lot of free and low cost web page editors like Nvu, Taco HTML edit, and SyleMaster. I definitely do hand code and even in Dreamweaver - certain things are faster that way like changing the Title but for some things like inserting Flash it is much easier to work visually. The reason why I like Dreamweaver is that it makes deisgning a web site much faster. Given I hardly ever use PHP or any server side scripting or database as I need my site to run off a CD-ROM as well. Dreamweaver puts what use to take me several different programs to do into one. Did you know it even does WML. I started out looking to get Flash, but when I tried out Dreamweaver, it just worked so naturally and everything I need to do web wise is all in one program. Another thing that drew me to Dreamweaver is that it is the leading web design program and some jobs I have wanted in the past required Dreamweaver.

http://benjamin-newton.info/about/event/website.html

This page was updated in Dreamweaver 8 and it is very clean code. I have it set to do XHTML code by deafault. I am still in the process of upgrading my entire site to XHTML, so I don't have the doc type set to XHTML yet.

http://benjamin-newton.info/opinion/alt/poetry/html

The XHTML code for these poetry pages which were generated by OpenOffice.org 2.0 were cleaned up in Dreamweaver 8, so they gave a nice structure instead of the original output which put the code in one long stream.

from my log of important events

3 January 2006

I now have Dreamweaver 8 and Contribute 3 with Flash Paper 2 (full commercial versions). Totally legal as all my software always has and always will be.

Anyway, the advantages of having Dreamweaver is that I am able to do what took me several different programs in one environment and I should be able to work on existing projects for volunteer work as Dreamweaver is the most popular web design program. Working on existing projects under someone else's supervision will help limit the amount of time I put into projects and the ease of design and updating the website will make projects much quicker. The simple answer is that my abilities have grown to the level that I can make good use of most of Dreamweaver's power.

I was thinking of using Flash as it is advertised as an easier way to create web based interfaces, but although I think highly of the Flash Player, Flash the development environment seems ok at many things but not excellent at any of them. After looking at Dreamweaver and trying out embedding the Flash Paper in with it, I found that Dreamweaver was much easier for me to use than Flash the development environment as I already know how to warp HTML and CSS to my will. Also it is surprising to see how so many people have such old versions of Flash Player on their computer and are unwilling to do the fast and free download to the latest version.

http://benjamin-newton.info/
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 11, 2006, 11:29 PM
 
bhout:

Can I ask why you need to run your site on a CD-ROM?

It really sounds like your site could use a CMS, since it has gotten so large! If you decide to go this route, you could probably eventually dump Dreamweaver or any other page creation/editors in favor of CMS driven pages based on templates.

Just an idea.
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 12, 2006, 01:04 AM
 
It is a portfolio of my work as well as an original philosophy and I like to be able to hand it out on CD-ROM because the web for most people is way to slow and highly unreliable. Even with Comcast Cable as my ISP and Register.com for my hosting, I don't think the Web is reliable enough to rely on one technology. Just as there is no web browser that is good enough to rely on totally, there is not one delivery mechanism that is fool proof enough to rely on solely.

I guess my standards for reliability are higher than most, but I worked with computers in the military and were required to know how we could do things with lower tech. The military has always been leary of switching too many things to computers, because even the kinds of computers they use that are mission critical can fail. Sometimes 99.99% uptime is not good enough.

If I could get everyone to use Firefox to see my site and could have it available online only it would be much easier to maintain and much more advanced feature wise. Although some people may not think my website is very important for most people, for the people who get something out of it, it is too valuable to not make it as accessible and error free as possible.

I think I am going to try out a CMS for another project - I tried out a simple one before and was frustrated with its limitations. My major concerns are being able to back up my content easily and automatic application of security updates without ruining my site.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 12, 2006, 08:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by bhuot
It is a portfolio of my work as well as an original philosophy and I like to be able to hand it out on CD-ROM because the web for most people is way to slow and highly unreliable. Even with Comcast Cable as my ISP and Register.com for my hosting, I don't think the Web is reliable enough to rely on one technology. Just as there is no web browser that is good enough to rely on totally, there is not one delivery mechanism that is fool proof enough to rely on solely.

I guess my standards for reliability are higher than most, but I worked with computers in the military and were required to know how we could do things with lower tech. The military has always been leary of switching too many things to computers, because even the kinds of computers they use that are mission critical can fail. Sometimes 99.99% uptime is not good enough.

If I could get everyone to use Firefox to see my site and could have it available online only it would be much easier to maintain and much more advanced feature wise. Although some people may not think my website is very important for most people, for the people who get something out of it, it is too valuable to not make it as accessible and error free as possible.

I think I am going to try out a CMS for another project - I tried out a simple one before and was frustrated with its limitations. My major concerns are being able to back up my content easily and automatic application of security updates without ruining my site.

Why not just create PDF versions of your relevant pages? As an employer, I don't know what I'd make out of being handed a website on CD-ROM. Certainly unusual.

As an employer, I'd also be interested in how you'd fare in large site management and using homegrown, OSS, or commercial CMSes... IMHO, expecting a company to maintain a site consisting of static pages is just unrealistic, an outdated model, and places too much burden on the content providers. I truly admire your patience in manually keeping all those pages up-to-date within your personal site though!

Keep us posted with your CMS research, I'd like to hear it! I've developed several homegrown CMSes myself, but I'm also looking at OSS ones too, currently. http://www.cmsmatrix.org is a good way of finding out what other users like, as there are user ratings there.
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 12, 2006, 04:41 PM
 
I am not looking for employment - only for small volunteer jobs. Also the website is a means to and end - a way to further my philosophy and show off my artwork, writings, and design ability. The website management part for large scale projects is not what I am trying to show. So far people have been very impressed that they can see my site without having to go on the Internet. Again these people are not ones I am trying to get a high paid webmaster job with. Also as this project is winding to a close, I won't be saving myself much time by converting it to a CMS, and it would be a tremendous amount of work. Also as far as PDFs are concerned, I do use the format quite a bit on my website, but many people I run into that I want to share my work with don't have Adobe Reader or else it is too old a version and they are uncomfortable with updating their computer and think the download is too big - that is why I have my writings in 2 to 7 different formats depending on how important the texts are. But I do appreciate the link and advice. I will be using a CMS for a photo website I will be launching in the future.
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:19 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2