A good HTML editor ?

[morrisdan1]

Hi,

When I first started working on my website back in 1997, I started using Windows' Notepad tool to edit the web pages. That I'd edit the html files using Notepad through the Internet Explorer browser.

My reasoning at the time was that it enabled me to organize or justify the codes better in a professional sense. That HTML editors would sometimes louse them up or make the source codes look less neat. That had been my thinking over the years.

But now I'm beginning to wonder that maybe using Notepad without using any HTML editors had made it more tedious ?

Have HTML editors improve over the years ? Are there good HTML editors out there that'll make it easier to work on web pages and at the same time are source-codes friendly ?

Perhaps, HTML editors that'll make it easier to improve the appearance of my website ? While we're at it, feel free to critique my website in terms of what could be improved or could use some work, etc ?

Thanks in advance!

[Wassercrats]

The only free editor that I found acceptable is gVim. There must be some good pay-editors that others could recommend. I still use wordpad and the text/HTML editor in CNC, but if I get into serious programming or webpage building, I'll probably try switching to gVim.

[Andilinks]

http://www.ultraedit.com/

It is worth every penny! $ 39.95 (€ 34.76)

I have a list of 62 other editors here:

http://www.andilinks.com/htme.htm

[CDarklock]

It is worth every penny! $ 39.95 (€ 34.76)

As someone who literally makes his living working in UltraEdit, I'll second that very loudly. I've been using it since verson 6 or so. It's also worth going for the UltraEdit/UltraCompare bundle (pays for itself the first time you have to synchronise two code libraries between sites), and for the "unlimited upgrades" option.

[Kevin]

Yes, html editors have improved. However, I still use vim for almost all of my html editing.

The only exception is when I am writing something that is really a document instead of a web page that just happens to also be published on my web site. The only example of that I can think of is my resume. I wrote it in OpenOffice, exported it to html, and then tweaked it a bit with vim.

[Randall]

EditPlus (http://editplus.com) is another one, similar to UltraEdit.

The point being that there's a middle ground between the Dreamweaver visual approach and barebones Notepad -- text editors with advanced features like syntax highlighting, HTML tag templates and multi-file search & replace.

Randall

[hobbes]

Hear, hear Kev! Had to install cygwin under win just so I could vi :)

-- old programmers never die, they simply GOTO 10 --

[Kevin]

Hear, hear Kev! Had to install cygwin under win just so I could vi :)

-- old programmers never die, they simply GOTO 10 --
ummm, there are DOS and Windows versions of vim: http://www.vim.org/download.php#pc
I have never taken the time to setup cygwin on my windows box but that is probably because I don't use it for much. If I had to sit in front of a windows box all day things would probably be different (like me looking for a new job :P).

[RickJ]

I've been using HomeSite for about as long as it's been out, mostly for PHP code work. But I think it's getting a bit long in the tooth; Macromedia doesn't seem to want to upgrade it.

I looked at the UltraEdit-32 screenshots and it seems very similar to HomeSite.

Would anyone who has used both products care to comment on their similarities/differences?

[Joseph]

As someone who literally makes his living working in UltraEdit, I'll second that very loudly. I've been using it since verson 6 or so. It's also worth going for the UltraEdit/UltraCompare bundle (pays for itself the first time you have to synchronise two code libraries between sites), and for the "unlimited upgrades" option.

I completely agree. I have been using UltraEdit since v5 or v6 (not exactly sure) and I have never been dissapointed with it. I just recently (a few months ago) upgrade to UltraEdit 11.00a+ and UltraCompare - wow. It's an amazing piece of software, and UltraCompare really comes in handing for a number of things. One thing I use it for a lot is upgrading scripts. I can run my current version against the new version, and only upload the different files. On scripts such as Gallery (where they have MANY files, and just say to overwrite everything to upgrade *grumble*) this saves me a LOT of time. :smile:

I frequently download and try different text editors, just to keep an eye on the market, but I've always reverted back to UltraEdit as my editor of choice.

It's clean, customizable, and does everything I need it to do. :smile:

A big recommendation for UltraEdit from me as well. :clapper:

[kitchin]

Anyone use Nvu? It is descended from the Netscape/Mozilla Composer and is open source, free, cross-platform, etc. Netscape Composer was never too good, but the Nvu people may have the right idea. Take a componenet of Mozilla, fix it, optimize it... sounds like Firefox (web), Thunderbird (email), Sunbird (calendar)...

[hobbes]

ummm, there are DOS and Windows versions of vim: http://www.vim.org/download.php#pc
I have never taken the time to setup cygwin on my windows box but that is probably because I don't use it for much. If I had to sit in front of a windows box all day things would probably be different (like me looking for a new job :P).
Well, the rsync daemon in cygwin came in handy too for backing up files from the linux server...

[Randall]

Anyone use Nvu? I've been aware of Nvu, but not brave enough to wade into Yet Another Mozilla Beta. Is the Windows version getting equal attention? I know they started out as a Linspire project.

Randall

[Juan G]

(...) there's a middle ground between the Dreamweaver visual approach and barebones Notepad (...)
Ah, Dreamweaver... That one is also a very nice and helpful program, WYSIWYG and code-friendly (I still use the old version 2 for some tasks).
:airtoss:

I cannot say the same of other visual HTML editors like FrontPage. Terrible...
:ythulk:

[Stecyk]

I've been using HomeSite for about as long as it's been out, mostly for PHP code work. But I think it's getting a bit long in the tooth; Macromedia doesn't seem to want to upgrade it.

I suggest TopStyle Pro (http://www.bradsoft.com/topstyle/) . Nick Bradbury wrote Homesite, which was bought by Macromedia. He then created an even better program called TopStyle, which is an excellent HTML and CSS editor.

[sheila]

I have to second the rave about TopStyle. I trialed it on my Win machine, and it is an excellent CSS editor. I wish it incorporated HTML editing (in the same way that Homesite did/does), too. Unfortunately, it doesn't. I used to use Homesite. It was the first HTML editor I paid $$$ for...um a few years back. :P

I have used Dreamweaver a fair amount, and did buy a copy for my Mac in February (shortly after I got the Mac). I got an edu discount, so it wasn't too pricey. But I find that I hardly launch it any more. Mostly just use BBEdit (my text editor).

Dreamweaver doesn't munge and muck up HTML code in my experience.

[Juan G]

Dreamweaver doesn't munge and muck up HTML code in my experience.
Yes, time ago I noticed small problems with some unwanted changes in the HTML code using Dreamweaver MX, so I went back to the good old Dreamweaver 2, which is wonderful. But currently I'm using it just for a few things like templates, since I use constantly modified scripts to generate my webpages (as old-fashioned static HTML files). :ytold:

BTW, TopStyle has indeed a good reputation for CSS, etc. UltraEdit seems also excellent.

[RickJ]

I've tried Dreamweaver; got every version since 2, I believe. I just couldn't get my mind around how it worked. Somehow, I kept going to the wrong place for stuff.

Now, all I use it for is its ability to strip out the extraneous Microsoft Word "html" code that is present when clients use Word to create a "web page" for me to post to their site. (Thanks, I think. :rasberry: )

I like TopStyle's integration with HomeSite when you edit CSS files, but was unaware that it does full-fledged web programming (PHP, HTML, etc.). I'll take a look at their site; thanks for the info.

[Randall]

But currently I'm using it just for a few things like templates, since I use constantly modified scripts to generate my webpages That's the real reason I don't bother with WYSI(A)WYG editors these days -- my "pages" don't look like much without the includes and the scripted content. :wink:

Randall

[Stecyk]

Hi there Sheila,

I wish it incorporated HTML editing (in the same way that Homesite did/does), too. Unfortunately, it doesn't. I used to use Homesite. It was the first HTML editor I paid $$$ for...um a few years back.

It does do HTML editing. There is more information on TopStyle's CSS/HTML/XHTML Editing Page (http://www.bradsoft.com/topstyle/tour/htmledit.asp). I can't compare it to Homesite, because I never used Homesite, but I find TopStyle to be very good.

[Melissa]

It does do HTML editing. There is more information on TopStyle's CSS/HTML/XHTML Editing Page (http://www.bradsoft.com/topstyle/tour/htmledit.asp).
Looks to be a difference in the Lite (trial) vs. Pro version:
http://www.bradsoft.com/topstyle/tslite/fullver.asp

TopStyle Pro contains dozens of powerful, time-saving features that you won't find in the free Lite version, including:

HTML and XHTML editing, including integration with HTML Tidy, CSE HTML Validator and the W3C HTML Validator...

[phppete]

DW is my preferred editor on Windows and DW or Text Wrangler on my Mac. DW has very nice code highlighting for CSS, JS, HTML and most server side languages so for web dev its ideal. I don't bother with DW's WYSIWYG but its useful for those people who prefer that method of working.

[sheila]

It does do HTML editing. There is more information on TopStyle's CSS/HTML/XHTML Editing Page (http://www.bradsoft.com/topstyle/tour/htmledit.asp). I can't compare it to Homesite, because I never used Homesite, but I find TopStyle to be very good.
Hmm. I wonder if that got added since I tried the software (which was a good 6 months or more ago...).

When I tried it, you could bring up lists of, say, CSS attributes for a class, and choose them, and it would create the correct text for you. But the same feature for HTML was not available.

I think I tried the "Pro" version? At least, when I try software on a trial basis, I usually try the version I'm considering buying. Anyhow, like I say, it was several months ago...but I looked over the menus like CRAZY for the HTML tags and I swear I could not find them. Because that is (as I recall it) how HomeSite used to work.

The next question...why doesn't he release it for Mac. :P

I have a hard time bringing myself to pay for Windows software at this point, since I'm using it so seldom.

[Stecyk]

The next question...why doesn't he release it for Mac. :P


To show you how much I stay on top of things, Bradbury sold his TopStyle and FeedDemon to Newsgator back in May.

You can read Nick's post (http://nick.typepad.com/blog/2005/05/newsgator_acqui.html).

Best regards,
Kevin

[morrisdan1]

http://www.ultraedit.com/

It is worth every penny! $ 39.95 (€ 34.76)



Hello everyone,

Ok, I downloaded the Ultraedit editor and have been trying its trial version.

Hmm, ok, I may be mistaken in here, and admittedly I'm still getting the hang of it, but my first impression of is that it's basically, perhaps maybe too much of, a text editor... ? :hrmm:

I think what I'm really looking for is something that'll make it easier to work on the visual aspects of a web page. That if push come to shove, I'd be willing to use an editor that'll make it easier for me to make the web page look like the way I want it to look and then if necessary work on justifying/aligning/editing the codes along the way as long as it isn't too cumbersome and that the codes aren't too disarrayed or out of whack...

Cause I sometimes feel that when I want to make some changes or improvements on the visual aspect of the web pages in my site, it's too tedious and time consuming to work on editing the codes and then to check to see how the updated page would look on a browser, etc...

Thanks again for your help! :smile:

[Andilinks]

It sounds then like you'll be happier with Dreamweaver. I've always felt that if I were designing more than one site I'd go with DW, but being able to control everything with code is easiest with UE--not that I'm a whiz at that either, but its one click macros and templates have made my life a lot easier.

I do wish its colored text worked with .shtm files.

Does DW display includes locally?

Andi

[phppete]

Does DW display includes locally?

Andi

Only if you used the DW behaviours to add them (I think). I just use code view, the highlighting is very good. I may try UE myself though, DW is a beast to start, takes 5 minutes to boot up and I rarely use anything but the site files window.

[Andilinks]

takes 5 minutes to boot up...Ewww... I hate clunky aps like that. Microsecond delays make me impatient, I may upgrade my computer just to get everything to happen right now.

With basically one template and no major site redesign until after Christmas I'll stick with UE, maybe go with UE Studio if I like its features.

Andi

[sheila]

Dan, given what you describe Dreamweaver would give you the view you want while tweaking. It is quite pricey, though. I suggest trying TopStyle (http://www.bradsoft.com/topstyle/) first, to see whether that would fit your bill. It does show a preview while you edit that updates nearly instantly as you work. (I get the same functionality in my Mac with BBEdit and the internal preview.)

Ugg. I just checked out the price. $80. Well, I won't be getting it for my laptop, since I don't code under Windows very much any more.

Screenshots and flash demos are here:
http://www.bradsoft.com/topstyle/screenshots/
The download and trial is free.

Compare to Dreamweaver at $400 (unless you have an EDU or similar discount, in which case it is $100).

Also, TopStyle will help you do much better code that conforms to standards than DreamWeaver ever will.

[TVB]

DW is a beast to start, takes 5 minutes to boot up

Pete, you may want to check if there is something else going on...DW (MX) boots in about 10 seconds for me.

Betsy

[phppete]

Hi Betsy,

This is common for DW, the MM forums are full of people complaining. FW's also takes a while to start. I only have 512MB of SD RAM with a 2.0GHZ processor, not slow but not really quick enough for big apps. Unfortunately this thing can't take anymore RAM :(

My DW on my 386MB 933mhz iBook starts far quicker. I had to move back to my PC to complete some projects but I'll be starting back on my Mac for dev in future. I like the power of the terminal in OS X, good for PHP dev.

[Randall]

Dan, given what you describe Dreamweaver would give you the view you want while tweaking. It is quite pricey, though. I suggest trying TopStyle (http://www.bradsoft.com/topstyle/) first, to see whether that would fit your bill. And also take a look at Nvu (http://www.nvu.com). It has the advantage of being free, and it's based on Mozilla Composer which has been around for a while. One would hope that a Mozilla project produces good HTML.

Randall

[REMIYA]

I personnaly don't like Dreamweaver. It's WISYWIG, but the generated code is too overwhelmed.

My choice is 1st Page 2000 :yeah:

[Andilinks]

My choice is 1st Page 2000...That is actually my second choice, it has some features that UE does not and I open it occasionally. Pretty amazing for a free program.

Andi

[Jeff]

Pete, you may want to check if there is something else going on...DW (MX) boots in about 10 seconds for me.

Betsy
My old version of DW 4 (which I still love) starts in 3 seconds ready to go :)

[gtc]

Here's what I've been using lately under Windows: Notepad++

http://notepad-plus.sourceforge.net/uk/site.htm


Other very good editors:

Jedit for Java lovers
http://sourceforge.net/projects/jedit/

SharpDevelop runs under .NET
http://www.icsharpcode.net/OpenSource/SD/

[Mandi]

I'm with you, Jeff. I use Homesite 3, from when Allaire still owned the software . . . they've since been purchased by Macromedia and make a huge, overbuilt monstrosity version of it. HS3 can still be found on Ebay, though.

I love that it automates a lot of code in ways that are intuitive to a computer user . . . for example, Ctrl+b gives you with a cursor in the middle for your intended "bold" content. One click wizards let you place images and other objects. It has a good spellcheck (that will learn new words) and a decent HTML validator, although it chokes a bit on SSI - I just ignore those flags since I know it's valid on the server.

It has a really robust find/replace utility.

It has a rudimentary "project" utility, but I can't say I've really used it much.

The built in viewer is somewhat limited (based on IE3, LOL!) but I've always been an "upload and view it" kind of girl anyway . . . I hate how viewing stuff locally doesn't troubleshoot path issues you'll have on the server. Poor support for CSS - but again, I tend to hardcode that and view on the server.

I like the balance between automating routine stuff, but still letting one be effectively a hardcoder. I am never going to be a high end designer, so this is just right for me.

[tappel]

For $19.95, it's tough to beat NoteTab Pro (http://www.notetab.com/ntp.php).

Tom

[tjlid]

For $19.95, it's tough to beat NoteTab Pro (http://www.notetab.com/ntp.php).

Tom
I second that. NoteTab Pro has been my HTML editor since 1998. I also use the Clipbook feature to automate many mundane tasks within NoteTab Pro and within other programs as well.

TL

[Winters]

I have struggled with this, and I have to say that when the dust settled, I decided that VIM was the editor for me. I've used vi to code forever, but I never considered it to be the most efficient thing until I tried the alternatives. Once you start getting into all the possible ways to customize it, and learn some of the more powerful commands, you can become extremely efficient. I think I've increased my productivity a few times over by adding in the syntax highlighting support, and certain key binding functions and just generally familiarizing myself with what it can actually do. I personally think that using the mouse during editing is the devil. :P

I used to use some WYSIWYG editors, and I got frustrated after a while. GoLive is a piece of junk as far as I'm concerned, not a fan of FrontPage after having to use it at work. I did use bluefish for a while (not a wysiwyg) and liked it alot (looks very similar to UltraEdit mentioned earlier in the thread). I think I might still use bluefish if Photoshop ran on linux, but I still always wished their text editing area responded to VI commands.

When I got more serious and needed to be practical, VIM was my best option. I know alot of people just really hate VI and I don't blame them at all, but for me it's a huge blessing. I can't say enough great things about it, so I won't even try :P