- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You 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. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Reply to: Free Site builders
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Free Site builders"
Collapse
-
Thanks for the insight. If you turn off all the MS specific widgets I find FP2003 fine for quickly hacking together a few HTML pages. Often I tweak the HTML by hand after though
-
Its primary purpose is for developing ASP.NET applications. It's overkill if you just want to hack a bit of HTML together.Originally posted by Fred Bloggs View PostHmmmm, I downloaded and installed this web developer 2008 express malarky. It looks very posh. I'm used to hacking around my own simple-ish websites using frontpage 2003 and I havbe to say, the absence of a simple menu that does "insert > image > from file" etc... floored me. I've gone back to FP2003. My initial conclusion is that for us simple non IT souls the web developer 2008 express might as well come from Mars for the use it is to us! (Oh, and my ancient but trusty Athlon XP 1800 PC slows to a crawl running the web dev thingy too!).
I've never used FP2003, but earlier versions produced some of the most badly-structured, bloated and invalid markup ever known to man. It also had a habit of producing pages that would only display as intended in Internet Explorer, which isn't a good idea now that IE's market share is generally considered to be down to around the 75% mark.
But I suppose it's possible that the 2003 version was better...
Leave a comment:
-
Hmmmm, I downloaded and installed this web developer 2008 express malarky. It looks very posh. I'm used to hacking around my own simple-ish websites using frontpage 2003 and I havbe to say, the absence of a simple menu that does "insert > image > from file" etc... floored me. I've gone back to FP2003. My initial conclusion is that for us simple non IT souls the web developer 2008 express might as well come from Mars for the use it is to us! (Oh, and my ancient but trusty Athlon XP 1800 PC slows to a crawl running the web dev thingy too!).
Leave a comment:
-
Windows (XP or Vista only).Originally posted by FiveTimes View PostI'll think I'll have a look at that, are there any product dependencies ?
I haven't downloaded the 2008 edition yet (I still use 2005). Not sure what it's like for building pages though - I only use it for JavaScript debugging in Internet Explorer (and occasionally trying to work out what on earth IE thinks it's up to when constructing its DOM).
The JS debugger is very good, once one works out the tortuous procedure necessary to get it to attach to an IE process.
Leave a comment:
-
I'm not aware of any dependencies. You can download it from :
http://www.microsoft.com/express/product/default.aspx
Leave a comment:
-
Damn it with faint praise, why don't you?Originally posted by adestor View PostI've been using it for a while, and it's just as good as Dreamweaver CS3, and probably easier to use.
Leave a comment:
-
I'll think I'll have a look at that, are there any product dependencies ?Originally posted by adestor View PostHi,
I suggest you try microsoft visual web developer 2008 express edition. Unusually for a Microsoft product, it's free. I've been using it for a while, and it's just as good as Dreamweaver CS3, and probably easier to use.
Leave a comment:
-
NickFitz is an uber-guru of such things, and currently on the bench
Leave a comment:
-
£20 a template?!Originally posted by Solent View Post
I use Rapidweaver comes with hundreds of templates from a community of people who develop them. I was publishing my site in the some morning I started using it.
Leave a comment:
-
Try visual web developer ....
Hi,
I suggest you try microsoft visual web developer 2008 express edition. Unusually for a Microsoft product, it's free. I've been using it for a while, and it's just as good as Dreamweaver CS3, and probably easier to use.
Leave a comment:
-
Leave a comment:
-
its not quite free, but have a look at Mr Site, seems very easy to use.
I'm sure others will be along to give a bit more guidance.
Leave a comment:
-
Free Site builders
Hi,
A friend also a potential customer has asked if I would create a website for his company.
Nothing to complex, so as I am not a website designer by trade. I was thinking of using a hosting company for the domain name that also offers a decent free site builder as part the hosting package.
From my experience they can be fairly limiting in the choices available etc. So
I am asking here in the forum for recommendations please of decent site builders
free or as part of a hosting package.
ThanksTags: None
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers



Leave a comment: