Starting Again

  Bebee 22:18 30 Oct 2009

Some time ago, about four years I think, I had a personal web site running that I was quite pleased with - not exactly cutting edge but functional and not too fussy - even some positive feedback here. I designed and built it with NetObjects Fusion - Version 9 originally although I have version 10 now.

I am now being asked to help with a new site for our local Gilbert & Sullivan Society (my wife is a member). They don't want anything exceptional (or expensive - they are a registered charity) just an upgrade to the 1990's site they had designed for them originally.

The question is - should I get to grips with NetObjects 10 again, is an upgrade to version 11 (about £40) worthwhile, or is something altogether different an option (Serif's new offering X4 looks quite interesting)?

I feel a bit out of touch now, so any advice would be welcome.

  Ansolan 03:33 31 Oct 2009

Hi Bebee

The really honest answer is none of them. Producing a WYSIWYG web creator that truly works has never been achieved. Just look at the money Apple spent to put out a total dog's dinner named iWeb.

Appreciate you are not looking for a commercial site and wouldn't want to spend time taking on board higher level skills just to help someone out. Really not worth spending money on upgrading Net Objects, or buying Serif, both fairly chronic.

Stick with what you have, or just download one of the many free site creators. click here is an example, far from perfect but will still produce a better site than Net Objects and they have a good support community.

  Forum Editor 23:33 31 Oct 2009

on upgrading Net Objects, or buying Serif, both fairly chronic."

With due respect, that's absolute rubbish.

NetObjects Fusion is a very good WYSIWYG application, and is used by hundreds of thousands of people every day of the week. Serif X4 is also very good.

As for "Producing a WYSIWYG web creator that truly works has never been achieved." That is, as fourm member has already said, a bizarre comment to make.

  Ansolan 04:06 01 Nov 2009

As you may have noted, I suggested a free WYSIWYG to the OP, or search for others, as he is just building a site for a local society. Still not ideal but presumably not so concerned with cross browser compatibility, working with search engines etc.etc.

Nothing bizarre about the comment in general, perhaps you would like to point to some of the millions of sites built by people with no knowledge beyond the WYSIWYG that do so well.

I might point out that I used to work with the producer of one of them, so understand the capabilities and limitations quite well.

If you don't fancy my word on the subject, how about a quote from Microsoft - SMX Seattle:

"Unfortunately people do use these packages, maybe see them in magazines, fall for the no skill needed line. A few do manage to iron out the hitches but most are permanently handicapped."

If you feel I'm interfering with your text link ad system by posting in this vein, that's fine, I won't mention products but please don't suggest the truth is bizarre.

  Bebee 08:24 01 Nov 2009

Thanks - I appreciate all contributions and comments.

I am aware of my limitations but would like something that is competent and pleasant experience to use on all browsers.

I did manage compatibility with my previous site on NetObjects, and recently tried it with Safari and it seemed OK with that too.

At that time I did have Serif WebPlus 9, which I did find poor, but Serif do produce some amazing software for the price and X4 does look good.

What I glean from this is that in many ways the the world of web building programs hasn't changed a great deal since I last spent time on it - the programs will do a satisfactory job, even a good job with a bit of extra knowledge and effort, but they won't turn you into a fully qualified web developer.

I will treat the project as a hobby activity and aim to enjoy doing it, so I don't mind spending a little money to add to the fun and the quality of the output - but I don't want to waste money.

  Forum Editor 10:34 01 Nov 2009

What you actually said - and what both fourm member and I reacted to was:

"Producing a WYSIWYG web creator that truly works has never been achieved." and that is certainly a bizarre statment.

fourm member didn't say anything about "millions of sites built by people with no knowledge" - you seem to have invented that. He said that millions of sites have been built with WYSIWYG software, and that's perfectly true.

As for interfering with our test link ad system, who said anything about that? I think you need to stop imagining what we say, and concentrate on what we actually say.

  Forum Editor 10:37 01 Nov 2009

That's understandable, and it's probably why fourm member suggested that you stick to NOF10. I agree with his suggestion.

  Ansolan 13:06 01 Nov 2009

Hi Bebee

Helpful summation of where the WYSIWYGs are, more balanced than mine.

Having spent time taking people's sites out of these things when they needed to move on, or solve the issues when their sites tanked, hope you will appreciate where the apparent bias came from.

Use whatever you are comfortable with and good luck with your new site.

  Bebee 13:13 01 Nov 2009

'hope you will appreciate where the apparent bias came from'

Yes I do appreciate where your comments came from - and that you made them.

Thanks for all contributions - all very helpful.

  IClaudio 12:56 05 Nov 2009

I have both NOF10 (built several sites with it) and WebPlus X4, having upgraded from X2 (there was no X3...).

I much prefer the Serif software: the included templates are much easier to adapt than NOF's and you will have a very good-looking site up and running very quickly.

Serif's Web Resources are an excellent way of providing things like Forums and so on without needing to get into php and so on. Best of all, they are free - and Serif also provide free Web Hosting.

I must admit that I've struggled over the past few decades to understand why these WYSIWYG programs are so derided by professionals - there are many great sites built with them. I agree that you need more knowledge to create anything more than a pretty basic 'flat' site, but many (most?) fan sites don't need anything more.

  Bebee 16:27 06 Nov 2009

Thanks for some more interesting input.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

iMac Pro review

Illustrator Charles Williams on how to create magazines and book covers

iMac Pro review

Les meilleures prises CPL (2018)