PHWinfo - Afficher un message

19/02/2008, 20h50

wxyz321@gmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 19, 12:19 pm, "$not quite so$ Fat Sam"
> <samandja...@knox.orangehome.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't use Photoshop to build a website.
>
> Maybe you wouldn't, maybe most people wouldn't, but I am. As I stated
> in my original post, I'm not about to shell out $400 for software that
> I'll never need again once this project is finished. The site is 95%
> done with CS3, and it looks beautiful. I just need to sort out this
> last detail.

Oh please don't misunderstand me Rudy.
I wasn't criticising you or your methods.
Just trying to you by suggesting there might be an easier solution.
You don't have to pay out $400 for a copy of dreamweaver. There are plenty
of free wysiwyg HTML editors out there that will still do a better job than
photoshop, which isn't primarily an HTML editing programme.

19/02/2008, 20h50	#4
\(not quite so\) Fat Sam Messages: n/a Hébergeur:	Re: Q: Site building with CS3 wxyz321@gmail.com wrote: > On Feb 19, 12:19 pm, "\(not quite so\) Fat Sam" > <samandja...@knox.orangehome.co.uk> wrote: > >> I wouldn't use Photoshop to build a website. > > Maybe you wouldn't, maybe most people wouldn't, but I am. As I stated > in my original post, I'm not about to shell out $400 for software that > I'll never need again once this project is finished. The site is 95% > done with CS3, and it looks beautiful. I just need to sort out this > last detail. Oh please don't misunderstand me Rudy. I wasn't criticising you or your methods. Just trying to you by suggesting there might be an easier solution. You don't have to pay out $400 for a copy of dreamweaver. There are plenty of free wysiwyg HTML editors out there that will still do a better job than photoshop, which isn't primarily an HTML editing programme.