What do you think is the best?

I like Microsoft word, because it has all the space you need, Notepad is small.
Word can do your HTML easier, Notepad is picky if it's wrong.
It does the tags I need and it has mostly evry thing I need!

I've used many but I always fall back on basic notepad. In all I don't have a favorite.

What do you think is the best?


Ooops sorry, I forgot the poll!

Notepad.


Without a doubt.

I have Dreamweaver because I got it for free from school last year because we used it in class and the teacher had some special edition, but I rarely use it. Oddly, I usually use it for PHP scripts. Not sure why...

I only have notepad and wordpad on my home computer. Even if I had Word I doubt I would switch.

I really, really love UltraEdit, which is a feature-rich text/hex editor and not just for HTML. A few of its many features are syntax highlighting, automatic indents, code folding, use of Unix regular expressions in find and replace, macros, templates, column mode (includes rectangular selection), great Unicode support and character encoding conversions, spell checking, automatic back-ups, batch find/replace in files on hard drive, and file comparison. It's a disk-based editor so it can also easily open very large files.

Beautiful program. Beats the pants off Notepad and is much easier to use than (X)Emacs or VI(M) for those who didn't grow up in a command line environment.

Notepad.


Without a doubt.
Oh, I'm afraid that I have very, very large doubts about that, my friend. Notepad is fine if you like rotting your eyes out staring at monochrome text, but it's far from the best text editor.

I use EditPad Lite. It's like a souped-up version of Notepad, the main difference being that I like it more. :D

Crimson Editor is my program of choice for coding. I use it because I do a lot of PHP coding, and its syntax highlighting really helps make it easier to spot mistakes. When all I have to do is HTML, however, I just use Notepad.

Notepad2. For quick touch up just Notepad.

I voted notepad, but I actually use notepad 2. It's designed for programming.
http://www.flos-freeware.ch/notepad2.html

It's the best
Beats the rest!

Notepad :)

Notepad is fine if you like rotting your eyes out staring at monochrome text



But that's what I love to do, especially when I'm in the mood to make something! :) As for the last 4 months and being busy will school and basically wasting the money I've paid in hosting...

But that's what I love to do, especially when I'm in the mood to make something! :)

:lol:

Mmm.. burning retinas.

:rolleyes:

You masochistic Notepad users are nuts.

Well, Josh.. not everyone can afford to pay $40 for an HTML editor.

Notepad is still better than Word, at any rate.

What programs are you using then?

Josh uses UltraEdit, which costs $40 US.

I'm using EditPad Lite, which is like Notepad, but has quite a few more options. I like it, it suits my purposes and didn't cost me anything. :D

Josh uses UltraEdit, which costs $40 US.

I'm using EditPad Lite, which is like Notepad, but has quite a few more options. I like it, it suits my purposes and didn't cost me anything. :D

:blush: Next time tell me to read the first page. :lolol:

:blush: Next time tell me to read the first page. :lolol:

:lol: Kaaaaaaaaate! Read the first page!!

The thought never crossed my mind! :blush: :lol:

Well, Josh.. not everyone can afford to pay $40 for an HTML editor.
Nor have I suggested that they should. You, for example, use EditPad Lite. Onigiri uses Crimson Editor (and is doubly nuts for willingly using notepad despite his knowledge of the former :P). There are plenty of free text editors out there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_text_editors#Free_software_.28libre.2Fopen-source.29) with plenty of useful features (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_text_editors). Notepad is just a to-say-we-did piece of default software, and while it certainly edits text, it was never meant to do it well or efficiently in a development environment.

Nor have I suggested that they should. You, for example, use EditPad Lite. Onigiri uses Crimson Editor (and is doubly nuts for willingly using notepad despite his knowledge of the former :P). There are plenty of free text editors out there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_text_editors#Free_software_.28libre.2Fopen-source.29) with plenty of useful features (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_text_editors). Notepad is just a to-say-we-did piece of default software, and while it certainly edits text, it was never meant to do it well or efficiently in a development environment.

:geek:

Yeah, I just use Notepad :)

Craaaaaaaziness...

Okay, so here's an analogy for a mentality that I never quite understood:

It's your birthday (yay!), you need a cake and happen to know of two - your town's cake industry has all but collapsed - default cake and improvement cake. Default cake is soft, has icing, tastes good, is free, and comes with your refrigerator. Improvement cake is soft, moist, tastes marvelous, has multiple layers, each with just the right amount of an icing that isn't too sweet or too bland, never goes stale, has 0g of fat and a low number of calories per serving, has lovely garnishes, washes your dishes when you're finished, sweeps, mops, and vacuums your floors (just in case you dropped some crumbs), is also free, but is located in a store that is two blocks away from your house.

Why will so many people opt for the cake in the fridge instead of walking the grand total of four blocks for the better cake? :confused:

Sure, it can't be denied that default cake would probably meet your needs, but improvement cake meets them so much better without negatively impacting your ability to eat cake due to unfamiliarity, because all of the basic attributes of default cake are implemented in a similar fashion by improvement cake.

:cake:

I thought we talked about HTML editors... :rolleyes:

:lol:



Josh, I was simply making the point that people use what they like. If they were unhappy with Notepad, they'd switch. That's what I did.

I use Notepad for HTML/CSS.

Well, Josh.. not everyone can afford to pay $40 for an HTML editor.

Notepad is still better than Word, at any rate.

How?

I thought we talked about HTML editors... :rolleyes:Well, yeah, I guess... but cake is so much more scrumptious.

Heh, nice signature, by the way... I think.

Josh, I was simply making the point that people use what they like. If they were unhappy with Notepad, they'd switch. That's what I did.
Haha, that much is obvious. The point is that we shouldn't like Notepad — shouldn't prefer it (or anything else, for that matter) to something better, at least. Since beginning work in an office environment, little irritates me more than the seemingly ubiquitous "way-we've-always-done-it" attitude. Stagnation is bad, mmmkay?

Notepad is still better than Word, at any rate.
How?
Because Word, despite a rudimentary ability to view and output HTML documents, is not an HTML editor. It is a word processor and it does what word processors do best: format text and other objects for layout on a piece of paper. The internet is not paper, however (until Sen. Ted Stevens has his way), and HTML is not a formatting language; rather, it is a language for describing content. Even when using Word's filtered HTML output, which is designed to remove extra, proprietary formatting from the document, it completely disregards semantics (headings aren't output as headings, etc.) and clutters your document with a redundant and bloated mix of HTML and CSS. This is common among WYSIWYG editors, with few exceptions.

HTML and CSS documents are pure text and should be edited with a text editor to maintain proper control over their content. Notepad, for all it might lack as a development tool, is at least that.

I use Notepad ++, which I think is a pretty good program.

--------------------

Dontcha wish Amanda was hot like me?

:lolol: Nice signature Josh

HTML Edditor, or not I will still think Word is better then Notepad.
But we all have opinions...
:teddy:

I use Notepad.

Also, we must agree upon the fact that it is all personal preference. Just like most everything else in life, there is no "best", just what we feel is right to suit our own needs.

:rolleyes:

You masochistic Notepad users are nuts.

You should try notpad2, its better then any other editor I have ever used. Fast, versatile, and still has the features of most other editors.

Notepad is just a to-say-we-did piece of default software, and while it certainly edits text, it was never meant to do it well or efficiently in a development environment.

Sorry for the double post. But you have no idea how wrong you are there. Notepad is one of the most useful pieces of software that comes with windows.

:lolol: Nice signature Josh
Thanks, but rumour has it that Amanda is way hotter than Josh. The reliability of its source, however, is questionable.

You should try notpad2, its better then any other editor I have ever used. Fast, versatile, and still has the features of most other editors.
Notepad2 is definitely a nice piece of software, but I think I'll stick with my current editor. There's no way I'm giving up my tabbed document interface, among other features.

Notepad is just a to-say-we-did piece of default software, and while it certainly edits text, it was never meant to do it well or efficiently in a development environment.Sorry for the double post. But you have no idea how wrong you are there. Notepad is one of the most useful pieces of software that comes with windows.
You're right: I have absolutely no idea how "wrong" I am there, but I do have an idea of how poorly you've read my posts. Despite the verbosity of those posts, I'm really not trying to make a huge deal out of this, so I'll try to keep this brief and pointed.

I don't feel, nor have I suggested, that Notepad is useless. I get plenty of use out of it myself — as a tool for taking notes. Heck, I even agree that it's one of the most useful pieces of software that's included with Windows, but if you think it's anything more than an application that's there so Microsoft can claim that its functionality is included with their OS — if you think that it is a good development tool or even an exceptional text editor — then you're, at least, mildly deluded: it isn't. Simply because it edits text doesn't make it good at editing text, and it certainly doesn't make it good at editing source code. If it did, then I wouldn't use UltraEdit and you wouldn't use Notepad2. Notepad works just fine, but there is a myriad of better solutions that are available.

Thanks, but rumour has it that Amanda is way hotter than Josh. The reliability of its source, however, is questionable.

Actually, the credibility of the source is impeccable. It is the credibility of your source that is questionable. :lol:

Besides, isn't _Notepad a _word processor?

Ok, sorry Josh, I did go a little overboard. And I do agree with this:

anything more than an application that's there so Microsoft can claim that its functionality is included with their OS

This is what I do not agree with:

>>...it was never meant to do it[edit text] well or efficiently

Actually, the credibility of the source is impeccable. It is the credibility of your source that is questionable. :lol:
My source hasn't failed me yet, thank you very much.


Besides, isn't _Notepad a _word processor?
No, notepad is a text editor. That means that all it reads and writes is character information: there is no font, justification, or other style information encoded directly in the file, just text. Word processors create files with that extra styling and are primarily meant for laying out information and printing it to paper. Microsoft Word is a word processor; notepad is not. Word processors shouldn't be used to edit documents which are pure text, like HTML files.


This is what I do not agree with:

>>...it was never meant to do it[edit text] well or efficiently
Well, that's fine, because this is what I said:

...while it certainly edits text, it was never meant to do it well or efficiently in a development environment.
Though, depending on your experience with "good and efficient" text editors, it might not be much of a stretch to remove that last bit and have it remain accurate.

I use Scite (http://www.scintilla.org/), feel alone in using it, agree with Josh, laughed at the cake analogy, hopes nobody would use Word as an HTML editor and wonders what you mean by it having more space vs. Notepad being small.

Actually, the credibility of the source is impeccable. It is the credibility of your source that is questionable. :lol:

:lolol:

My source hasn't failed me yet, thank you very much.

Is the source you by any chance? :P

Is the source you by any chance? :P

Of course it is. Did you haaaaaaaaave to ask? :lol:

Dreamweaver Ftw?

I use NoteTab Light (not so much) and EditPad Lite (usually). Cause I'm poor and can't afford the full versions, haha. =)

I love their features, and hate using Notepad. I recently did a presentation for my class, instructing them on how to make a simple web page, and I had to have them use Notepad.. ugh. The lack of features really shows once you've coded in a text editor like EditPad Lite.

But anywho. Just my two cents. =)

EditPad Lite and Notepad are the two that I use. I don't know how one can tolerate using Microsoft Word for HTML, since that isn't it's purpose. I don't care if it's 'bigger' (in what way?)

Is the source you by any chance? :P
But of course! Could anyone else be as infallible?

But of course! Could anyone else be as infallible?

:rolleyes: Of course! I shouldn't have even wondered

Dreamweaver Ftw?


If I didn't love Notepad because of its simplicity, Dreamweaver would be my program of choice. I do love the features of it, so with that said...

If this thread really was for the "best" editor, Dreamweaver would get my vote. However, this is [obviously (Thanks everyone)] an opinionated thread in which everyone is just going to talk about (and vote) for the editor they use.


By the way, you all crack me up.

I've never tried Dreamweaver, Zeppy, admittedly because of a fierce (and largely well-deserved) bias against WYSIWYG HTML editors. I'm curious: what features does it have that could cause you think it could objectively be labelled as the best HTML editor.

Dreamweaver if I'm working with a large site. Crimson Editor if I'm working with a small site. A mix between Visual Studio .NET and Dreamweaver if I'm doing ASP.NET.

My source hasn't failed me yet, thank you very much.



No, notepad is a text editor. That means that all it reads and writes is character information: there is no font, justification, or other style information encoded directly in the file, just text. Word processors create files with that extra styling and are primarily meant for laying out information and printing it to paper. Microsoft Word is a word processor; notepad is not. Word processors shouldn't be used to edit documents which are pure text, like HTML files.



Well, that's fine, because this is what I said:


Though, depending on your experience with "good and efficient" text editors, it might not be much of a stretch to remove that last bit and have it remain accurate.


Well I still don't see the difference. Word, eddits text, Notepad can cahnge the font, style, so on. I'm just being lazy using word, but if it wasn't meant to eddit HTML documents, then why did Microsoft make it do that?
And Notepad was meant to take notes, not eddit HTML files. BUt most use it as an edditor.
It said so in the help.
And you can print out word documents too!
So I think they are the same.

I use Scite (http://www.scintilla.org/), feel alone in using it, agree with Josh, laughed at the cake analogy, hopes nobody would use Word as an HTML editor and wonders what you mean by it having more space vs. Notepad being small.

:tired:
Well, when I used Notepad, I wanted to add something, and it made it a link when it wasn't suposed to!
And it was only like one paragraph! Word on the other handmade my page as big as I wanted to!

If you want a paragraph as a page...

I'm in the mood to debate. But I'm out numbered!
If my friend was with me on this forum she would be on my side!
Cause she uses word too!
If people want to argue, that word is the worst edditor edditor, then let's make it one, on one.
Just kidding!

Word puts so much unnecessary garbage in the code. It may not matter to you (not meaning anyone specific), and that's fine, but it matters to me. I don't want to look at it when I edit the code by hand, which is what I always do. Word really cannot even be counted as an HTML editor. It's just not that. Realistically, nobody in a professional position makes sites in Word or anything related, and in fact they probably shouldn't even us a WYSIWYG... And if one wants to be in a professional position, I would suggest that they ditch Word and do it the right way (oh, there is a right way) right away.

Word puts so much unnecessary garbage in the code. It may not matter to you (not meaning anyone specific), and that's fine, but it matters to me. I don't want to look at it when I edit the code by hand, which is what I always do. Word really cannot even be counted as an HTML editor. It's just not that. Realistically, nobody in a professional position makes sites in Word or anything related, and in fact they probably shouldn't even us a WYSIWYG... And if one wants to be in a professional position, I would suggest that they ditch Word and do it the right way (oh, there is a right way) right away.


Well I'm not in a profeshanal mood. This is my first site, and I'm not an HTML master (I don't plan to be.)
It was just something I want to try.
It's just a personal site.
I get what you mean though.
I look at the cource, and nothing I learned in HTML is there, just a bunch of stuff I haven't learned.
One day I'll have to use notepad!
But I'm sticking to word, because it's my first site, and possibley my last!