LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > 2003 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice Awards
User Name
Password
2003 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice Awards This forum is for the 2003 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice Awards.
You can now vote for your favorite products of 2003. This is your chance to be heard!

Notices


View Poll Results: Web Development Editor of the Year
Quanta 233 49.26%
Bluefish 215 45.45%
Ginf 3 0.63%
FCKeditor 1 0.21%
Screem 21 4.44%
Voters: 473. You may not vote on this poll

 
  Search this Thread
Old 11-18-2003, 06:13 AM   #31
sequitur
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Oregon
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 11

Rep: Reputation: 0

Quote:
My point is.. I don't care how fast and optimized your parser is. I'm not gonna use quanta if it depends on 50 megs of KDE so all that nice optimization is completely irrelevant to me.
Cool. It's not like I'm losing sales over it. I used to do heavy professional development with nothing more than EPM on OS/2. All I wanted was something that would make me really fast... Then I ended up developing on an OSS program... Then I found myself on a crusade for GPL software... Then I got religion when the righteous brotherhood of the W3C enforcers sat me down and preached that not one page that failed to validate should be left on the internet with metadata from my app. (Oops!) Thus enlightened I forged on to leave the valley of the sabretoothed HTML beast and vowed never again to be beholden to any one DTD... And now I find out that my libraries are a blight on the hard drives of the faithful. Why? How could I have been so foolish to be taken in by these sirens with their pretty widgets?

Anyway most people seem to put a priority on intuitive performance. The relative cost of aquiring it is of no consequence given the value of their time, and especially when Dreamweaver is $500 and many people tell me they prefer Quanta. The important thing is that you have what you want... whatever that is, because I only know what you don't want. Enjoy it.
 
Old 11-18-2003, 06:49 AM   #32
slakmagik
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 4,113

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally posted by sequitur
I know you've given me an incentive not to but that wouldn't be nice. It's a double entendre, which is why I didn't want to go there. "small drive" == cramped for space on your hard disk and "skinny pipe" != "fat pipe" would be a slow internet connection. This was a speculation prior to your offering a more detailed explanation.
I'm aware of what both terms mean and the double entendre - I wasn't - and am not - aware of what your intention was in raising the issue. I have a 25 MHz 486SX and a P100 that are disconnected from the net and would be running a 2200bps modem and a 56K if they were, and I have an i686 with 40 gigs that is DSL-capable and an Athlon XP with 35 gigs that is on DSL. So what? And if the entendre was the point then, in all honesty, I'd call that pretty pathetic.

Quote:
if you feel Mozilla Firebird is a dog than so is Quanta. However we're not done optimizing it yet so it will be faster come release time.
No, I dislike Linternet Explorer - I love mozilla, though.

Later.
 
Old 11-19-2003, 01:05 AM   #33
arose
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Latvia
Distribution: Mandrake
Posts: 6

Rep: Reputation: 0
nxml-mode :-)
 
Old 11-19-2003, 11:34 PM   #34
moeminhtun
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Singapore
Distribution: Fedora Core 6
Posts: 647

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally posted by s1ider
I'm sorry but if you voted for bluefish then you REALLY have not checked out Quanta any time recently. They don't even compare!

--s1ider
Yeah! right. First I voted for bluefish coz I had not used Quanta before. Now I already downloaded Quanta and Gee! you are right.
I wish I could change my vote.
 
Old 11-19-2003, 11:38 PM   #35
moeminhtun
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Singapore
Distribution: Fedora Core 6
Posts: 647

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally posted by The Noid
My point is.. I don't care how fast and optimized your parser is. I'm not gonna use quanta if it depends on 50 megs of KDE so all that nice optimization is completely irrelevant to me.
Don't care the depedencies. Just upgrade your KDE to 3.1 and you will get Quenta automatically. Coz Quanta is integrated into KDE 3.1
 
Old 11-21-2003, 04:52 AM   #36
amantia
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 9

Rep: Reputation: 0
Quanta...

Hi all,
I've just registered on this site as the discussion about Quanta got so heated, that I can't stay so quiet in the background...

1. "This is not a Quanta mailing list". Right, but it's a forum about voting for the best web development editor, and Quanta is one of the nominates. Which was is better: to say that "hey, I voted this, I voted that" or talk in detail about the nominated applications, showing what's good or bad in them? Not trolling, but showing facts.

2. "Quanta uses KDE libraries". Yes it does, and Eric explained well, why is it so. Because of reusable component, because of great framework, because it takes a lot of things down from our shoulders and thus Quanta can progress in its own area (web development) rather than trying to reimplement everything from a single dialog to http/ftp access, editor, HTML rendering or so. So yes, it uses the KDE libraries. I would not chose anything inferior if I'm not forced to.

3. "The requirements are big (50MB)." In case of distributions, yes, it is big. But if you take the time and don't want a bloated KDE libraries, you can strip them down. Compile from sources. Disable arts support (Quanta does not need arts!), disable libmad support. If you teak it more, you can disable even more things from the kde libraries. Not that I say this is a good thing, but I say that the requirements can be stripped down. weblint is also only an optional requirement.

4. Quanta is a GUI applications. Thus it needs dialogs, help system, grahpical editor. Why should we only provide only a man page? If you don't need a GUI app, don't use it. Fire up an xterm and run your favourie console mode editor there. Or just don't run X. It will save you a lot of memory and disk space. Nobody forces you to use Quanta or any other GUI application.

5. Disk space: my whole and full KDE installation is 370MB, but it includes really everything from KDE and some extra KDE applications. And also API documentation (110MB) and developer things. I'm sure that another 40MB-50MB can be stripped down for a regular user (not a developer). Quanta takes 6MB. Mozilla takes 25MB. XFree86 takes about 80MB if I count the installed Xfree86* packages, but /usr/X11 is 178MB. My X server uses 280MB of memory. Looking at the latter figures, +50MB doesn't seem so much.

6. Slow startup: naturally it's slow as the libraries must be loaded. Plain X apps are not slow, because X is already in the memory. Anything that uses not already loaded libraries is slower to start. But is a web editor something that you start and quit, start and quit? Those N seconds from your life shouldn't really matter. Again, you're not forced to use it. console apps usually start faster.

7. Memory usage: yes, it's using memory, maybe even more than expected, but we are constantly trying to improve this situation as well as the speed of the application. If you are low on memory, frist thing to do is to quit X.

Anyway, the conclusion is: if you don't like the requirements, don't use it. If you don't like Quanta, don't use it. But if you have not used it, didn't know it, don't criticize it. If you don't like the direction where Linux is going, stop using Linux. Or ignore those parts that bother you. There is a lot of things to choice from. Nobody is forcing you, unlike MS does in many cases (because they are in a monpol situation). Think positive and don't be against something, but support something. Be it GNOME, vim, Bluefish or whatever. If they are good for you, support them. But this doesn't mean that the rest is evil and cannot be good for others. And this is even true for MS and Windows. It's good for many peoples. It's not good for me, so I don't use it. If somebody comes here I show the strengths of my choice. I only get mad about other products if they really do something stupid (like last time Word for my wife printed only garbage until I restarted it...)

Andras
 
Old 11-21-2003, 10:24 AM   #37
fancypiper
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Sparta, NC USA
Distribution: Ubuntu 10.04
Posts: 5,141

Rep: Reputation: 58
I use either mcedit or gnp, neither of which is listed.
 
Old 11-21-2003, 11:14 PM   #38
dcaillouet
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: May 2001
Location: Flyover Country
Distribution: SuSE
Posts: 10

Rep: Reputation: 0
Since commercial products (Oracle, DB2, games, etc.) were listed in other categories, I'm surprised Zend 3.x wasn't listed in this poll. It's not free but it does run on Linux.
 
Old 11-22-2003, 10:20 AM   #39
jeremy
root
 
Registered: Jun 2000
Distribution: Debian, Red Hat, Slackware, Fedora, Ubuntu
Posts: 12,425

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308Reputation: 3308
Zend Studio is more of an IDE and will likely be in next year's IDE of the Year Award.

--jeremy
 
Old 11-25-2003, 01:52 AM   #40
Mal the Elder
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 1

Rep: Reputation: 0
I especially like Bluefish, now that project management is working consistently in Version 0.12. I keep trying to like Quanta and Screem, but Quanta seems to insist on formatting lines its way, not mine, and Screem just keeps crashing. I can't say I miss previewing in the app, since I'd rather see it in an actual browser window. Besides, Quanta won't display .php pages, and that's kind of required.

Still, the best editing environment is whatever works best for you. My favorite combo is Bluefish and a handful of browsers: Moz, Firebird, Opera, Konq, links and even Exploder. If you're developing stuff to be seen by the masses, you've gotta test in everything. CSS makes it easier, Great Ghu be praised!

Nuff ramblin',
Mal
 
Old 11-25-2003, 03:39 PM   #41
Yaa 101
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: Mandrake
Posts: 3

Rep: Reputation: 0
I think Screem and Quanta highly unstable and bloat...
My favorite is Bluefish...
 
Old 11-26-2003, 08:16 PM   #42
chrisis
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: gentoo
Posts: 4

Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally posted by moeminhtun
Yeah! right. First I voted for bluefish coz I had not used Quanta before. Now I already downloaded Quanta and Gee! you are right.
I wish I could change my vote.
Aw... see what you've have done. Now I HAVE to download Quanta. Good thing I haven't removed KDE yet...

 
Old 11-26-2003, 08:17 PM   #43
chrisis
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Distribution: gentoo
Posts: 4

Rep: Reputation: 0
Quote:
Originally posted by fancypiper
I use either mcedit or gnp, neither of which is listed.
Same goes for vi.
 
Old 11-27-2003, 10:40 AM   #44
NGene
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2001
Location: Turku, Finland
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 66

Rep: Reputation: 16
I'd vote for Vim... it's the best editor for web development...
 
Old 11-28-2003, 10:29 AM   #45
trickykid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,149

Rep: Reputation: 235Reputation: 235Reputation: 235
Just to clarify for the misinformed members. Those who are referring to plain type text editors as their choice to do web page design and coding are not realizing what this poll is about.
Yes you can use vi, pico or whatever text editor you want to code html, etc. These are great editors for typing, editing anything that is text based. That is why they are called text editors.

This poll is geared towards the best app that is or was designed to assist in web page creation.

Example: vi doesn't come equipped with tools to place html tags and such in the page your creating, editing.

bluefish and quanta and all the others mentioned do. That's their purpose. They're not simply text editors, they were only designed to assist in coding web pages, etc.

I hope that clears things up in why we have an text editor poll and a web design app poll...

Cheers.
 
  


 


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > 2003 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice Awards

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:26 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration