(1)
Your rating: Now say why...
HunAgurk (formerly known as HunAgurkHTML and Fast HTML) is much better than a Danish cucumber. It's also much better at making websites than cucumbers too, regardless of their nationality. HunAgurk can make making web pages a piece of cake. The HTML is done for you, just add your text and images and other media, and you're set. It also supports frames and a simple side bar building tool that will add navigation bars to the side of your page relatively quickly. Probably the best simple HTML editor around and probably the freest one too, you can also add your own tags and other code if
What's New
Version 2.5:
- Picking colours for the page uses an actual colour picker instead of having to type in hex codes.
Requirements
PPC, Mac OS X 10.3 or later
PPC, Mac OS X 10.3 or later
Be the first to recommend a similar software title.
HunAgurk User Discussion (Write a Review)
Overall:
(1)
(1)
| Downloads:5,148 |
| Version Downloads:1,907 |
| Type:Development : HTML |
| License:Free |
| Date:24 Sep 2007 |
| Platform:PPC |
| Price:Free |
Overall (Version 2.x): |
| Features: |
Ease of Use: |
| Value: |
| Stability: |
-
-
-
HunAgurk (formerly known as HunAgurkHTML and Fast HTML) is much better than a Danish cucumber. It's also much better at making websites than cucumbers too, regardless of their nationality. HunAgurk can make making web pages a piece of cake. The HTML is done for you, just add your text and images and other media, and you're set. It also supports frames and a simple side bar building tool that will add navigation bars to the side of your page relatively quickly. Probably the best simple HTML editor around and probably the freest one too, you can also add your own tags and other code if you want, so you are not limited to the standard set of tools.
Copyright © 2012 MacUpdate LLC
- -
jaydub reviewed on 25 Sep 2007
+59
If you're not going to contribute to the development of HunAgurk and are just going to be selfish by posting flimsy comments, then my recommendation to you is go and buy this book-> http://www.amazon.com/Learn-HTML-Weekend-3rd-CD/dp/0761526943 and open Textedit and code your own damn pages by hand. Sorry if I'm being rude or anything, but I'm frustrated with the three people who commented on this and said hardly anything constructive at all.
This is the line, above this line will be useful, what you like and don't like about my program, what you want changed, what you'd like improved etc... Got it? Good.
__________________________________________________
1. I don't know anyone who's still using FONT tags, and your app is spewing them out left, right and centre - which is why scottyarch made the observation about bloated code. Ditch the FONT tags and add support for CSS instead.
2. Make your interface more Mac-like - use dropdown menus, dialogs for finding image files, etc. - using type-in fields increases the likelihood of mistakes being made and your app being perceived as 'clunky' - which at the moment, it is.
3. Your Tools window simply squirts chunks of code into the HTML, which can cause problems - for example, if someone tries to *change* the title from the Tools window, it simply adds a new chunk of code at the bottom of the document; similarly, if someone decides to add a paragraph back into the middle of the document from the Tools window, it just goes to the end anyway, and they then have to cut and paste - none of this makes for a happy user experience.
Originally I used styles to style the text, but it would do it for each and every paragraph which is the surplus of useless code ScottyArch was talking about.
I ditched the styles and then added the font tag for compatibility with old old old browsers and it seemed to make sense though, I can't work out styles and the font tag is much more friendly imho.
I'd have to restructure the whole program for styles, which is going to be a waste of time, and I'd have to add code for styles on and off, which would increase the size of the application. I'll try it, just not now.
You are right about the drop down menus, but I can't do dialogues for images sorry. It would try to access the images, like, where they are on the hard drive. Instead of docs/image/hi.gif, it would go to Macintosh HD:Users:Telstar:Desktop:Website:docs:image:hi.gif.
I will agree that not being able to insert code wherever you like is annoying, but I'm totally stumped as to how I'd get around that. I'll give it a try and we'll see what happens. But cutting and pasting doesn't really require any skills, and you can always select and drag the code to where you want in the page.
But fair play, I'll see what I can do about inserting code wherever you want, but you shouldn't really dive into HunAgurk without knowing what you're going to make, so there's no excuse to have to change the title; unless you change your mind and want to go over again. There's nothing stopping you to go into the code window and just changing the title though.
Thanks for your input, I'll get to work on some of these straight away. :)
But still, unfair comparison. And as for being bloated, it only really runs slowly on Intel. On my G4 it seems pretty zippy.
+31
Oh, it could be because the application is native to PowerPC and it's running under Rosetta... If you've got a G4, then try it, you might notice a difference.
+125
Those of you considering this, as a web designer who hand-codes his work (so you know how much I dislike WYSIWYG editors) just use iWeb. More features, more support, extremely user friendly.
How and why are you looking at my source code? It's not open source and I didn't bundle the source with the .zip file, unless you're using seedy and naughty methods to pick though my application. I don't approve of that, and I'd like you to cut it out. :)
And I think iWeb costs money - about £70 if I recall. The point of my application is that it's free. I'm not saying that it's better than iWeb, because it's not. But for most people, text, images and links are really quite enough. So really, it's a bit unfair to compare something like this with something like iWeb or Dreamweaver and all that stuff. Anyway, you've got iWeb, so why bother with a free HTML editor in the first place? :P
+125
(2) iWeb comes FREE with EVERY Mac. You only need to pay $79 for iLife (which iWeb is a part of) if you have a previous version where it's not included or you wish to upgrade to the newest version. Otherwise, it's free.
(3) I'm not comparing you to Dreamweaver, I never mentioned Dreamweaver, I wouldn't either because Dreamweaver is an extremely powerful and highly in-depth application that can do some pretty advanced level web development. This isn't anything like that.
(4) I don't use iWeb. I use Coda or Dreamweaver, remember, I hand code.
(5) As for what most people need, most people need nothing, but what more. You're application expects that they have their own web space (otherwise what's the point of writing your own code?) and people paying for web space are going to expect a bit more out of an app like yours.
Otherwise they'd get a blog on Wordpress, Blog.com or LiveJournal assuming MySpace and Face Book weren't enough to satisfy their needs.
+125
Dreamweaver is not a WYSIWYG, it can be used as such, but it's infinitely more powerful and that's just one of it's more basic features.
As for bloated, I was referring to how you style each element individually instead of using style sheets. It creates a lot of extra, and useless code.
+125
Check out w3schools.com.