I have to do some webpages at the office. They have purchased Dreamweaver MX 2004 which I really like. But now I need an easy way to the graphics - banners, buttons, etc. I downloaded the trial of Fireworks and really like program. I know I can do the buttons in Dreamwever but Fireworks makes it so much faster. However, there is no way they are going to spend $300 for that program since they wouldn't even buy the Studio MX when I asked.

So here is my question can someone recommend another program that is not as expensive as Fireworks but is just as easy to use? Oh - it should also work on both Mac's and PC's if possible.

What about Adobe? The suite or Photoshop? My personal opinion is, that Fireworks doesn't hold a candle. :kiss:

I have to do some webpages at the office. They have purchased Dreamweaver MX 2004 which I really like. But now I need an easy way to the graphics - banners, buttons, etc. I downloaded the trial of Fireworks and really like program. I know I can do the buttons in Dreamwever but Fireworks makes it so much faster. However, there is no way they are going to spend $300 for that program since they wouldn't even buy the Studio MX when I asked.

So here is my question can someone recommend another program that is not as expensive as Fireworks but is just as easy to use? Oh - it should also work on both Mac's and PC's if possible.
I was going to suggest GIMP, which is free, but it is on Linux.

I do buttons as table cells, setting the border and background colors to get the look I want. I use JavaScript to change the background and text colors when the user rolls over the buttons. I'm not a fan of images as buttons, because it's more work to create a new button with new text if you have to redo the site navigational structure.

I was going to suggest GIMP, which is free, but it is on Linux.The GIMP is also available for Win32 and MacOSX. www.gimp.org


I do buttons as table cells, setting the border and background colors to get the look I want. I use JavaScript to change the background and text colors when the user rolls over the buttons. I'm not a fan of images as buttons, because it's more work to create a new button with new text if you have to redo the site navigational structure. :yeahthat: Plus less images = quicker load time.

I do buttons as table cells, setting the border and background colors to get the look I want.

I'd use CSS for this, rather than tables. It loads faster and you avoid nightmarish table layouts. It takes some time to convert and adjust, though. There are also IMHO some real issues with box formatting using CSS that CSS 2 and 3 don't seem to address.

As for GIMP, I like the program, but it's got a big learning curve. It can do just about anything, if you know how. Macromedia's programs are nice, but they tend to be expensive and are a little too "no-no do it our way" for me.

I use Paintshop Pro for image work, it's like $90 bucks.

I'd use CSS for this, rather than tables.
Are you talking about using DIVs positioned through the style sheet? I tried that for a test page, but I was getting some weird results with older browsers.

Are you talking about using DIVs positioned through the style sheet? I tried that for a test page, but I was getting some weird results with older browsers.
Put a browser update link on the page. I run all my pages through W3C validation. I hand pound most of my pages. Fewer validation errors that way.

I ran Microsoft's home page through the W3C validation and it had over 100 errors on it. :lol: Front Page creates a lot of errors.

If I were in charge of the universe, all browsers would conform 100% to the W3C standards. I've often found that code that meets the W3C validation still has problems in some browsers.

I know the government has some disability access requirements for all agency Web sites. The code on these sites has to be readable by the assistive devices that some disabled people have on their computers.

Thanks for all the suggestions. I will look and them and see I what I can do.