<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Site Grinder 2</title>
	<atom:link href="http://layersmagazine.com/site-grinder-2.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://layersmagazine.com/site-grinder-2.html</link>
	<description>The How-to Magazine for Everything Adobe</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 21:03:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: bikeman</title>
		<link>http://layersmagazine.com/site-grinder-2.html/comment-page-1#comment-8083</link>
		<dc:creator>bikeman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 07:03:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.layersmagazine.com/?p=7243#comment-8083</guid>
		<description>I can&#039;t see the point of this product. I tried the trial and was disappointed.

Lots of graphics apps can save as html including photoshop. This option usually results in very poor code suitable for use only as a mockup or by a user who doesn&#039;t know better.

In this respect Site Grinder is no better. The html it writes is poor and no better that Photoshop&#039;s &#039;save for web&#039; it just saves the bother of slicing which is no big deal.

Site Grinder is a bit like Netobjects Fusion or Xara Web Designer except that both of those actually manage to create html pages exactly as you see them prior to export. All three write poor html but Site Grinder doesn&#039;t even manage to save as html accurately - saved web pages look quite different from how they looked in Photoshop.

Maybe I am being a bit harsh but my trial of Site Grinder was uninstalled within 20 minutes.

I&#039;ll stick to Fireworks and Dreamweaver.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#8217;t see the point of this product. I tried the trial and was disappointed.</p>
<p>Lots of graphics apps can save as html including photoshop. This option usually results in very poor code suitable for use only as a mockup or by a user who doesn&#8217;t know better.</p>
<p>In this respect Site Grinder is no better. The html it writes is poor and no better that Photoshop&#8217;s &#8216;save for web&#8217; it just saves the bother of slicing which is no big deal.</p>
<p>Site Grinder is a bit like Netobjects Fusion or Xara Web Designer except that both of those actually manage to create html pages exactly as you see them prior to export. All three write poor html but Site Grinder doesn&#8217;t even manage to save as html accurately &#8211; saved web pages look quite different from how they looked in Photoshop.</p>
<p>Maybe I am being a bit harsh but my trial of Site Grinder was uninstalled within 20 minutes.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll stick to Fireworks and Dreamweaver.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

