[MW Forums]

Thanks to its integration with the rest of the iLife suite, Apple’s first stab at a consumer-based Web publishing app makes it easy to add audio, video, and still photographs to a Web site. But while iWeb is ideal for novices, people with more experience will probably find it limiting. more

[wolfneuralnet]

Nice review. I was able to create a nice photo album and upload it in about 3 minutes, which is great.
I would like to edit this now from wherever I am - you mentioned a tech note from Apple. Could you maybe tell us how to do it instead?
Thanks!
JAW

[jhmaughan]

The fact that you were able to do it in 3 minutes is the best part of iWeb. I've got enough web programming experience to write a JSP or ColdFusion web app or just do a simple dreamweaver page, but last night when all i wanted to do was toss pictures online, nothing could touch iWeb.

[MacsRGolden]

One thing I didn't like about iWeb was managing multiple sites as everything is contained in one 'domain.sties' fine in your ~Library/Application Support/iWeb folder, i was changing the names manually so i didn't have to open 4 sites at once.
On Macosxhints today there is a really nice hint/applescript to mange this here:
http://www.macosxhin...060126122633213
hope this helps someone else. it really makes iWeb much nicer if you have multiple sites, especially if you publish to folder and upload via FTP.

[minderbinder]

Slide show doesn't work if you're not on .mac? Damn, they should put that in their info about the program. That's one of the coolest features of iWeb, glad I didn't shell out the cash and find this out the hard way.
Looking at apple's source code, it looks like the slideshow just uses javascript files. Why couldn't you serve those up from another site, as long as you link it correctly? Or even cheat, and link to the scripts from the apple site?

[tabasco_hot]

In reply to:

---

Nice review. I was able to create a nice photo album and upload it in about 3 minutes, which is great.
I would like to edit this now from wherever I am - you mentioned a tech note from Apple. Could you maybe tell us how to do it instead?
Thanks!
JAW

---

Not to come off as a creep, but this isn't a support site it's a news/reviews site. You have a link to the tech note, and you also have google. Apple has it's own user support forums also. You shouldn't have any trouble getting it together your self. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[wolfneuralnet]

Not really a creep, just someone who doesn't have anything better to do than nit pick...
There is no link to the tech note in the article (happy if you find it for me...)
Good luck with Google - there is an OSX hints on how to do this but it involves using iDisk for the iWed folder, which I was trying to avoid.
If the writer has inside info on how to do this, I would love to hear it, whether you think it "appropriate" or not.
Have a better day, and get a life.

[Nobody]

I have to disagree about PNGs being a down-side of iWeb (which I've not tried). The statement that JPEGs are usually smaller than PNGs is misleading unless you are comparing PNG to JPEG images produced by iWeb (is that what it does?).
PNGs on a whole are a much better quality image and saved properly will be smaller than JPEGs. JPEGs are an older format and in my opinion it is time for them to go away. You want JPEGs? Okay, how about JPEG2000?

[minderbinder]

Since the article says the tech note hasn't been published yet, why do you assume macworld knows how to do it?
Sounds like Apple just needs to publish that tech note.

[miggleharland]

The problem with iWeb is not that the images are PNGs - it seems that iWeb makes PNG images even for text input!
My pages take ages to appear in the browser and this is because a text box which would take up only 2k in HTML has been turned into an image of 164K - this may be nice and pretty, but it is slow and inefficient web authoring. Anybody knowing anything about web authoring will be appalled and, like me, immediately go back to real HTML. Obviously it is a workaround to avoid font problems. I had hoped iWeb would be a quick and efficient way of putting up small sites, but not any more.

[xStep]

I've spent a little time with iWeb and am impressed. Enough to use it for a recent trip.
I have found one flaw that I'm attributing to the systems I've seen it on. The window to display the large views, displays jagged edges in the images on some machines. OK, so far Windows machines. If I could change the fixed 800-by-600 to something smaller I could abolish that problem for my audience. An alternative might be to force the window to be larger, but that seems to have a maximum size too. I've been looking at the generated files for a fix.
I prefer PNG to JPEG files. They tend to be much nicer looking. Any modern browser should be able to handle them, and the size issue isn't an issue for high quality images. If you over compress JPEG images, they look terrible.
The only issue I have with the FTP upload, is you have to understand how the top level folder will be created. It will be the name you gave in one of the inspector tabs. (sorry, I'm at a wintel box right now)

[DrMax88]

iWeb craches frequently on my Powerbook (1.33GHz/1GB RAM), especially when I was trying to pick some pictures from iPhoto. Does anyone have the same problem?

[tomtom]

I have NEVER come across a PNG that is smaller than its equivalent JPEG.
There is a case for using PNG in the Reflections theme for example. The PNG enables the page background color to be changed in Inspector. However, once the color is decided, exporting the PNG with canvas color set to the chosen background color typically gives a JPEG image around one third of the size of the PNG - just try it out in Fireworks or whatever.
When you have about 5 PNG small images on a page, the page is about 1 MB. In a production environment this just will not work.

[tomtom]

Give Rapidweaver a try. This is just what I thought iWeb might be.
As in iWeb, PNGs are used for reflections and repurposing of images but in the final export, the user can choose to have images in original formats or JPEG. Effects such as reflections and repurposing are of similar quality when represented by JPEGS, The files a just that much smaller and load very much faster,