If I remember correctly the difference between the free HTML editor and the one you pay for is significant in certain area. I used the free version for quite some time and was happy with it, but the paid version comes with more tools. It has a web color schemer, image mapper and I believe the free version has the code cleaner disabled. I have found them very handy tools esp because I'm not the greatest graphically and it helps that way, with color shemer.

The code cleaner is a must. I use that on every page I develop. it optimizes the code and checks for silly mistakes that I might make. Now, I am not admitting to any mistakes, I'm just saying, just in case.

Oh come on Eric you don't make any mistakes I'm sure . Your absolutely right about the code cleaner, it's a great bit of kit.

Your picture frightens me. with that said, you will have to excuse me, I'm American, I do not know what a "great bit of kit" is.

I don't know if this is fully current or not, but I would assume it is. This is taken from the Free Stuff page (with all the free software on it) and tells you exactly what is different or not included in the free version. I've bolded the pertinent info:

The CoffeeCup Free HTML Editor is a full-featured Web design system. With built-in FTP uploading, wizards for tables, frames, fonts, and more, and 100% valid code output, it's a great tool for anyone who wants to design their own Website. The Free HTML Editor is a trimmed-down version of the CoffeeCup HTML Editor, and does not contain the Visual Editor, CSS Menu Designer, Image Mapper, and Website Color Schemer. If you're interested in getting your hands on these great features, download the free, fully functional trial version of the HTML Editor .

I would have to agree. The code cleaner is a must.

Jay

Doh, sorry for not reading the question properly and apologies to those who didn't get a straight answer.

As for the whole Kompozer thing; it is interesting the history side of it. I created my first 'real' website 13 years ago with Netscape Composer and despite from the fact it was my first site and I knew next to nothing about anything, it looked fantastically awful! I used a weird font that nobody would ever install in a zillion years, which meant that everyone who viewed it (yes, I guess I did brag about it a bit) came back saying they couldn't read anything on it. Of course, being a guru webmaster, I blamed their lame browsers, operating systems, general computer skills and anything else before discovering the reason why. Embarassed? Yes, I still blush at the thought after all these years. Needless to say things have changed a lot since then; I don't brag so much now!

Someone mentioned Nvu and yes, Kompozer picked up where that left off because whoever coded Nvu started with a hiss and a roar, built up a huge community of followers then obviously got a life (or a girl/boy friend) because development stopped like it hit a brick wall. They are both good editors actually, but things like CCHTML and WeBuilder by Blumentals tear strips off them, though of course if WYSIWYG is what you are looking for then most 'real' editors will leave you flat. There are really only two WYSIWYG editors worth having (I'm not counting Namo Web Editor, which I used for many many years, because it has turned into a highly unstable POC that doesn't deserve to be downloaded and their support is legendary for being horrifically terrible; just ask anyone in their 'user' forum).
Dreamweaver I find too clunky these days (aside from the ludicrous expense of it) and though I have Expression Web 3 installed, I don't use it. It does look good for those who are more visual designers, though I understand it costs a bit. I 'won' it through the Microsoft Partner program with my business and sat a couple of qualification courses for it. If I didn't use the two editors above, I would use this I think.

For those interested, Seamonkey is an excellent browser/email/composer type suite with the Firefox 3 engine and the Thunderbird core for mail. It will fit those familiar with Netscape of old like an old baseball glove and while development of it lags behind the big two Mozilla projects, it is still up there as far as browsing engines go.

Sorry for the rant, just my 2 cents

Dave.

Thanks, Jo Ann. You nailed it.

Also - and this could be huge for some people - you get priority tech support when you pay for the full version. If you submit a support request for the Free version we will still help you with the basics, but we give priority and detailed support to the people that pay for software. Those support techs don't come free.

Yep, tech support is critically important with all software, not just CC's stuff (and their support is top-notch in my experience). With applications expected to run on every possible hardware and software configuration as there are computers out there, it is vital there is someone to answer heavy questions when the going gets tough. And with CC software you only pay once, unlike the other editor I use, which I have to pay extra for every year to keep using it. While I agree on-going development costs a lot of money, CC take a huge kick in the rear by using this business model and not charging for upgrades. Still, at a conservative guestimate, when they say 8 million humans served and even if only half the users pay 50 bucks for the editor, that's Uncle Scrooge amounts of cash, so no one there is starving I would imagine.

. I think most of the companies that charge for upgrades are the smaller, one or two man bands that code stuff in their spare time, so fair enough all round. If something is worth paying for, I don't mind paying for it.

My 2 cents

Dave.

I need to know if I buy the HTML Editor can I use the program on two computers? The reason is I work at two diffrent places during the day and at night.