>>Given that HTML and CSS are text files and define pages semantically I don't really see what other tools could do to make it any easier.
>>
>>The basic text editors on Linux can do syntax highlighting for just about anything so maybe that's why I dont see the advantage of a fancier tool.
>>
>>Ive also written 3000 lines of JavaScript in a text editor. Even if you are using libraries youre too lazy to read the docs for any JavaScript console in web browsers gives you intellisense for exploring.
>>
>>Its all so dirt simple you shouldnt need 6gb to make it work well.
>>
>>Ive never personally used a computer to do work with more than a half gig of ram.
>>
>>Its a total waste of resources.
>
>Let's just say I disagree with you. Given your rampant ego and scorn that's all I am going to say.

Of course he's wrong, notepad sucks big time - it can't even select a word properly. The best editor for html, css, and perhaps javascript (although the other one, e editor, that I have is more helpful in matching and highlighting the matching brackets) is Fox's editor. I would love to have a tag matcher - select a piece of text, press a hotkey and get an inputbox where you enter the tag... well, could write that one in Fox, I guess.

But other than that, if you're doing web stuff, you don't need any damn compilers etc. You shouldn't need them. It's all just text. That VS requires a screaming machine is just proof how lame it has all become. The dev suite is getting too big and too complicated. I just wonder how much time it takes to learn the dev IDE vs time to learn the language you're working in.