I, personally, like DreamWeaver from Macromedia. I used NetObjects a long
time ago (somewhere around when the first came out) and wasn't impressed,
but I'm sure the product is radically different by now.
>Besides, IBM and Oracle both have a stake in them surviving,
>so I bet they can stumble along for at least another decade.
You make the assumption that those companies are willing to throw good
money after bad... I'm not as sure. Investors these days are only willing
to go so far before they pull the plug. It seems that many investors are
learning when it's better to just let things go, and I don't see either IBM
or Oracle seeing this as a really strong, vital part of their business to
support if it keeps sucking change out of them.
The thing that most intererted me in the article was it's the first article
I've seen that articulated the going public because you *must* rather than
because you *can*. That's bad. It happens all over the valley, and it's
scary. I've spoken with plenty of people at companies who say thing such
as "within six months we'll be public or out of business". That's not
good. It's not healthy. A company that could be out of business in six
months shouldn't be going public.
What scares me these days is how down I am on the market and all these
companies, when I'm such a fan of the internet in general...
Oh well.
-Mike