so it is being prepared for release, but it is not showing up on the Firefox site, nor when we check for update.

The original source actually says "Firefox 9 unofficially released, "

I don't agree with this. While Google may be a known brandname, one can say Microsoft is also.
The people I know that are using Chrome are using it for the speed of startup. I am not even talking tech geeks. Family members, having been pushed away from IE by us geeks were using Firefox. But when they saw how fast Chrome started up and loaded pages, they started using it more.

I also started doing that for the quick logon. But for my main surfing, I still want my extensions in Firefox.

I agree with the CMS concept. Though, a static site generator is good also, for security purposes.

Of course, on /. you will be getting a lot of 'code by hand' comments, and those are all true, for people who code by hand. It may be better for them, but not everyone can deal with that.

As the OP mentions, they use software that makes it easier for them to create. GoLive, Apple fisherprice crap, etc. So, they are looking for graphical based software.
As mentioned by someone else, Dreamweaver has been pretty stable for a long long time. If going with a software solution, Dreamweaver may be the way to go.

Long Haul - on the web, especially in web development, long haul is 5 years or less. You have to accept that technology is changing at a blinding pace. It is frustrating, and tiring, but it's the price we pay for progress. It's frustrating when I have to deal with someone that 'does websites' and thinks what they did in 1998 is still valid.

CMS - going with one of the big 3 (arguably Drupal, WordPress, Joomla) is one way to stay focused on content rather than technical code stuff. Be sure to update and patch, and be on a quality server with it's own security. Active opensource projects like these 3 (and others) will help you keep in touch with the changing landscape.

No matter what, try to accept that whatever you are doing now will likely change in 5 years. All around the web we can instantly see when certain sites were created, some vintage 1996, others 1999, 2002, 2007, 2011. FrontPage, GoLive, crappy web templates, straight boring html with ani-gifs.

If sticking with your previous path, Dreamweaver is probably the answer.

FLAC is certainly a better format. However, it is not a practical format for use.
Yes, it should be made available to those that want it. MuleTracks.com offers both FLAC and MP3 for sale, and FLAC is a little more expensive but it's likely worth it for those that want it. (remember that there is actual extra costs involved with downloading larger files, and that cost should be covered).

However, for the masses, for actual usage, MP3 is fine. It's portable and DRM free. Simple to copy and backup. Every player and OS plays it. No extra knowledge needed.

Think of how many people have no idea what formats are. Don't include your friends that know what /. is. Look at family and co-workers. They don't even know the songs are 'files'; it's just a 'song in iTunes'. They might know how to transfer a song to you, but they have no idea of files, tags, folder structure, filenames. The best we can do with them is advise them to stick with mp3 and DRM free formats.

For those more advanced creatures, FLAC is great in concept, but not worth the extra effort for basic usage. Most just want to be able to play their music, wherever and when ever they want.

FLAC is best for the purist, the hobbyist, the collector. Yes, it should be made available for them, even though it's really a small percentage. I appreciate those that feel the need to preserve the music in lossless format, especially when we can't be sure the industry will. And we need them as a backup. But they are a select few, and they will find a way to attain the best quality anyway. Having it available for download, even at a slight premium, would make it easier for them, and validate them, which is good.

Let's not bash mp3, but instead help educate the masses that they should use mp3 and not some DRM format. And teach them that mp3's should not be burned to CD format, etc. Don't try too hard... they can't take too much 0's or 1's.

mp3 for all.
flac for the select.