Ever since I've used this program, people have looked at my code and said things like "you need to start over from scratch and rebuild your page, Dreamweaver is going nuts!"; or "wow, you got script all over the place, put in all in the head and make an indirect folder for it." LOL, these are the people that designed it
<br />
<br />
I have to say, it's been a real pleasure using it. It puts a page together,
YOU (the user) tears it down and rebuilds it.<br />
<br />
I swear I'll see the day that a man sells a ketchup popsicle to a nun in white gloves, if I haven't already.<!--content-->Could be worst... could be FrontPage. <!--content-->You know, that's something that never ceases to amaze me. When you've got a gazillion people doing pages, and a gazillion different ideas on what a "good" page should look like, how can you say that one way of doing things is better than another? <br />
<br />
"Code all over the place"? I've seen hand-coded pages that are worse than any html editor can put together - or even MSWord, for that matter! <blush> Come to think of it, I've done a few like that.<br />
<br />
If nothing else, DW *does* let you pay more attention to what you're putting on the page, rather than on whether or not you've closed all your tags. I was under the impression that that was the entire purpose of DW - to do the bullwork so you can do the page.<br />
<br />
With all due respect to those who are fanatical about it, so long as the page loads quickly and doesn't bugger up, who gives a rat's p'toot *how* it was created?<br />
<br />
Peg<!--content-->I just got to learn not listen to peoples advice all the time and use my own judgement more (I'm reading all about HTML), Dw is actually a pretty cool program, I just went off on a rant about what a DW moderator told me. To this day, my phylosophy is and always will be....."if it's not broken,<br />
don't fix it"<!--content-->*g* I've had people tell me that I really shouldn't be using DW1.2 or DW3. I should have Mx because it does more. Well, yeah. **It** may do more, but I don't. <br />
<br />
<shrug> The biggest problem I can see, is that people tend to change their minds about what is "acceptable" and what isn't. Working with DW might be acceptable today, but it won't be tomorrow - and will be again, the day after next. <br />
<br />
Web design *is* a judgment call. It's the "design" part that keeps buggering everybody up. Listening to people's ideas is a good idea. Even total idiots can come up with intelligent lines of thought. *g* The trick is not to follow everyone else's ideas, but incorporate the best of those ideas, the ones that will fit, into your own design. <br />
<br />
*lol* And trust me, HTML isn't that hard to learn if I can do it. Best of luck to you!<br />
<br />
Peg<!--content-->i like frontpage and dreamweaver<br />
i never use em though
<br />
notepad lol or uuummm the geocities html editor<!--content-->I havent a single bad word to say about DW. I use version 4. I think the point is more about understanding what dreamweaver can do for you and making the most of that. Anyone who *****es about DW will more than likely expect such packages to make em breakfast as well. What DW can't do I will make up in other packages or hand code it.<br />
<br />
For what it is worth DW rocks and hand codeing facists suck. Yeah I can hand code but does that mean I have to be anal about it?<!--content-->I like Dreamweaver too. I especially like the "Code and Design" view mode; makes it easy to see any changes you make to the code.<br />
<br />
DW MX has nice website reports too to help you find errors.<br />
I'm still not generally a big fan of WYSIWYG editors, but DW is simply awesome.<!--content-->Originally posted by entimp <br />
I think the point is more about understanding what dreamweaver can do for you and making the most of that. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree 100%. There are always going to be a variety of tools that you can use, and you should at least explore using them to their maximum potential. <br />
<br />
Small teams of non HTML savvy folks can really benefit from the works of WYSIWYG editors, and DW is IMHO one of the best out there.<br />
<br />
Larger teams responsible for rapidly changing/ dynamic/ tightly integrated sites would naturally lend themselves towards hand coding, again IMHO.<!--content-->
<br /><br />
I have to say, it's been a real pleasure using it. It puts a page together,
YOU (the user) tears it down and rebuilds it.<br /><br />
I swear I'll see the day that a man sells a ketchup popsicle to a nun in white gloves, if I haven't already.
<!--content-->Could be worst... could be FrontPage. <!--content-->You know, that's something that never ceases to amaze me. When you've got a gazillion people doing pages, and a gazillion different ideas on what a "good" page should look like, how can you say that one way of doing things is better than another? <br /><br />
"Code all over the place"? I've seen hand-coded pages that are worse than any html editor can put together - or even MSWord, for that matter! <blush> Come to think of it, I've done a few like that.
<br /><br />
If nothing else, DW *does* let you pay more attention to what you're putting on the page, rather than on whether or not you've closed all your tags. I was under the impression that that was the entire purpose of DW - to do the bullwork so you can do the page.<br />
<br />
With all due respect to those who are fanatical about it, so long as the page loads quickly and doesn't bugger up, who gives a rat's p'toot *how* it was created?<br />
<br />
Peg<!--content-->I just got to learn not listen to peoples advice all the time and use my own judgement more (I'm reading all about HTML), Dw is actually a pretty cool program, I just went off on a rant about what a DW moderator told me. To this day, my phylosophy is and always will be....."if it's not broken,<br />
don't fix it"
<!--content-->*g* I've had people tell me that I really shouldn't be using DW1.2 or DW3. I should have Mx because it does more. Well, yeah. **It** may do more, but I don't. <br /><br />
<shrug> The biggest problem I can see, is that people tend to change their minds about what is "acceptable" and what isn't. Working with DW might be acceptable today, but it won't be tomorrow - and will be again, the day after next. <br />
<br />
Web design *is* a judgment call. It's the "design" part that keeps buggering everybody up. Listening to people's ideas is a good idea. Even total idiots can come up with intelligent lines of thought. *g* The trick is not to follow everyone else's ideas, but incorporate the best of those ideas, the ones that will fit, into your own design. <br />
<br />
*lol* And trust me, HTML isn't that hard to learn if I can do it. Best of luck to you!<br />
<br />
Peg<!--content-->i like frontpage and dreamweaver<br />
i never use em though
<br />notepad lol or uuummm the geocities html editor<!--content-->I havent a single bad word to say about DW. I use version 4. I think the point is more about understanding what dreamweaver can do for you and making the most of that. Anyone who *****es about DW will more than likely expect such packages to make em breakfast as well. What DW can't do I will make up in other packages or hand code it.<br />
<br />
For what it is worth DW rocks and hand codeing facists suck. Yeah I can hand code but does that mean I have to be anal about it?<!--content-->I like Dreamweaver too. I especially like the "Code and Design" view mode; makes it easy to see any changes you make to the code.<br />
<br />
DW MX has nice website reports too to help you find errors.<br />
I'm still not generally a big fan of WYSIWYG editors, but DW is simply awesome.<!--content-->Originally posted by entimp <br />
I think the point is more about understanding what dreamweaver can do for you and making the most of that. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
I agree 100%. There are always going to be a variety of tools that you can use, and you should at least explore using them to their maximum potential. <br />
<br />
Small teams of non HTML savvy folks can really benefit from the works of WYSIWYG editors, and DW is IMHO one of the best out there.<br />
<br />
Larger teams responsible for rapidly changing/ dynamic/ tightly integrated sites would naturally lend themselves towards hand coding, again IMHO.<!--content-->