anybody use Dreamweaver???  | | |
September 27th, 2002, 12:05 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
| | Ultimate Member
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 1,758
| anybody use Dreamweaver???
I couldn't sleep last night so I decided to play around with Dreamweaver. Maybe it was the lack of sleep but I couldn't seem to get very far with it. What are the major benefits of using Dreamwearver OVER Front Page???
thanks so much!
---edwelly
__________________
If you never try anything new,
you will miss out of some of life's many disappointments...
|
| |
September 27th, 2002, 12:11 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
| | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Wwwwaconia, MMMinnes
Posts: 845
| |
| |
September 27th, 2002, 12:41 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
| | Member
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Tulsa, OK. *USA*
Posts: 462
|
Over the years I've used every incarnation of FrontPage up through FP 2000. I was given a copy of Dreamweaver 4 and ended up migrating to it for design. I can’t remember why now but I did.
My homepage was designed with Dreamweaver. www.timsimons.com - Note: by no means is this site a demonstration of Dreamweaver’s full capabilities.
Some the things I like about Dreamweaver is layout control is more initiative. It makes setting up and using CSS easy and has limited Flash capabilities built into the application. Your abilities to include things such as Java Applets/Scripts, Shockwave and of course Flash is better integrated. Version of FP that I’ve used didn’t appreciate you trying to insert anything non-Microsoft oriented. The only drawback maybe is if you need functionality that is found in FP server extensions. These do make something’s easier than say finding a script, modifying for your site and server, integrate it into your web page and trouble shooting to make sure everything is functioning correctly.
I’m not a Dreamweaver master but that’s my opinion.
Regards,
Zotz Mein
Last edited by Zotzmein : September 27th, 2002 at 12:43 PM.
|
| |
September 27th, 2002, 01:14 PM
|
#4 (permalink)
| | Ultimate Member
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 1,758
|
fatal - GREAT link, thanks...
Zotzmein - I like your site and I too agree, I hate it when TV people just halt a show without any closure!!!!
---edwelly |
| |
September 27th, 2002, 01:38 PM
|
#5 (permalink)
| | Si vis pacem, para bellum
Join Date: Sep 1999 Location: KBAD-Bossier City LA
Posts: 7,606
|
I switched because DW seemed more flexible and easier to use. I am not the expert in the family on this one though. That would be my wife. In asking her, she can't really compare them b/c she has never used FP.
One of the major benefits, at least at one time, was that DW did not insert as much proprietary code. In using FP, you used to have a server that would support FP extensions. DW never had this limitation. So, I think many went to DW because of these issues. I do not know if these limitations still remain with FP or not. Also, like Zotz said, it is easier to embed flash and other code from external sources.
Good luck with your DW attempts. Macromedia has a great tutorial set, if you need help figuring out the app. http://www.macromedia.com/support/dr...ial_index.html
Dave |
| |
September 27th, 2002, 02:41 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
| | Member
Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 384
| Quote: Originally posted by daveleau I switched because DW seemed more flexible and easier to use.
One of the major benefits, at least at one time, was that DW did not insert as much proprietary code. In using FP, you used to have a server that would support FP extensions. DW never had this limitation. http://www.macromedia.com/support/dr...ial_index.html
Dave | I agree I would also like to add that the plugin (extensions)capacity of DW is very nice and are in most cases easily added in. They take some of the more complex coding and make the code (dare I say it ...) plug and play.
I also like the ease of updating broken links or making global link changes. Much more involved in FP.
Lastly you cant embed FP proprietary code into a ebook... 
Once you get the swing of it you will be very pleased that the FP borg did not get you...
RainFire
__________________
Finding new ways to do old things...
Innovation
|
| |
September 27th, 2002, 09:29 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
| | Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 100
|
I am no webmaster but I love dreamweaver.
I use the Studio version with Fireworks.
It's nice to be able to edit photos or graphic with a click of a button.
Heres a site I'm working on now for a friend.
Remember this is a hobby of mine and I'm no expert. http://smaabg.org/ |
| |
September 27th, 2002, 10:16 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
| | Ultimate Member
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 1,752
|
I made this page with the trial of Dreamweaver MX, and the little flash animation in the bottom right with the trial of Flash MX ... used the $ I got off one of my websites I designed with the trial of fireworks to get Dreamweaver MX fully ... I'll never go back.
__________________
My R&D machine:
AMD 2100+ @ 2700+
Asus A7N8X-E
1GB Kingston PC333
2xWD 74GB Raptor's in SATA RAID
ATI 9700Pro w/ Zalman Heat Pipe
|
| |
September 28th, 2002, 12:15 AM
|
#9 (permalink)
| | Member
Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Bloomington IN
Posts: 219
|
I will concur and say that Dreamweaver is a great Weapon of Choice for Development. The site management features alone are worth the price. Built in FTP, link checker, etc. etc.
Here is one of the sites that I have built using Dreamweaver. http://www.indiana.edu/~sfa |
| |
September 28th, 2002, 12:30 AM
|
#10 (permalink)
| | Fur ballin
Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 4,371
|
My reason to use Dreamweaver over Frontpage
Is those nasty Frontpage extensions.. in my opinion they don't work very well.
I like .asp and cgi and Dreamweaver seems to work well with all the html plugins... not like Frontpage.
__________________
--- Standby to receive our transmission ---
|
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | | | Most Active Discussions | | | | | Recent Discussions  | | | | | |