Frontpage

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Jim Scott, Aug 23, 2005.

  1. Jim Scott

    Jim Scott Guest

    I know that several here do not use FP and I understand their reasons.
    However are there any of you who DO use FP?
    Just interested, as people who are content with things tend to get on and
    say nothing.
    --
    Jim
    Tyneside UK
     
    Jim Scott, Aug 23, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jim Scott

    rf Guest

    Jim Scott wrote:

    > However are there any of you who DO use FP?


    Yep. I use it all the time. It makes a mighty fine FTP client (usually) to
    synchronize the local copy of my web sites with the copies at the server. I
    know, I could find another one just as good but, well, I have FP and am used
    to it.

    Oh, do you mean do I use it to actually produce/write HTML or something? Not
    a bloody chance. FP produces invalid bloated and deprecated HTML with a very
    low understanding of CSS and totally rips apart anything I write in PHP. I
    never ever use the editor bit[1]. Crimson editor is the one I use for
    producing web/PHP pages.

    [1] With one single exception. If I have a bunch of images to plonk on a
    page then I might use FP to produce a dummy page that I drop those images
    into. I like the way it puts the dimensions of the images into the generated
    HTML. I then copy/paste the code into my real editor and discard the FP
    produced dummy page.

    Cheers
    Richard
     
    rf, Aug 23, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Re: Frontpage versus Code

    _____/ On Tuesday 23 August 2005 11:27, [rf] wrote : \_____

    > Jim Scott wrote:
    >
    >> I know that several here do not use FP and I understand their reasons.
    >> However are there any of you who DO use FP?



    I used to, but not for a long time. It was a good way to start getting a
    feel for Web design. Time and experience have shown that it was not
    necessary and encouraged poor knowledge of (X)HTML/CSS. The outcome of this
    abstraction is lack of flexibility and dependency on a single-platform
    product rather than on a text editor.


    >> Just interested, as people who are content with things tend to get on and
    >> say nothing.
    >> However are there any of you who DO use FP?



    I know a few who use Dreamweaver, but Frontpage seems to have lost its
    spark.


    > Yep. I use it all the time. It makes a mighty fine FTP client (usually) to
    > synchronize the local copy of my web sites with the copies at the server.
    > I know, I could find another one just as good but, well, I have FP and am
    > used to it.



    I recommend KDE and Konqueror if you were ever to consider Linux? You can
    edit the files over FTP as if they were placed locally. KDE does all the
    copying over FTP in the background.


    > Oh, do you mean do I use it to actually produce/write HTML or something?
    > Not a bloody chance. FP produces invalid bloated and deprecated HTML with
    > a very low understanding of CSS and totally rips apart anything I write in
    > PHP. I never ever use the editor bit[1]. Crimson editor is the one I use
    > for producing web/PHP pages.
    >
    > [1] With one single exception. If I have a bunch of images to plonk on a
    > page then I might use FP to produce a dummy page that I drop those images
    > into. I like the way it puts the dimensions of the images into the
    > generated HTML. I then copy/paste the code into my real editor and discard
    > the FP produced dummy page.



    I do the same thing with KDE's thumbnail gallery generator.

    Roy

    --
    Roy S. Schestowitz "Slashdot is standard-compliant... in Japan"
    http://Schestowitz.com
     
    Roy Schestowitz, Aug 23, 2005
    #3
  4. Jim Scott

    Neredbojias Guest

    With neither quill nor qualm, Jim Scott quothed:

    > I know that several here do not use FP and I understand their reasons.
    > However are there any of you who DO use FP?
    > Just interested, as people who are content with things tend to get on and
    > say nothing.


    FP might be good if you're brand new to markup, as in not knowing
    anything at all about it. However, it's a rather expensive primer.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.
     
    Neredbojias, Aug 23, 2005
    #4
  5. Jim Scott

    rf Guest

    Re: Frontpage versus Code

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > > Yep. I use it [FP] all the time. It makes a mighty fine FTP client


    > I recommend KDE and Konqueror if you were ever to consider Linux?


    Given that I just said I use FP (FTP only) what would make you think I would
    ever consider linux? I use Windows. I have to. It is my target market. My
    bread and butter.

    Cheers
    Richard.
     
    rf, Aug 23, 2005
    #5
  6. Re: Frontpage and Linux

    _____/ On Tuesday 23 August 2005 14:47, [rf] wrote : \_____

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> > Yep. I use it [FP] all the time. It makes a mighty fine FTP client

    >
    >> I recommend KDE and Konqueror if you were ever to consider Linux?

    >
    > Given that I just said I use FP (FTP only) what would make you think I
    > would ever consider linux? I use Windows. I have to. It is my target
    > market. My bread and butter.


    The same goes for 80% of my visitors, but it's transparent. The Internet is
    open so the way you edit your files and the server you run is something
    that does not affect your target market. Look at Google, for example, with
    Linux machines all over the place serving a marjet of ~95% Windows users
    and doing this rather successfully.

    Roy

    --
    Roy S. Schestowitz Useless fact: ~70% of organisms are bacteria
    http://Schestowitz.com
     
    Roy Schestowitz, Aug 23, 2005
    #6
  7. Neredbojias wrote:
    > With neither quill nor qualm, Jim Scott quothed:
    >
    >>I know that several here do not use FP and I understand their reasons.
    >>However are there any of you who DO use FP?
    >>Just interested, as people who are content with things tend to get on and
    >>say nothing.

    >
    > FP might be good if you're brand new to markup, as in not knowing
    > anything at all about it. However, it's a rather expensive primer.

    Got FP with office 2003, it still sucks
    --
    Edwin van der Vaart
     
    Edwin van der Vaart, Aug 23, 2005
    #7
  8. Re: Frontpage versus Code

    rf wrote:
    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >>>Yep. I use it [FP] all the time. It makes a mighty fine FTP client

    >
    >>I recommend KDE and Konqueror if you were ever to consider Linux?

    >
    > Given that I just said I use FP (FTP only) what would make you think I would
    > ever consider linux? I use Windows. I have to. It is my target market. My
    > bread and butter.

    Why not using smartftp, it's also free.
    --
    Edwin van der Vaart
     
    Edwin van der Vaart, Aug 23, 2005
    #8
  9. On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:47:34 GMT, Jim Scott <> wrote:

    > I know that several here do not use FP and I understand their reasons.
    > However are there any of you who DO use FP?
    > Just interested, as people who are content with things tend to get on and
    > say nothing.


    What is good about FP is that it can get people to publish on the net, who would
    never have done so without the software. Why that is good? Because it helps to
    give all people an equal chance to publish. No matter where you're from, who you
    are, what you have to say: you can without any special knowledge. All you need
    to know is what you want to publish. You can focus on content, content and
    content. And a bit on the looks.

    It might easily be over ninety percent of the private publishers out there (no,
    no studies, no statistics, just a hunge) who let FP (or Word or what ever) do
    the job of creating markup. And who can blame them. Whatever the quality or lack
    thereof, the stuff gets published and it is accessible to a large percentage of
    the potential visitors.

    Those using FP are actually people who have some authentic wish to publish in
    the www. They don't use Word for the job, but got themselves a genuine piece of
    software that is meant to do the job. They show some interest in doing it the
    way it should be done. One should blame them for not knowing any better. At
    least not initially.
    Some may get the hang of it all. May get truely interested. May want more
    control. May want knowledge on proper coding the markup. May want to know about
    css. All because of FP and the like. If it wasn't for FP, the net wouldn't be
    half as interesting as it is today. :)

    All imho of course.

    --
    ,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
    | weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
    | webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
    |zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
    `-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'
     
    Barbara de Zoete, Aug 23, 2005
    #9
  10. Jim Scott

    Neredbojias Guest

    With neither quill nor qualm, Edwin van der Vaart quothed:

    > Neredbojias wrote:
    > > With neither quill nor qualm, Jim Scott quothed:
    > >
    > >>I know that several here do not use FP and I understand their reasons.
    > >>However are there any of you who DO use FP?
    > >>Just interested, as people who are content with things tend to get on and
    > >>say nothing.

    > >
    > > FP might be good if you're brand new to markup, as in not knowing
    > > anything at all about it. However, it's a rather expensive primer.


    > Got FP with office 2003, it still sucks


    What a coincidence. In 2003 I got an office and a secretary of similar
    characteristic.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.
     
    Neredbojias, Aug 23, 2005
    #10
  11. Neredbojias wrote:
    > With neither quill nor qualm, Edwin van der Vaart quothed:
    >>Neredbojias wrote:
    >>>With neither quill nor qualm, Jim Scott quothed:
    >>>
    >>>>I know that several here do not use FP and I understand their reasons.
    >>>>However are there any of you who DO use FP?
    >>>>Just interested, as people who are content with things tend to get on and
    >>>>say nothing.
    >>>
    >>>FP might be good if you're brand new to markup, as in not knowing
    >>>anything at all about it. However, it's a rather expensive primer.

    >
    >>Got FP with office 2003, it still sucks

    >
    > What a coincidence. In 2003 I got an office and a secretary of similar
    > characteristic.

    lol
    --
    Edwin van der Vaart
     
    Edwin van der Vaart, Aug 23, 2005
    #11
  12. Jim Scott

    rf Guest

    Re: Frontpage versus Code

    Edwin van der Vaart wrote:

    > rf wrote:
    > > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    > >
    > >>>Yep. I use it [FP] all the time. It makes a mighty fine FTP client

    > >
    > >>I recommend KDE and Konqueror if you were ever to consider Linux?

    > >
    > > Given that I just said I use FP (FTP only) what would make you think I

    would
    > > ever consider linux? I use Windows. I have to. It is my target market.

    My
    > > bread and butter.


    > Why not using smartftp, it's also free.


    Why would I? I have something that already works for me. If I were to use
    *anything* else it would cost me money to learn how to use it, even if this
    only took 5 minutes.

    Cheers
    Richard.
     
    rf, Aug 23, 2005
    #12
  13. Jim Scott

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 20:07:34 +0200, "Barbara de Zoete"
    <> wrote:

    >What is good about FP is that it can get people to publish on the net, who would
    >never have done so without the software.


    One of the best things about the web is this easy access for people with
    no other publishing route. However what they need is "software", not
    necessarily Frontpage. There are any number of similar small-scale
    vaguely wysiwyg packages which are both vastly cheaper than FP and
    considerably better.

    FP just isn't a good product. It makes bad markup by any standard, and
    it carries a "professional" pricetag when its markup really is anything
    but professional quality. Worst of all, it's a publishing tool for M$oft
    Blackbird (anyone remember that ?), not for the Web. The web has
    standards (FP ignores these) and it is cross-platform (it ignores this
    too).

    There is a niche for simple web publishing tools which I'm very much in
    favour of supporting. I'd almost support FP if it tried to address this
    - but it doesn't. FP could be simpler than it is, if it chose to address
    simpler targets. In typical M$oft fashion though, it's seen as vital
    that it offers every possible dancing penguin and complex feature,
    whilst still not doing a good job of the basics.

    I'd like Dreamweaver to be better. I don't like that either, although
    it's better than FP. There is a market for a professional WYSIWYG tool,
    one that assists the task of professional (i.e. paid) web developers.
    This could cost real money and it can require a learning curve, so long
    as it saves time in use and it delivers good markup. DW almost manages
    this, FP fails completely.

    HTML coding just isn't that difficult. With a good CSS stylesheet
    already produced, I can author the HTML with a text editor faster than
    someone with DW or FP, and I get a better end result too. FP almost
    manages to do this too - the CSS "themes" are a far better idea than
    DW's reliance on templates, although their implementation was poor an
    their documentation was downright misleading as to what they were for.

    FP's biggest failure is as a teaching tool - and this is why beginners
    should be kept away from it more than any other group. FP teaches the
    idea that you _need_ complex WYSIWYG tools to build web content (you
    really don't) and it also teaches that a complicated page is a good
    page. It teaches _nothing_ of good design styles, and certainly not good
    coding styles, particularly not for CSS.

    >All because of FP and the like. If it wasn't for FP, the net wouldn't be
    >half as interesting as it is today. :)


    "The like" possibly. But you simply don't need FP when there's HomeSite,
    CoffeeeCup and HotDog as well.


    --
    Cats have nine lives, which is why they rarely post to Usenet.
     
    Andy Dingley, Aug 23, 2005
    #13
  14. Jim Scott

    AF Guest

    On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:47:34 GMT, Jim Scott <>
    wrote:

    >I know that several here do not use FP and I understand their reasons.
    >However are there any of you who DO use FP?
    >Just interested, as people who are content with things tend to get on and
    >say nothing.


    I use it in two ways:

    1. to support older sites I either inherited or which are small & have
    uncomplicated designs and for which I do not have the time to convert.

    2. to do a quick, simple page design and see it, colors, fonts, etc.
    so I can adjust a font, color size etc. Sometimes after a late night
    and even with much caffeine, I can not always see what html code will
    look like, so FP is quick for doing this.

    I usually don't publish with FP for the reasons others have listed. I
    tend to use it for simple design.

    If anyone has a WYSIWYG editor they like better than FP, I'd like to
    hear about it.

    Also if this editor helps with FTPing pages or transferring them and
    also if it generates good clean code, something FP does not do, I'd
    love to hear of it.

    Finally FP seems easier than most editors I have worked with in
    cutting, pasting, and organizing pictures, graphics files, etc. I
    work occasionally with other web sites, and if I have the permission
    of the web site's owner to use graphics, it is far easier to cut and
    paste graphics into FP and hav it save the files than with other
    editors.

    Again I do not publish with FP, but use it for design tasks.

    Please let me know if anyone has something better. I am not a fan of
    FP or Microsoft.


    Best regards,

    Al
    http://www.affordablefloridainsurance.com
    http://www.americanbestmortgages.com
    http://www.americanaffordablelifeinsurance.com
     
    AF, Aug 24, 2005
    #14
  15. Re: Frontpage versus Code

    rf wrote:
    > Edwin van der Vaart wrote:
    >>rf wrote:
    >>>Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>Yep. I use it [FP] all the time. It makes a mighty fine FTP client
    >>>>I recommend KDE and Konqueror if you were ever to consider Linux?
    >>>
    >>>Given that I just said I use FP (FTP only) what would make you think I would
    >>>ever consider linux? I use Windows. I have to. It is my target market. My
    >>>bread and butter.

    >
    >>Why not using smartftp, it's also free.

    >
    > Why would I? I have something that already works for me. If I were to use
    > *anything* else it would cost me money to learn how to use it, even if this
    > only took 5 minutes.

    Then don't.
    Hmmm. Always time is money and money is time.
    --
    Edwin van der Vaart
    http://www.semi-conductor.nl/ Links to Semiconductors sites
    http://www.evandervaart.nl/ Under construction
     
    Edwin van der Vaart, Aug 24, 2005
    #15
  16. Jim Scott

    wayne Guest

    AF wrote:
    > On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:47:34 GMT, Jim Scott <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I know that several here do not use FP and I understand their reasons.
    >>However are there any of you who DO use FP?
    >>Just interested, as people who are content with things tend to get on and
    >>say nothing.

    >
    >
    > I use it in two ways:
    >
    > 1. to support older sites I either inherited or which are small & have
    > uncomplicated designs and for which I do not have the time to convert.
    >
    > 2. to do a quick, simple page design and see it, colors, fonts, etc.
    > so I can adjust a font, color size etc. Sometimes after a late night
    > and even with much caffeine, I can not always see what html code will
    > look like, so FP is quick for doing this.
    >
    > I usually don't publish with FP for the reasons others have listed. I
    > tend to use it for simple design.
    >
    > If anyone has a WYSIWYG editor they like better than FP, I'd like to
    > hear about it.
    >
    > Also if this editor helps with FTPing pages or transferring them and
    > also if it generates good clean code, something FP does not do, I'd
    > love to hear of it.
    >
    > Finally FP seems easier than most editors I have worked with in
    > cutting, pasting, and organizing pictures, graphics files, etc. I
    > work occasionally with other web sites, and if I have the permission
    > of the web site's owner to use graphics, it is far easier to cut and
    > paste graphics into FP and hav it save the files than with other
    > editors.
    >
    > Again I do not publish with FP, but use it for design tasks.
    >
    > Please let me know if anyone has something better. I am not a fan of
    > FP or Microsoft.
    >
    >
    > Best regards,
    >
    > Al
    > http://www.affordablefloridainsurance.com
    > http://www.americanbestmortgages.com
    > http://www.americanaffordablelifeinsurance.com


    I like NVU. The latest version has better code than previous versions,
    nice and clean. NVU also has a CSS editor built in. You can toggle
    between wsiwyg and html too. One thing I don't care for is the default
    "text" behavior which inserts a <br> at every carriage return. Simply
    choosing "paragragh" from the menu at the top will generate <p> </p>
    tags when a carriage return is entered though.

    It's free and I suggest those using FP download it and try it out.

    Regards,

    --
    Wayne
    http://www.glenmeadows.com
     
    wayne, Aug 25, 2005
    #16
  17. AF wrote:
    > If anyone has a WYSIWYG editor they like better than FP, I'd like to
    > hear about it.


    "WYSIWYG HTML editor" is an oxymoron.
     
    Leif K-Brooks, Aug 25, 2005
    #17
  18. Jim Scott

    AF Guest

    On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 05:23:30 GMT, Leif K-Brooks
    <> wrote:

    >AF wrote:
    >> If anyone has a WYSIWYG editor they like better than FP, I'd like to
    >> hear about it.

    >
    >"WYSIWYG HTML editor" is an oxymoron.


    True, but there are some nice features in FP for formatting, like the
    eye dropper under colors. I use this a lot to try to match colors,
    pick different shades or do contrasts. If you have a better way to do
    this, I am all ears.



    Best regards,

    Al
    http://www.affordablefloridainsurance.com
    http://www.americanbestmortgages.com
    http://www.americanaffordablelifeinsurance.com
     
    AF, Aug 25, 2005
    #18
  19. AF wrote:
    > True, but there are some nice features in FP for formatting, like the
    > eye dropper under colors. I use this a lot to try to match colors,
    > pick different shades or do contrasts. If you have a better way to do
    > this, I am all ears.


    For matching colors, I use ColorZilla:
    <http://www.iosart.com/firefox/colorzilla/>. For picking new colors, I
    tend to use Inkscape's <http://inkscape.org/> color editor.
     
    Leif K-Brooks, Aug 25, 2005
    #19
  20. Re: Frontpage versus Code

    Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > I recommend KDE and Konqueror if you were ever to consider Linux? You can
    > edit the files over FTP as if they were placed locally. KDE does all the
    > copying over FTP in the background.


    Hmmm. I would've never thought to use a browser.

    I used to use gFTP, and used kbear for a while, but found it buggy.

    Then when I checked out the Firefox FireFTP extension, I liked it and
    have been using it ever since.

    Wait! I said I'd never have thought about using a browser...

    Well, I'm not *exactly* using a browser. ;)

    Datapoint: Mandrake/KDE here.

    > I do the same thing with KDE's thumbnail gallery generator.


    Hey, what's that called?

    --
    Blinky Linux Registered User 297263

    Killing All Posts from GG: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
    End Of The Good GG Archive GUI: http://blinkynet.net/comp/gggui.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Aug 26, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Bootstrap Bill

    Frontpage 2003 and C#?

    Bootstrap Bill, Sep 12, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    562
    Joe Mayo [C# MVP]
    Sep 12, 2004
  2. mit
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    417
    Scott M.
    Mar 31, 2006
  3. joe

    ASP.Net and FrontPage mixed

    joe, Jun 26, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,022
  4. Peter H

    opening aspx-files in frontpage?

    Peter H, Jul 3, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    377
    Peter H
    Jul 4, 2003
  5. SStory
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    300
    SStory
    Aug 1, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page