asp.net webcontrols: What would be cool as hell, would be a designer interface like Dreamweaver -
with drag and drop elements like frames and such.

Why isn't ASP.Net as easy to use as Dreamweaver. Certainly Microsoft has
looked at them (if nothing more than as competition for FrontPage). What
would be the reason for NOT making an easy-to-use ui designer that actually
made good looking web pages instead of what we have come to expect from
Microsoft's web development tools?

I have one idea..... Microsoft has publicly stated that their goal is
online applications. Perhaps this is the reason for the really crappy
interface designer in ASP.Net and Visual Interdev before that - they don't
want to foster too much competition before they monopolize the market.

Wouldn't put it past 'em........

Happy New Year to ya!

I hear there's a new killer designer being developed code named Quartz but I
don't know if it will integrate with Visual Studio.

<%= Clinton Gallagher
METROmilwaukee (sm) "A Regional Information Service"
NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://metromilwaukee.com/
URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/


[quoted text, click to view]

I completely, totally, absoluetely 100% disagree with what you said. VS (or
VWD) are FAR better than DW for making web apps (not even mentionning the
"programming" part as the difference on that is beyond obvious). If there is
one app I can't stand it's DW. I really wonder what you don't like about MS'
tools, it generates all the markup I need - although I tend to mostly create
my master pages in "code view". None of us (in the teams I've worked on)
have ever had issues with "not making good looking web pages" (not to
mention, that would hardly be ASP.Net's fault like you seem to say - which
is just a server side technology - not a design app). The pages generate all
the xhtml (markup) it's expected to (the master pages add the "non-webapp"
markup), and the CSS styles it accordingly. I don't see any limitations,
lacks, or shortcomings of any kind anywhere whatsoever.

The real issue seems to be that you want some easy-to-use (beginner
click-n-point/drag stuff from toolbars) web page DESIGN app, and you're
using an advanced app made to generate code/applications (programming - and
not exactly a beginner's tool; and again, ASP.Net isn't some IDE to edit
pages but a server-side technology). Apples and oranges. Once you know XHTML
and CSS (not just for styling text and such but also for site layout and
everything), you will find something like DW *EXTREMELY* lacking (borderline
useless) anyways. None of these DW-like "design" apps come even close to
knowing simple markup and CSS (and there are TONS of very good CSS templates
and resources such as csszengarden on the web to get you started). It's not
that hard nor time consuming to learn (you can't realistically not know this
stuff if you're willing to do web design for a living nowadays).

And about frames, I hope I'm misunderstanding you... You don't really want
to make a site that uses frames for real, do you? With the exception of
MSDN, I don't recall seeing a single site that still uses them, last I
recall seeing them being used commonly was around 1995, in static HTML sites
that used no server-side technologies, hence no possibilities of server-side
includes for menus or such, so a frame was used for the site menu... There
are tons of issues associated to using frames as well (pages don't ahve
unique URLs anymore and are hard to bookmark (and other associated isues),
they go against accessibility guidelines, they can be a major obstacle (or
prevent altogether) your site from being indexed/spidered, often won't save
or print right, etc etc). I can't think of a single reason why one would
want to use that (and deal with all the associated
issues/troubles/problems/headaches) instead of using today's
modern/simple/elegant CSS layout techniques or worst case scenario even a
table layout...

As for the "competition" thing, it's not like it's competing against DW or
the like - they're completely different apps, aimed at completely different
groups of people (designers don't seem to like coding tools overly, and
saying DW is crippled as a development tool is quite an understatement
IMHO). And VS (or VWD) is by FAR the best tool for for both tasks IMHO. But
it comes down to personnal preferences and such. Make your site design in DW
if you prefer, then make a master page from it, and finally code the web app
itself in VS, or something along those lines if that's what you prefer...

Just my 2 cents... And Happy New Year to everyone :)

[quoted text, click to view]

First of all, thank you very much for your in-depth response. If I may.....

[quoted text, click to view]

True. The programming part is great. But, why can't you have the easy ui
designer like DW WITH the programming (code behind) resources?

[quoted text, click to view]

It is the same as the difference in coding C++ vs VB6. Sure, C++ is more
powerful, but VB6 let you slam out far more projects in the same amount of
time. DW is much easier to use for interface design precisely because of
the drag-and-drop interface, while ASP.Net technologies excel at server side
programming.

There's simply no reason we can't have both (say a cross between FrontPage
and ASP.Net even).

[quoted text, click to view]

I sertainly do....for the UI anyway.....

[quoted text, click to view]

I am not exactly a beginner, but I am new to .Net web applications. I need
to use the power of ASP.Net to do some database editing via a web
app.....but, I want a cool interface. Something that Visual Studio 2005 Pro
doesn't seem to be able to do as quickly or easily as Dreamweaver 8 or even
FrontPage for that matter.

[quoted text, click to view]

I disagree here. If you are going to put out a product and technology like
ASP.Net, having the power of server side processing is great. But, you
can't ignore the user interface.

Microsoft understands the importance of user interface design. Look at the
changes in Windows from 98 to XP...and from XP to Vista. They get it. They
just haven't enabled us to use that same reasoning in ASP.Net.

Truly visually appealing websites don't use VS. They use Flash or
Dreamweaver or a similar app, because VS can't compete with the visual
appeal possible with the other applications.

[quoted text, click to view]

Have you used Dreamweaver 8? CSS support is an integral part of the design
features and is the preferred mehtod for creating pages in DW.

[quoted text, click to view]

I am well aware of the arguments for and against frames. I want the
simplest of all sites, and frames seem like the way to go.

I want to be able to have a navigation list on the left and load web pages
in a frame to the right of this navigation list. The web pages being loaded
will be generated based on the options selected by the user in the
navigation "frame". Do you know a simpler way to do this than with frames?

To be honest, I don't care if I am using the latest widgets or
methodologies. I am interested in getting solutions created as quickly as
possible and putting them to use ASAP. DW fills this bill quite nicely and
ASP.Net allows fast programmig of server side code.

I just want the best of both worlds in a single application.

[quoted text, click to view]

VS and DW are not competitors as evidenced by VS's lack of an easy to use
designer interface. The competition I was referring to was one between
FrontPage and Dreamweaver. (One that Dreamweaver wins hands-down I might
add.)

[quoted text, click to view]

Examples of this would be really cool. I have Googled my fingers to the
bone to no avail. I will visit my local computer/bookstore ASAP to continue
my search there.

[quoted text, click to view]

Happy New Year to you! And thanks again for your post.

BTW.....Microsoft does see Dreamweaver as a competitor. I found the
following after reading ClintonG's reply to the OP.....
http://pdc.betanews.com/entry/Quartz_Microsofts_Dreamweaver_Rival/1126715113.

Download the beta!

http://www.microsoft.com/products/expression/en/downloads.aspx


[quoted text, click to view]

"john smith" <john@smith.com> wrote in
news:#H9ldGpDGHA.3528@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl:

[quoted text, click to view]

Not much of a web designer huh. VS.NET's HTML capabilities are
HORRENDOUS.



[quoted text, click to view]

At least DW doesn't mangle HTML.

[quoted text, click to view]

I guess your templates must be simplistic. VS.NET is fine for generic
HTML... but once you start adding complex javascripts, DHTML, etc - the
limitations are obvious.


[quoted text, click to view]

If you don't see any limitations, you haven't really used VS.NET's HTML
editor much.

[quoted text, click to view]

No, but DW's CSS editor is decent - and the HTML produced by DW is clean
- unlike VS.NET : )

--

"Jim" <reply@groups.please> wrote in news:9FKtf.2412$vL4.2365
@bignews1.bellsouth.net:

[quoted text, click to view]

The previous post is a minority in this group. Last time I posted a similar
rant about VS.NET's HTML editing capabilities, most people agreed that
VS.NET needs a major overhaul.

VS.NET's HTML editing is "good enough" to get by. Hence that's why I build
my templates in DW, then copy and paste the HTML back over to VS.NET! : )

--

That's just the graphic tool.

Randall Arnold

[quoted text, click to view]

I added that bit of information elsewhere.....sorry I forgot to add it here.

I am getting more info on getting into the beta program for Microsoft
Enterprise (which contains all 3 apps in a suite), and I'll let you know
what I find out.


[quoted text, click to view]

With master pages why would you need frames anyway?

Joe


[quoted text, click to view]

If your navigation "frame" loads content outside your website that you do
not control, you cannot load those outside pages as content pages because
you can't add the content headers required by the master pages.

Frames do this simple task extremely well.


[quoted text, click to view]