Just out of interest...

[Emmanize]

Who here gets paid developing websites via DW (or other programmes). I know some people are against this here, I was just wondering if there are any DW supporters here as well, lol. :D

[EC]

I use dreamweaver.

[Zendada]

Almost every site I have built for every job that I have worked for that required it was done with DW. The only exceptions are Flash, and the sites I have built outside of any “job” which I also used DW for. :)

[ecsyle]

I use Dreamweaver. But I don't get paid to use dreamweaver. I get paid to develop websites. I also use BBEdit, Bluefish, Emacs...

[EC]

keyboard, mouse, huge mug of coffee, itunes ...

[JPnyc]

Just ONE mug?

[EC]

at a time.

[JPnyc]

I just drink from the pot now. I dont have to get up as much and I workout my biceps while I drink.

[EC]

you should really consider a carafe. Keeps the coffee warm, and doesn't give you the "burned coffee" taste you get if you leave it on the burner. Unless of course you just chug-a-lug it.

[Silence04]

i use Dreamweaver for all our sites, but i certanly don't enjoy it.

[chris_bcn]

I use Topstyle Pro - I think that DW is a fine program, but it's just a tool. I guarantee that anyone who makes a real living building websites and uses DW spends the vast majority of the time in code view, and never in design view only.

I have Dreamweaver and will use it from time to time. nothing wrong with it all. I'm not against Dreamweaver - I'm not even against FrontPAge - they can both be used to make Semantic standards based sites. It all depends on how you use them.

A better question would be:

Of those that use DW, how many use the Design view only to build their sites?

[Zendada]

When I use DW I use the code view about 5% of the time. I only go to it to tweak if something is not right.

[EC]

I use code view 100% of the time.

[EC]

And I've hooked TopStyle Pro into mine (DW comes standard with topstyle lite) thanks to old chris there.

[EC]

not that you're old chris, I'm probably older than you oh nevermind. Sorry emmanize. ;)

[chris_bcn]

Well EC I am deeply and mortally wounded :D

Nice Tiara! Very classy. Once I got to grips with Topstyle Dreamweaver started to collect computer dust in its wee folder. The design view just doesn't render CSS well enough, yet.

Which is a shame as I love the code completion in Dreaweaver, i just finr TS has a much smaller thumbprint, and uses way less RAM, especially if I have photoshop and Fireworks open. (I know I should learn photoshop, but I'm so comfortable with Fireworks. But then again I make far better gradients and shadows with photoshop).

Maybe I should get out more

[EC]

I picked up 8 awhile ago, haven't yet installed it because I got a new computer that had some problems right out of the box, but it's all better now and this week I'll be giving it a whirl. It's supposed to be better for developing CSS-based websites. Anything to help productivity -- and really, that's all I use it for.

[Patrick Shannon]

On our older websites, I use Dreamweaver at work (completely in code view) all the time. But we've moved over to a new framework, so I am now using MS Visual Studio Pro for all new sites. At home, BBEdit is god.

[Zendada]

Well EC I am deeply and mortally wounded :D

Nice Tiara! Very classy. Once I got to grips with Topstyle Dreamweaver started to collect computer dust in its wee folder. The design view just doesn't render CSS well enough, yet.

Which is a shame as I love the code completion in Dreaweaver, i just finr TS has a much smaller thumbprint, and uses way less RAM, especially if I have photoshop and Fireworks open. (I know I should learn photoshop, but I'm so comfortable with Fireworks. But then again I make far better gradients and shadows with photoshop).

Maybe I should get out more

Well, as for previewing the page, I open it up in a browser obviously. I’ve heard that even browsers are not up to speed as far as rendering CSS at this point.

[reuber1]

I remember when I was starting off my Freshman year in college, I never even heard of Dreamweaver; I thought it was the best thing since sliced cheese. Then, I started to use it and see what extra code it likes to throw in. I'm pretty much in code view all of the time.

[EC]

Well, as for previewing the page, I open it up in a browser obviously. I’ve heard that even browsers are not up to speed as far as rendering CSS at this point.

You mean IE is not up to speed. ;)

[EC]

I remember when I was starting off my Freshman year in college, I never even heard of Dreamweaver; I thought it was the best thing since sliced cheese. Then, I started to use it and see what extra code it likes to throw in. I'm pretty much in code view all of the time.

once in awhile I try to shortcut something and use the wysiwyg and I go back and take a gander :eek:

Dreamweaver was really fantastic in the days of table-based layouts. I used it all the time. Then I didn't, now I'm back but for other reasons.

[Zendada]

You mean IE is not up to speed. ;)

Well, that just goes without saying in any case. :)

[Emmanize]

I have both the code and design view open, but I build the site via code. I like the design section open so I can see what I am doing - but this is just how I feel more comfortable. I must admit you can get a bit lazy in DW, instead of writing out a simple table code, DW does it for you. Great time saver but lazy. It’s the same with CSS. But it’s a great way to learn...well for me it is anyway.

[Patrick Shannon]

WYSIWYG viewing (even when working in code view too) can only be handy up to a certain point. When you are using code like PHP or ASP to pull in include files for your header and footer site files along with other elements, then Dreamweaver's (at least the version I used, don't know about newer) site view can't pull them in. So if I had something like...

<?php include("header.inc"); ?>

<h1>Hello, world!</h1>
<p>Blah blah blah.</p>

<?php include("footer.inc"); ?>

You'd only see the header and paragraph alone, since it didn't pull in the includes.

[reuber1]

^^^Exactly.

That's the main problem I had with design view. Especially with our templates that are pretty much entirely generated by metatags. All you could see were layers of emptyness and a bunch of (!blahblah!), and it was nearly impossible to actually work with the file through design view.

[EC]

^ an even less complicated example, the design view doesn't render the CSS -- looks like poop, even if it validates and looks great across all browsers. Or maybe somebody already mentioned that. :/

[chris_bcn]

It's not laziness as DW doesn't spit out decent code. All that happens is that you have to unlearn everything before you learn the right way. Takes far longer in the long run.

IE 6 is perfectly up to speed. Assuming that you have a strict DOCTYPE. and there's no reason why you shouldn't. Strict cause IE 6 to run in standards mode. Transitional will cause it to run it Quirks mode with the broken box model. Code in strict and Bob's your Uncle.

Then ofcourse, make a new stylesheet - through in your hacks for IE5 / 5.5 (ditch IE/MAC - MSoft doesn't support it now so it's off my list of browsers), link them into your page via conditional comments and you habve more problems .Easy as pie.

All it takes is learning your trade and knowing your craft rather than trying to blag it

[chris_bcn]

I must admit you can get a bit lazy in DW, instead of writing out a simple table code,

You mean a table for tabular data only right? Right? not tables for layout surely :eek: :p

DW doesn't write correct code for tables. At least last time I checked. It doesn't ask you to put in a summary, not does it add <tbody> or <tfoot>

[JPnyc]

What's my uncle Bob have to do with this?

[Patrick Shannon]

The only pet peeve that I have about strict is that they took out "target," which is good to have external links open in new windows. Doesn't make sense to take it out, to me. There's Javascript of course, but that has some pitfalls as well.

[chris_bcn]

The back button is the most used part of a browser. Breaking it by forcing links to open in a new window is disoorientating to the majority of users. The majority are non savvy and wat to know why they can't go baack to where they came from.

you should see actual user testing sessions. Fascinating to see how the majority use web sites. Changes your whole outlook on web design

[JPnyc]

But I never got that. What's easier than closing the window to return to where you were? Isn't it more disorienting to navigate a few pages into the new site, and then have to click 'back' a half dozen times when with one click to close you could be right back there?

[chris_bcn]

Nope

[Zendada]

Well, like I’ve said in another post, I would not call myself a “web designer”*as I feel that means knowing all kinds of coding. But people should not be mistaken: DW is very capable of creating, managing and ftping sites all in one application. I’ve created dozens of successful, workable, visually pleasing sites using only DW and mostly in ‘design’ view.

And using nested tables for layout too. :P

[chris_bcn]

people know how to use the back button. They're comfortable with it. They know how it works. Break that and you confuse them.

For people like us it seems obvious, but to mum, or aunty or my wife it bugs the hell out of them. Especially if they have 10 browser windows open after surfing for 10 minutes. And yes they could use firefox. But they don't. The vast majority still use IE.

THis is what I mean about knowing your craft. It simply isn't enough to be able to bung together a layout in DW. You need to know what your doing. The actual site is a small part of a much larger process. If you want to be a web designer you have to kow all this.

If you're a graphic designer making the odd site for a specific audience you can get away with it though I guess

[EC]

I didn't even realize about the target thing. Say huh?

I had a client that recently instructed me, according to her new "publicity coach" to change all of her external links to open a new browser. I tried to explain to her that this annoys some people, and that was taken as an insult. (i.e. "Why would they be annoyed if they're brought back to my site?") *sigh*

I told her that her coach's site, as an example, uses this techique on nearly every link (even some that are pseudo-internal, pointing to her blog on a different addy) and when people see how many windows they've got open, it irritates the user. Also, people like to be in control of their browsing experience, not have something forced upon them -- ultimately the site owner *thinks* they are achieving a goal to not miss a chance to keep people on their site as long as possible (a marketing advantage), but that's not what web design is about -- it's about balancing the goals of the user and the client. As a personal preference, I don't like new windows.

[EC]

Well, like I’ve said in another post, I would not call myself a “web designer”*as I feel that means knowing all kinds of coding. But people should not be mistaken: DW is very capable of creating, managing and ftping sites all in one application. I’ve created dozens of successful, workable, visually pleasing sites using only DW and mostly in ‘design’ view.

And using nested tables for layout too. :P

They work for now, but they won't always.

[JPnyc]

Well even my 79 yr old father knows how to click the x in the right corner to close a window, and since target="_blank" won't open a maximized window in most cases, he knows what's just happened because he can see the old window behind it. He also knows how to use the back button, but I wouldn't say either is more comfortable for him. And I can't imagine many users more inexperienced than he.

But even without respect to that debate, I resent choices being taken away. I don't think it's the w3c's job to control my design practices for me, and resent them for doing so.

[chris_bcn]

I've have been to properly run user trails for launches of large scale websites. One of my clients is a very large company. )Don't want this forum to come up if anyone googles them),and they run them on each new site. It is an eye opener to say the least - and while your 79 yr old Father might now, a lot more don't. Including my 30 yr old wife. It's not an age thing at all. It's an interest thing. Web design isn't like print. You can't control every aspect of the design. You have to embrace user choice and users drive design decsions not the other way round

[JPnyc]

But that's what I'm saying Chris, he's about as inexperienced on the pc as they come, but I should think 1 of the very 1st things any novice user learns is how to close a program by clicking x. Now maybe alt-f4 would come a bit later, but the x should be among the 1st things anyone learns to do, right after learning to open a program.

I mean dad has to be told how to add a fave to his browser, how to reply to email, the difference between MSN msgr and internet explorer and signing into hotmail, but he knows how to close a window.

[chris_bcn]

I take your point, but there are far more people who don't thatn who do.

My wife is one of them, and she is 48 years the junior of your father. She gets really annoyed when she can't go back to where she was. I've told her to just close the window, but she'd prefer that the back button works

Studies clearly show that most people are unhappy when the back button doesn't work as expected. Quite frankly it really annoys me too. If I want a page opened in another window I'll do it myself thank you very much. I don't want the designer forcing his or her viewing habits onto my browsing experience.

The only exception is for me is links to pdfs

[chris_bcn]

http://diveintoaccessibility.org/day_16_not_opening_new_windows.html

4 years old but still relevant

[EC]

The only exception is for me is links to pdfs

And please for the love of whomever is in control of the universe according to your own personal spiritual beliefs ... WARN US WHEN YOU LINK TO A PDF!

Here: http://www.softpress.com/action_files/Acrobat_Icon/

[chris_bcn]

amen to that

Particle tree use to have a great script that previews your links with an icon - any link that went to a word, xls or pdf would automatically have the icon placed after it. I've used it on a few intranet sites. Works like a charm, and the content writes don't need to worry about warning anyone.

PM me if ou want to have a look at it (assuming I can find it) - I don't want to publish it as particle tree seem to have taken it down

[JPnyc]

THat was a good read, Chris. I guess I'm once again in the minority, because I go out of my way to have links I click on open in a new tab, so that I can close em with a mouse gesture and go right back where I was. Well I'm used to being in the minority.

Ok, I can accept that it's a practice that confuses the new user, but I still resent the w3c making that choice for me. I'm relegated to using JS to open a window (true, you have much more control over the new window) and I have to make provisions for the user without JS.

[JPnyc]

OH god YES, please tell us when there's a PDF on the other end of your link, so I can avoid it like root canal.

[chris_bcn]

I'm sorry that was a complete fib - my bookmark took me to a 404 - guess they cahnged the name

http://particletree.com/features/preview-your-links-with-unobtrusive-javascript/

very cool indeed. Although I made my own icons - those were to big for the projects I was working on

[EC]

I'm sorry that was a complete fib - my bookmark took me to a 404 - guess they cahnged the name

http://particletree.com/features/preview-your-links-with-unobtrusive-javascript/

very cool indeed. Although I made my own icons - those were to big for the projects I was working on

EXACTLY what I was looking for. I'm always saving cool pixel icons and buying them when they're on sale at iconbuffet. I could have sworn I had a good pdf one but I can't find it. This is awesome. If you have the space, give us an icon. If not, write it out i.e. "(opens a pdf document)" after the link. PLEASE. PLEASE? PLEAAAAAAAAAAASEEEEEEE!!!! This needs to go in the what jerks your chain thread. When I'm at the end of the day and all my sh*t is open, opening acrobat will freeze up everything and it drives me mental. Most times the use of a pdf document is completely uneccessary which is completely offensive to me. If you're too lazy to make a web page, at least warn us. Designers are often the worst offenders.

Sorry </rant>
:mad:

[yarusskii]

i use dw, but only reason for that is the instant preview and function of hotswapping between documents.

[urstwile]

I'm still learning about all of this web stuff (I mean in terms of execution, not using :rolleyes: ), but I have to say there are some times when it's cool when something opens in a new window, and other times when it's just booty.

I'd say the new window thing is a contextual thing. For example, you're reading your webmail from another computer, you click on a link someone sent you in an e-mail...of course, that should open a new window.

Similarly, you're on a newsmagazine site (like Salon, for instance), you click on a link to another source in the article, I think it's best for that to open in a new window.

But navigating within a site that always opens new windows within the site every time you click on a link? Annoying! And um, well, I'll stick with annoying.

Seems like the new window thing should be done on the end of the programmer, within reason.

I'm hoping I didn't repeat anything that anyone's already said.

I use Safari, and I like the tab feature, so I tend to hold down the Apple key when I click on a new link anyway, because I never can predict how someone on the other end has programmed the link. So if I want to maintain my current spot on the page, I'll hit the Apple key and open it up in a tab (I use it when I'm in this forum a lot).

Those are my two cents.

[yarusskii]

it's quite simple for me, i would open a new mindow for external links and pdf's.
this way user doesn't suffer, also is a good thing to say "this links open in new window etc.."

[JPnyc]

Well with PDFs the user suffers no matter what, because after you close the window, there's still an adopey acrobat process running sucking up 18mb of system resource, while serving no purpose whatsoever.

[Patrick Shannon]

Wow, I opened a floodgate here.

I'd only open new windows on external links only (with some exceptions), because the user doesn't always want to navigate completely away from the site. It's like leaving your car parked on the side of the road while you get out to explore the countryside as opposed to driving your car right into the field. Sure you can still hit reverse and get back on the road just as well if you drove into the field, but sometimes it's not very practical to do that and we'd like to leave our cars in a safe location. And what if you run into a pothole on the way back? And it's that pothole analogy that works so well for what I'm about to say.

The back button can run into potholes itself. You can't always depend on other websites to fully comply with the browser functionality. For example, sometimes when surfing around and I want to go back a few sites, I find that sometimes I get "stuck" and no matter how many times or how quick I click the back button, I can't pass. (This happens most often with redirects.)

I guess it's all up to personal preference, though. It's all too easy to look at your own annoyances and generalize that the entire public feels that way, so I would say that there would be several approaches one could take. At my job which works with accessibility and 508 as a goal, we have external links open in new windows. However, we also place an icon next to external links (as well as PDFs) to inform the user that they're about to leave the site/open a new window. So this works pretty well as to not surprise the user.