Official Luthiers Forum!
http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/

Microsoft Frontpage 2003???
http://www-.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=2558		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Steve Kinnaird [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 5:25 am ]
Post subject: 
Hey--any of you out there who have built your own web page: Is Frontpage 2003 a useful tool? Anyone have experience w/ this program? A friend who builds websites (or at least used to) said I should consider this. Just curious if anyone has experience they could relate.

Thanks,

Steve
Author:  LanceK [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 5:37 am ]
Post subject: 
I built and managed the original OLF and my guitar site using FP 2002 - its very user friendly, and has lots of cool features. You need a hosting plan that supports FP Extensions. I say if your not really savoy with website design its a great place to start, and stay with if it does what you need.

LanceLanceK38555.6095023148
Author:  RussellR [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 5:45 am ]
Post subject: 
Another good option is Coffeecup the visual site designer allows you to do most things without having to write code. see there there website at www.coffeecup.com. It is pretty cheap too
Author:  RussellR [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 5:53 am ]
Post subject: 
Forgot to say Steve you can download the software and use it 10 times for free.
Author:  John Kinnaird [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 5:58 am ]
Post subject: 
I started out with Front page. It is user friendly and has graphic features that Dreamweaver (my present webpage program) does not have.
Author:  Brock Poling [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 6:46 am ]
Post subject: 

Jim is on the money ... Frontpage is a nightmare. It might be easy to use, but the code is a mess. Dreamweaver is better (you can get it bundled with Fireworks and have both a good editor and a good graphics platform).

Another option is Contribute (by macromedia). It is a nice system, but it does require "templates" to be built first by a coder. I think this produces some of the cleanest most functional code of all of the editor tools. This is great for people who don't do the initial design, but want to do their own ongoing maintenance.



Author:  Shawn [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:01 am ]
Post subject: 
(disclaimer: I am an engineer for Microsoft so my opinions are not impartial)

Frontpage is geared to people who want to create a website or a webpage that do not have any other experience other than with applications like a word processor, spreadsheet, or presentation program, such as Word, Excel and Powerpoint found in Microsoft Office.

The comments on Frontpage are mostly true but are based on previous versions of Frontpage which is in its fourth version, Frontpage 2003.

It is possible to create complete websites and host them on servers that do not have frontpage extensions loaded. These extensions in the past were required but are no longer required. Frontpage is a product that Microsoft did not create but rather acquired and the extensions came with it. It always takes a couple versions to get rid of all of the non-Office code when we acquire products and then integrate them into Office. The same was true of Visio and Project.

The purpose of the extensions was to reduce the amount of scripting that was needed in the creation of the website but this also generated the "extra" code that was commented on. If you go into options and set it to write to a server without Frontpage extensions, it simply takes the code that would have been written to the server and imbeds it into the webpages as javascript.

In response to the browser compatibility issue, in the past it was common to go to a website that would have a disclaimer "best view in 800x600 using Netscape or IE or whatever"...That is old school web programming. There is a compatibility setting in options in Frontpage in which you can specify what version of html standard you want the pages created in and either tuned for a specific browser or viewable by any browser that can understand that verion of html set. This can be set at the page level or the site level.

There are alot of good packages for creating websites, some which were mentioned...none of them are without a learning curve and all insert more html code than would be there if it wasnt written in a tool that generated sites with lots of placeholder pages that then need to be tailored to what you want displayed on the site.

These tools are about creating a complete site along with links to all of the other pages in the site so most add code as part of the creation process that is only useful for that website creation package.

I use Frontpage when setting up websites for churches, associations and clubs in which the person that will be maintaining the site is not technical with only Microsoft Office skills. I do not spend alot of time and effort doing this as the more glitzy the website is, the more difficult it will be for a non-technical person to be able to maintain.

I am an engineer so I dont have any issues with any products regardless of vendor, I just want to setup websites but dont want to have to maintain them afterwards which is why I recommend Microsoft Frontpage, not for any other wizbang reason than that.
Author:  Joe V [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:36 am ]
Post subject: 
With Frontpage it was easy for me to put up a website for my office. You can also get templates from 3rd party vendors that make it super easy to put together a professional looking website really quick. If you do a google search for "frontpage templates" you will find plenty of good examples of what can be put together fast and cheap.

That said, Dreamweaver is a better program overall. I have it also. Only problem is that I haven't gotten around to learning enough of it to redo my sites yet.

Joe Volin

Author:  John How [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:44 am ]
Post subject: 
I tried several different HTML editors and finlly decided it was easier just to learn a few HTML tags and write it myself. I didn't try either FP or Dreamweaver though so maybe they will do better. I would just find web pages hat I liked and then just view the source code to get examples, it really not rocket science, in fact Steve, mayhaps there is someone in your congregation that can help you.
Author:  Brock Poling [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:12 pm ]
Post subject: 

Steve... you are right. FP is getting better... and I understand the evolution of the product -- so it is not the MS bashing I am sure you get all the time... In another generation or two I may totally change my tune about FP.

In fact, I am a big fan of MS products (for the most part).

Author:  Dennis Leahy [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:30 pm ]
Post subject: 
I code in (and endorse) Microsoft programming languages for desktop applications, and I think that Microsoft has the best office applications on the market. That said, I use Macromedia products (Dreamweaver and Fireworks) in all web work. I will say I have not used FrontPage2003, and it may have evolved to be a great product by now. Without searching for factual data to back it up, I would hazard a guess that the vast majority of web professionals are currently using Dreamweaver.

I would say that if you are planning to have just a "static, presence" site, it probably does not matter too much what tool you use, but if the site evolves toward any "dynamic" content and/or e-commerce, then you will be glad that you have more sophisticated and integrated tools to work with.

That's my $0.02

Dennis
Author:  Steve Kinnaird [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 2:08 pm ]
Post subject: 
Lance, Russell, John, Jim, Brock, Shawn, Joe, John and Dennis,
Many thanks for your generous advice. Shawn described my needs pretty well when he spoke of someone with limited skills...and I should say time. I don't want to spend the rest of my life maintaining a web site. And, the "glitzy", complicated sites end up frustrating me anyway (from a viewer's perspective).

By the way, Ebay was listing FP 2003 for 79.00.
Will that be the one w/out the updates, requiring an additional purchase, or would this be a fantastic bargain?

Again, my thanks.

Steve
Author:  Dennis Leahy [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 2:37 pm ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=Steve Kinnaird] ... the "glitzy", complicated sites...[/QUOTE]

Are often Macromedia Flash, not Dreamweaver. Complicated is also a state of mind. You can make complicated or easily navigable sites using any tool.

Be sure to go to sites you enjoy visiting, and echo/mimic/borrow what you need. (In Microsoft Explorer, just click on the top menu: View, then click Source, and you'll see what makes each site tick.)

When you are ready to add a "contact" page, email me and I'll give you the code to keep your email address from easily being picked up by WebBots (whose sole purpose in life is to find you, read your code, and add your email address to a list to be sold to spammers. That is, unless you need info on mortgages, penis enlargement, erection correction, and teenage sluts. )

Dennis
Author:  Dennis Leahy [ Fri Jul 22, 2005 2:44 pm ]
Post subject: 
By the way, $79 sounds like the upgrade, which requires a previous version. The full (non-academic, non-upgrade) FP 2003 goes for about $170-175 from legit, discounted dealers.
Author:  Steve Kinnaird [ Sat Jul 23, 2005 1:49 pm ]
Post subject: 
[QUOTE=DennisLeahy] By the way, $79 sounds like the upgrade, which requires a previous version. The full (non-academic, non-upgrade) FP 2003 goes for about $170-175 from legit, discounted dealers.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, it sounded too good to be true....

Thanks for the advice (to a recovering Ludite).

Steve
Author:  Bobc [ Sun Jul 24, 2005 12:35 am ]
Post subject: 
Steve I checked a few of the e-bay listings and they state that they are the full install not an uograde.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/