UD1 was a good first step. I personally dont think it should have been
released as a product, but maybe it was good for ASP or PHP development, but
it stunk for CF.
UD4 is a totally different story. It understand's <cfif> and <cfinclude>
unlike ud1. It can use your remote servers ODBC connection unlike ud1. On
top of the fact that it is Dreamweaver 4. It's very difficult to design a
visually complex site without a WYSIWYG design tool. Dreamweaver is the
number one program in this category right now, and most CF developers agree
with me here as shown in the recent CFDJ user awards.
While I dont think any of us will ever do any actual ColdFusion programming
in UD, it is exremely handy to see your live recordsets in your design, and
be able to tweak the visual elements with a mouse click.
That said, UD still does not understand the majority of cf tags. It needs to
have propery inspectors for each tag, and make designing custom inspectors
easier. Perhaps a VTM import function?
I used to use Homesite and Dreamweaver, now I use Homesite and Ultradev
which doesn't choke on CF code. Ultradev is not going to ever be a
replacement for Studio, unless they go to extremes like IBM has done with
VisualAge for Java.
jon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Wolfinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: Dreamweaver UltraDev 4.0 and Cold Fusion
> > In particular, I am interested in finding out how the tool is perceived
> > within the CF developer community, why you choose to use or not
>
> I have UD1 and am actually kind of upset that you guys put out a new
version
> so quickly after I bought my copy. It would have been nice to know a
newer
> version was in the works and since CF Studio is so much better than UD1, I
> do not plan on upgrading or switching over to UD4. I saw the NDA of UD4
at
> the Allaire Dev Conference back in November 2000 and am still waiting for
my
> "free gift" that you guys were supposed to send the attendees as well.
Due
> to these factors I have turned my back on Macromedia for web authoring all
> together (I am not . From what I saw at the NDA, I wasn't too impressed
> with the code editor anyway and I've found after using Studio hand coding
> everything is much more efficient. Much nicer than even being able to
> "draw" your own tables like UD4 can.
>
> --greg
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Teschmacher, Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 3:15 PM
> Subject: Dreamweaver UltraDev 4.0 and Cold Fusion
>
>
> > I would like to get some feedback regarding Macromedia's Dreamweaver
> > UltraDev 4.0 and it's CF support.
> > In particular, I am interested in finding out how the tool is perceived
> > within the CF developer community, why you choose to use or not use the
> > tool, and what are it's strengths and weaknesses in terms of building CF
> web
> > applications. Additionally, I would like to find out your thoughts on
the
> > CF code that UltraDev generates. Is it close to what you would have
> > authored by hand?
> >
> > Please respond to me directly, any feedback is greatly appreciated.
> > - Lawrence Teschmacher
> > - Sr. Software Engineer
> > - Macromedia Dreamweaver UltraDev
> >
> >
> >
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
