>> ColdFusion is a Rapid Application Development language. >> >> Dreamweaver MX should not be used in the same sentence as the word >> in the next sentance. Rapid. Mulitply the time wasted waiting for >> DWMX to catch up with you by the amount of times you wait for it to >> catch up to you and you'll find you've lost weeks of development >> time. >> >> Yeah sure there's fancy features, but do they really speed up >> development. After all Macromedia is a 'design' company, why would >> they care about developers? DWMX is a quick design tool, not a great >> development tool.
PJ> I really wonder if you've ever used it! It's certainly not just a "quick PJ> design tool" as you put it (and actually, imho, it's not that great a design PJ> tool if the HTML that comes out of it is anything to go by!). Yes I used it for three months, and I thought it was great until I looked at how it slowed my productivity. I actually gave it a mighty chance to prove to me that it was worthy of my dollars. In the end I just applied the update to CFStudio that took the tag lib up to CFMX and continued to code there. CSS is done in TopStyle Pro, animation in Flash MX, etc... PJ> I will not say it's perfect (because it's not), but as a tool for building PJ> websites, it works really really well. Why do you think that DWMX comes out PJ> in the top 3 (if not top) of all design tools for building websites (and I PJ> do realise that I said "design")? Is it because it's JUST a "quick design PJ> tool" or do you think... You know, just maybe... That it's a bit more than PJ> that? Nope. It's just a quick design tool! <stirs pot> It comes out in the top 3 because 'it does layers' well. CNet says Norton Antivirus is the number 1 tool for anti-virus. The industry body says it is the worst and Nod32 is the best through years of testing experience. It's all relative to who's paying the advertising dollars to who is in the top n. PJ> I do think it's a bit stupid to say that you just use Notepad or CFStudio to PJ> do everything and then slag off DWMX for "Not being like CFStudio". IT WAS PJ> NEVER MEANT TO BE THE SAME AS CFSTUDIO! It is meant to be DWMX, allowing PJ> for the fact that real developers need to use it, and if you use it the way PJ> they suggest, then it works just fine! DWMX isn't a good 'all-round' tool, and isn't a 'specialised' tool, so it got to meet my recycle bin. When you're writing code, your fingers and some snippets are pretty much all you need to program quickly. DWMX, while being a good tool in some ways is far too slow for hand coding situations. The largest problem I see is that they only half implemented the development side as an add-on to an existing product. Looking back at DW3 and DUD (ultradev - ironic acronym), DWMX is a giant leap forward, probably 2 versions from an excellent tool for development. DWMX is to CF Studio as MS Word is to WordPerfect. One is trying to do everything and nearly gets there, the other is designed for a specific reason and does it extremely well. (ie: word=everyone wp=secretaries) PJ> Paul PJ> PS Where you get the idea it's not a Rapid development tool, I have no idea! PJ> No-one ever said that Rapid Development Tools produced good code. They just PJ> produced rapid code. Rapid means fast. People 'do' say that RAD tools cut development time. DWMX extends development time. I don't develop web sites, I develop enterprise data-driven applications for web/handheld/etc. I just want to get an end result as fast as possible, so I can play fooseball with some Canadians or something! :-) -- ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
