On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 21:42:39 -0800 (PST), Jordan Gouger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Well I do a lot of development in vb.net as well as CF, and one of the > things that I really like about VS.net is that you actually have a true > WYSIWIG editor on there, where the controls that are placed in design view > are exactly as they appear in the compiled application.
Bear in mind that HTML pages are a bit of a different beast than a compiled VB application. You never know *exactly* how HTML is going to wind up looking, but I think DW does a decent job on the WYSIWYG side of things. I personally don't ever use it since I don't do much design, but it's probably about as good as it's going to get for HTML stuff. Macromedia's FlexBuilder does a bit better with the WYSIWYG stuff since Flex is more akin to doing VB development, but that's a completely different model. > I also find that the > most aggrivating thing about working with CF is the lack of a real-time > syntax checker, as VS.net and most Java IDEs have. You might want to check out CFEclipse if you're used to Java IDEs--it's really nice and has real-time syntax checking (for Java at least ...). http://cfeclipse.tigris.org/ > Besides these to is the > lack of Dreamweaver to recognize an application framework behind other > pages, without using live design view. These are probably my biggest > grievances, but there are many others. Another feature I don't ever use but I've heard others express this frustration as well. About as far as I go with this stuff is using the database panel in DW which is pretty handy. > When Macromedia bought out Allaire back in the day, they for whatever reason > decided to phase out homesite / CF Studio and try to integrate homesite with > dreamweaver. This did not work out very well, as dreamweaver simply doesn't > do enough to satisfy the hard-core coder, but it is a great middle ground. You might want to try HomeSite+. It's on the DW CD if you bought the PC version. I agree that DW used to be terrible for coders up to and including UltraDev, but it's really made a lot of progress. I use it more or less full time on both the PC and the Mac, and even coming from using CF Studio I really like DW. A lot of other folks prefer HomeSite+. > I > could argue for hours over how much better Cold Fusion is over classic ASP > and even ASP.net, but the fact of the matter still remains that ASP.net is > widely accepted and easy to work with thanks in part to the power of VS.net. > I think that Macromedia could compete head-to-head with .net if they > possesed an IDE that was comparable to its competition. Well, again I think CF and .NET are completely different animals, and so are their IDEs. VS only has to work with Microsoft technologies and only run on Windows, while DW has to support as much web stuff as it can. VS is designed to work for both web app building and desktop app building, while DW is a web-only tool. I understand where you're coming from but I think there are some distinct differences that allow MS to do things with VS that can't be done with DW, although there are some obvious areas of improvement that could be made with DW. Macromedia has a wish list and is always looking for areas in which people want to see improvement, so it might be worth sending these comments over to the DW team: http://www.macromedia.com/support/email/wishform/ -- Matt Woodward [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mattwoodward.com ---------------------------------------------------------- To post, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: http://www.dfwcfug.org/form_MemberUnsubscribe.cfm To subscribe: http://www.dfwcfug.org/form_MemberRegistration.cfm
