I also enjoyed your post, the thing that I get annoyed about with DW and other GUI interfaces is the fact that often the users do not know anything about HTML. They put some stuff in DW and magically there is a webpage.

This is good and bad.
-Good: everyone can have a website, no matter how much/little schooling they have.

-Bad: when they want their website to be better, they have absolutly no idea on how to do it. Or if things break they cannot fix it.

I am a contributing member in the HTML/DHTML/CSS board, I do this because I want to share knowledge, but it kinda annoys me a bit when people ask questions about things that a simple HTML book, tutorial or class would cover.

This probably has to do with the way that I learn (on the web or books) by myself. I think that people should take some time and learn a bit about HTML.

-------------------------------------
P.S. Just to prove that I don't always do what I say, I drive a car, and have no idea how to do an oil change

Take care

Well, at first I didn't know a thing about coding, but when I wanted to put some java on my karate page, I found out I hadn't a clue about it. Then I started to learn some stuff and my Crimson editor comes quite handy sometimes.
I agree, people who use Dreamweaver, should really try to atleast understand how a site functions.

I'm sick of people assuming that those who use dreamweaver must know nothing about the code. Dreamweaver is not intuitive, at least not like using frontpage wich is like using MS word. You must have at least a grasp of how html works in order to use dreamweaver.

Like I have mentioned before, along with a few other people, I use dreamweaver to hand code. I could probably run circles around most of the young people here when it comes to general knowledge of this industry, standards, etc. With dreamweaver it's less about making easy websites and more about increasing productivity.

whoo he's havin' a go at the young people now

i agree with everything else you say, cptnwinky!

Most of my best paid work comes from sites created using Dreamweaver by those unable to get exactly what they need out of it, particularly in relation to server-side functionality, cross-platform / browser compatibility and meeting accessibility requirements.
For this reason, I am extremely grateful to Macromedia.

It is not the tool but the people using it that count.

Originally Posted by cptnWinky

Like I have mentioned before, along with a few other people, I use dreamweaver to hand code. I could probably run circles around most of the young people here when it comes to general knowledge of this industry, standards, etc. With dreamweaver it's less about making easy websites and more about increasing productivity.

I apologize if my comments sounded insulting. I didn't mean them that way. I am merely trying to point out what I see as a danger.

Once again I apologize if I have offended anyone, especially cptnWinky who I do respct for his contributions to this forum.

Nope, not offended, just passionate.

very true opinion there cptnwinky i've always found dreamweaver a great tool to utilise, especially when you know how to hand code! my productivity increased a lot thanks to the handy code tips provided to us by Macromedia.

Originally Posted by dojo

I don't mean to offend anyone when I say there are few sites entirely coded that look appealing. I know there are people who really know their stuff and have the time, knowledge and talent to make the sites look awesome too. In many cases the sites are bland and nothing catches the eye.

I'm a hand coder, it's how I learned and it's just easier for me. I don't really know anything about Dreamweaver but I'm pretty sure the code it outputs is the same code I'm using, so how can it make a site better? I don't know everything but as far as I know the only editor out there that can do more than notepad, as far aesthetics go, would be one that outputs flash.

A lot of people use a wysiwyg for various purposes and as long as they understand what they're actually making than it is just another tool. It has been mentioned by some that they use Dreamweaver because of the many other useful tools built in and it saves them time. That’s great for them but I have been making sites long enough to develop my own system for efficiency. I'm fairly certain I could keep up with anybody of my skill level using a wysiwyg.

I'm not at all offended by your comments but rather confused by it. I've heard others say the same thing and simply can't understand where they would get the idea that a wysiwyg will some how make a site better. A tool is a tool and nothing more, the best wysiwyg users could probably hand code their sites just as well with notepad but prefer their editor only because of other features it offers them and that they have become accustom to. The only thing that makes a good design is a good design and hand coding or wysiwyg are both equally capable of producing the end product.

If this was a question between handcoding verse photoshop than I'd agree, images look better than text, but if we're talking code than I can't see the difference.

Just my .02¢

very well put faze...

i held off commenting but uhh.. faze just summed everything up for me

I have a love/hate relationship with Dreamweaver. I love that it saves me time, I love that I can save code snippets I use frequently and add them in with just a doubleclick, I love the keyboard shortcuts to add in stuff like paragraphs and other commonly used items, I love that it's finally supporting the css implementation, I love the way it shows the code in colors to make it easier to pick out mistakes and problems, I love how I can add stuff like ampersands in wysiwyg and it "codes" it for me in codeview(gotta love splitscreen!) I hate how badly the wysiwig side of it screws up the preview on complex css layouts, I hate how DW adds unnecessary code, I hate how the property manager's buttons are set up to add obsolete code instead of css (like in adding bold text), and I especially hate DW's sometimes ridiculously complicated and obscure help files. I've managed to come to terms with DW, and it is one of the best tools around-- and in defense of DW and MM, if the browser creators (especially the telletubby world of Microsnot) would conform to the standards, MM would have a lot easier job of making DW better.