|
code
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Any hints on how to do frames in ASP.Net 2.0?What would be cool as hell, would be a designer interface like Dreamweaver -
with drag and drop elements like frames and such. Why isn't ASP.Net as easy to use as Dreamweaver. Certainly Microsoft has looked at them (if nothing more than as competition for FrontPage). What would be the reason for NOT making an easy-to-use ui designer that actually made good looking web pages instead of what we have come to expect from Microsoft's web development tools? I have one idea..... Microsoft has publicly stated that their goal is online applications. Perhaps this is the reason for the really crappy interface designer in ASP.Net and Visual Interdev before that - they don't want to foster too much competition before they monopolize the market. Wouldn't put it past 'em........ Happy New Year to ya! I hear there's a new killer designer being developed code named Quartz but I
don't know if it will integrate with Visual Studio. <%= Clinton Gallagher METROmilwaukee (sm) "A Regional Information Service" NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com URL http://metromilwaukee.com/ URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/ Show quoteHide quote "Jim" <reply@groups.please> wrote in message news:MGHtf.48888$wq.2101@bignews7.bellsouth.net... > What would be cool as hell, would be a designer interface like > Dreamweaver - with drag and drop elements like frames and such. > > Why isn't ASP.Net as easy to use as Dreamweaver. Certainly Microsoft has > looked at them (if nothing more than as competition for FrontPage). What > would be the reason for NOT making an easy-to-use ui designer that > actually made good looking web pages instead of what we have come to > expect from Microsoft's web development tools? > > I have one idea..... Microsoft has publicly stated that their goal is > online applications. Perhaps this is the reason for the really crappy > interface designer in ASP.Net and Visual Interdev before that - they > don't want to foster too much competition before they monopolize the > market. > > Wouldn't put it past 'em........ > > Happy New Year to ya! > > > Download the beta!
http://www.microsoft.com/products/expression/en/downloads.aspx Show quoteHide quote "clintonG" <csgallag***@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in message news:eqaJWxoDGHA.2040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... >I hear there's a new killer designer being developed code named Quartz but >I don't know if it will integrate with Visual Studio. > > <%= Clinton Gallagher > METROmilwaukee (sm) "A Regional Information Service" > NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com > URL http://metromilwaukee.com/ > URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/ > > > "Jim" <reply@groups.please> wrote in message > news:MGHtf.48888$wq.2101@bignews7.bellsouth.net... >> What would be cool as hell, would be a designer interface like >> Dreamweaver - with drag and drop elements like frames and such. >> >> Why isn't ASP.Net as easy to use as Dreamweaver. Certainly Microsoft has >> looked at them (if nothing more than as competition for FrontPage). What >> would be the reason for NOT making an easy-to-use ui designer that >> actually made good looking web pages instead of what we have come to >> expect from Microsoft's web development tools? >> >> I have one idea..... Microsoft has publicly stated that their goal is >> online applications. Perhaps this is the reason for the really crappy >> interface designer in ASP.Net and Visual Interdev before that - they >> don't want to foster too much competition before they monopolize the >> market. >> >> Wouldn't put it past 'em........ >> >> Happy New Year to ya! >> >> >> > > That's just the graphic tool.
Randall Arnold Show quoteHide quote "Jim" <reply@groups.please> wrote in message news:jrMtf.9593$3I3.7481@bignews5.bellsouth.net... > Download the beta! > > http://www.microsoft.com/products/expression/en/downloads.aspx > > > "clintonG" <csgallag***@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in message > news:eqaJWxoDGHA.2040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... >>I hear there's a new killer designer being developed code named Quartz but >>I don't know if it will integrate with Visual Studio. >> >> <%= Clinton Gallagher >> METROmilwaukee (sm) "A Regional Information Service" >> NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com >> URL http://metromilwaukee.com/ >> URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/ >> >> >> "Jim" <reply@groups.please> wrote in message >> news:MGHtf.48888$wq.2101@bignews7.bellsouth.net... >>> What would be cool as hell, would be a designer interface like >>> Dreamweaver - with drag and drop elements like frames and such. >>> >>> Why isn't ASP.Net as easy to use as Dreamweaver. Certainly Microsoft >>> has looked at them (if nothing more than as competition for FrontPage). >>> What would be the reason for NOT making an easy-to-use ui designer that >>> actually made good looking web pages instead of what we have come to >>> expect from Microsoft's web development tools? >>> >>> I have one idea..... Microsoft has publicly stated that their goal is >>> online applications. Perhaps this is the reason for the really crappy >>> interface designer in ASP.Net and Visual Interdev before that - they >>> don't want to foster too much competition before they monopolize the >>> market. >>> >>> Wouldn't put it past 'em........ >>> >>> Happy New Year to ya! >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > I added that bit of information elsewhere.....sorry I forgot to add it here.
I am getting more info on getting into the beta program for Microsoft Enterprise (which contains all 3 apps in a suite), and I'll let you know what I find out. Show quoteHide quote "Randall Arnold" <rgarnold@cathartis.com_> wrote in message news:%23EhavX2DGHA.3920@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > That's just the graphic tool. > > Randall Arnold > > "Jim" <reply@groups.please> wrote in message > news:jrMtf.9593$3I3.7481@bignews5.bellsouth.net... >> Download the beta! >> >> http://www.microsoft.com/products/expression/en/downloads.aspx >> >> >> "clintonG" <csgallag***@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in >> message news:eqaJWxoDGHA.2040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... >>>I hear there's a new killer designer being developed code named Quartz >>>but I don't know if it will integrate with Visual Studio. >>> >>> <%= Clinton Gallagher >>> METROmilwaukee (sm) "A Regional Information Service" >>> NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com >>> URL http://metromilwaukee.com/ >>> URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/ >>> >>> >>> "Jim" <reply@groups.please> wrote in message >>> news:MGHtf.48888$wq.2101@bignews7.bellsouth.net... >>>> What would be cool as hell, would be a designer interface like >>>> Dreamweaver - with drag and drop elements like frames and such. >>>> >>>> Why isn't ASP.Net as easy to use as Dreamweaver. Certainly Microsoft >>>> has looked at them (if nothing more than as competition for FrontPage). >>>> What would be the reason for NOT making an easy-to-use ui designer that >>>> actually made good looking web pages instead of what we have come to >>>> expect from Microsoft's web development tools? >>>> >>>> I have one idea..... Microsoft has publicly stated that their goal is >>>> online applications. Perhaps this is the reason for the really crappy >>>> interface designer in ASP.Net and Visual Interdev before that - they >>>> don't want to foster too much competition before they monopolize the >>>> market. >>>> >>>> Wouldn't put it past 'em........ >>>> >>>> Happy New Year to ya! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > With master pages why would you need frames anyway?
Joe Show quoteHide quote "Jim" <reply@groups.please> wrote in message news:rJ4uf.4135$vL4.2519@bignews1.bellsouth.net... >I added that bit of information elsewhere.....sorry I forgot to add it >here. > > I am getting more info on getting into the beta program for Microsoft > Enterprise (which contains all 3 apps in a suite), and I'll let you know > what I find out. > > > "Randall Arnold" <rgarnold@cathartis.com_> wrote in message > news:%23EhavX2DGHA.3920@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... >> That's just the graphic tool. >> >> Randall Arnold >> >> "Jim" <reply@groups.please> wrote in message >> news:jrMtf.9593$3I3.7481@bignews5.bellsouth.net... >>> Download the beta! >>> >>> http://www.microsoft.com/products/expression/en/downloads.aspx >>> >>> >>> "clintonG" <csgallag***@REMOVETHISTEXTmetromilwaukee.com> wrote in >>> message news:eqaJWxoDGHA.2040@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... >>>>I hear there's a new killer designer being developed code named Quartz >>>>but I don't know if it will integrate with Visual Studio. >>>> >>>> <%= Clinton Gallagher >>>> METROmilwaukee (sm) "A Regional Information Service" >>>> NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com >>>> URL http://metromilwaukee.com/ >>>> URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/ >>>> >>>> >>>> "Jim" <reply@groups.please> wrote in message >>>> news:MGHtf.48888$wq.2101@bignews7.bellsouth.net... >>>>> What would be cool as hell, would be a designer interface like >>>>> Dreamweaver - with drag and drop elements like frames and such. >>>>> >>>>> Why isn't ASP.Net as easy to use as Dreamweaver. Certainly Microsoft >>>>> has looked at them (if nothing more than as competition for >>>>> FrontPage). What would be the reason for NOT making an easy-to-use ui >>>>> designer that actually made good looking web pages instead of what we >>>>> have come to expect from Microsoft's web development tools? >>>>> >>>>> I have one idea..... Microsoft has publicly stated that their goal is >>>>> online applications. Perhaps this is the reason for the really crappy >>>>> interface designer in ASP.Net and Visual Interdev before that - they >>>>> don't want to foster too much competition before they monopolize the >>>>> market. >>>>> >>>>> Wouldn't put it past 'em........ >>>>> >>>>> Happy New Year to ya! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > If your navigation "frame" loads content outside your website that you do
not control, you cannot load those outside pages as content pages because you can't add the content headers required by the master pages. Frames do this simple task extremely well. Show quoteHide quote "Joe Reiss" <joere***@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:gMjuf.100413$aS5.66533@bignews4.bellsouth.net... > With master pages why would you need frames anyway? > > Joe I completely, totally, absoluetely 100% disagree with what you said. VS (or
VWD) are FAR better than DW for making web apps (not even mentionning the "programming" part as the difference on that is beyond obvious). If there is one app I can't stand it's DW. I really wonder what you don't like about MS' tools, it generates all the markup I need - although I tend to mostly create my master pages in "code view". None of us (in the teams I've worked on) have ever had issues with "not making good looking web pages" (not to mention, that would hardly be ASP.Net's fault like you seem to say - which is just a server side technology - not a design app). The pages generate all the xhtml (markup) it's expected to (the master pages add the "non-webapp" markup), and the CSS styles it accordingly. I don't see any limitations, lacks, or shortcomings of any kind anywhere whatsoever. The real issue seems to be that you want some easy-to-use (beginner click-n-point/drag stuff from toolbars) web page DESIGN app, and you're using an advanced app made to generate code/applications (programming - and not exactly a beginner's tool; and again, ASP.Net isn't some IDE to edit pages but a server-side technology). Apples and oranges. Once you know XHTML and CSS (not just for styling text and such but also for site layout and everything), you will find something like DW *EXTREMELY* lacking (borderline useless) anyways. None of these DW-like "design" apps come even close to knowing simple markup and CSS (and there are TONS of very good CSS templates and resources such as csszengarden on the web to get you started). It's not that hard nor time consuming to learn (you can't realistically not know this stuff if you're willing to do web design for a living nowadays). And about frames, I hope I'm misunderstanding you... You don't really want to make a site that uses frames for real, do you? With the exception of MSDN, I don't recall seeing a single site that still uses them, last I recall seeing them being used commonly was around 1995, in static HTML sites that used no server-side technologies, hence no possibilities of server-side includes for menus or such, so a frame was used for the site menu... There are tons of issues associated to using frames as well (pages don't ahve unique URLs anymore and are hard to bookmark (and other associated isues), they go against accessibility guidelines, they can be a major obstacle (or prevent altogether) your site from being indexed/spidered, often won't save or print right, etc etc). I can't think of a single reason why one would want to use that (and deal with all the associated issues/troubles/problems/headaches) instead of using today's modern/simple/elegant CSS layout techniques or worst case scenario even a table layout... As for the "competition" thing, it's not like it's competing against DW or the like - they're completely different apps, aimed at completely different groups of people (designers don't seem to like coding tools overly, and saying DW is crippled as a development tool is quite an understatement IMHO). And VS (or VWD) is by FAR the best tool for for both tasks IMHO. But it comes down to personnal preferences and such. Make your site design in DW if you prefer, then make a master page from it, and finally code the web app itself in VS, or something along those lines if that's what you prefer... Just my 2 cents... And Happy New Year to everyone :) Show quoteHide quote "Jim" <reply@groups.please> wrote in message news:MGHtf.48888$wq.2101@bignews7.bellsouth.net... > What would be cool as hell, would be a designer interface like > Dreamweaver - with drag and drop elements like frames and such. > > Why isn't ASP.Net as easy to use as Dreamweaver. Certainly Microsoft has > looked at them (if nothing more than as competition for FrontPage). What > would be the reason for NOT making an easy-to-use ui designer that > actually made good looking web pages instead of what we have come to > expect from Microsoft's web development tools? > > I have one idea..... Microsoft has publicly stated that their goal is > online applications. Perhaps this is the reason for the really crappy > interface designer in ASP.Net and Visual Interdev before that - they > don't want to foster too much competition before they monopolize the > market. > > Wouldn't put it past 'em........ > > Happy New Year to ya! First of all, thank you very much for your in-depth response. If I may.....
"john smith" <j***@smith.com> wrote in message True. The programming part is great. But, why can't you have the easy ui news:%23H9ldGpDGHA.3528@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... >I completely, totally, absoluetely 100% disagree with what you said. VS (or >VWD) are FAR better than DW for making web apps (not even mentionning the >"programming" part as the difference on that is beyond obvious). designer like DW WITH the programming (code behind) resources? >If there is one app I can't stand it's DW. I really wonder what you don't It is the same as the difference in coding C++ vs VB6. Sure, C++ is more >like about MS' tools, it generates all the markup I need - although I tend >to mostly create my master pages in "code view". None of us (in the teams >I've worked on) have ever had issues with "not making good looking web >pages" (not to mention, that would hardly be ASP.Net's fault like you seem >to say - which is just a server side technology - not a design app). The >pages generate all the xhtml (markup) it's expected to (the master pages >add the "non-webapp" markup), and the CSS styles it accordingly. I don't >see any limitations, lacks, or shortcomings of any kind anywhere >whatsoever. powerful, but VB6 let you slam out far more projects in the same amount of time. DW is much easier to use for interface design precisely because of the drag-and-drop interface, while ASP.Net technologies excel at server side programming. There's simply no reason we can't have both (say a cross between FrontPage and ASP.Net even). > I sertainly do....for the UI anyway.....> The real issue seems to be that you want some easy-to-use (beginner > click-n-point/drag stuff from toolbars) web page DESIGN app, >and you're using an advanced app made to generate code/applications I am not exactly a beginner, but I am new to .Net web applications. I need >(programming - and not exactly a beginner's tool; to use the power of ASP.Net to do some database editing via a web app.....but, I want a cool interface. Something that Visual Studio 2005 Pro doesn't seem to be able to do as quickly or easily as Dreamweaver 8 or even FrontPage for that matter. > and again, ASP.Net isn't some IDE to edit pages but a server-side I disagree here. If you are going to put out a product and technology like > technology). Apples and oranges. ASP.Net, having the power of server side processing is great. But, you can't ignore the user interface. Microsoft understands the importance of user interface design. Look at the changes in Windows from 98 to XP...and from XP to Vista. They get it. They just haven't enabled us to use that same reasoning in ASP.Net. Truly visually appealing websites don't use VS. They use Flash or Dreamweaver or a similar app, because VS can't compete with the visual appeal possible with the other applications. >Once you know XHTML and CSS (not just for styling text and such but also Have you used Dreamweaver 8? CSS support is an integral part of the design >for site layout and everything), you will find something like DW >*EXTREMELY* lacking (borderline useless) anyways. None of these DW-like >"design" apps come even close to knowing simple markup and CSS (and there >are TONS of very good CSS templates and resources such as csszengarden on >the web to get you started). features and is the preferred mehtod for creating pages in DW. Show quoteHide quote >It's not that hard nor time consuming to learn (you can't realistically not I am well aware of the arguments for and against frames. I want the >know this stuff if you're willing to do web design for a living nowadays). > > And about frames, I hope I'm misunderstanding you... You don't really want > to make a site that uses frames for real, do you? With the exception of > MSDN, I don't recall seeing a single site that still uses them, last I > recall seeing them being used commonly was around 1995, in static HTML > sites that used no server-side technologies, hence no possibilities of > server-side includes for menus or such, so a frame was used for the site > menu... There are tons of issues associated to using frames as well (pages > don't ahve unique URLs anymore and are hard to bookmark (and other > associated isues), they go against accessibility guidelines, they can be a > major obstacle (or prevent altogether) your site from being > indexed/spidered, often won't save or print right, etc etc). I can't think > of a single reason why one would want to use that (and deal with all the > associated issues/troubles/problems/headaches) instead of using today's > modern/simple/elegant CSS layout techniques or worst case scenario even a > table layout... simplest of all sites, and frames seem like the way to go. I want to be able to have a navigation list on the left and load web pages in a frame to the right of this navigation list. The web pages being loaded will be generated based on the options selected by the user in the navigation "frame". Do you know a simpler way to do this than with frames? To be honest, I don't care if I am using the latest widgets or methodologies. I am interested in getting solutions created as quickly as possible and putting them to use ASAP. DW fills this bill quite nicely and ASP.Net allows fast programmig of server side code. I just want the best of both worlds in a single application. > VS and DW are not competitors as evidenced by VS's lack of an easy to use > As for the "competition" thing, it's not like it's competing against DW or > the like - they're completely different apps, aimed at completely > different groups of people (designers don't seem to like coding tools > overly, and saying DW is crippled as a development tool is quite an > understatement IMHO). And VS (or VWD) is by FAR the best tool for for both > tasks IMHO. designer interface. The competition I was referring to was one between FrontPage and Dreamweaver. (One that Dreamweaver wins hands-down I might add.) > But it comes down to personnal preferences and such. Make your site design Examples of this would be really cool. I have Googled my fingers to the > in DW if you prefer, then make a master page from it, and finally code the > web app itself in VS, or something along those lines if that's what you > prefer... bone to no avail. I will visit my local computer/bookstore ASAP to continue my search there. > Happy New Year to you! And thanks again for your post.> Just my 2 cents... And Happy New Year to everyone :) BTW.....Microsoft does see Dreamweaver as a competitor. I found the
following after reading ClintonG's reply to the OP..... http://pdc.betanews.com/entry/Quartz_Microsofts_Dreamweaver_Rival/1126715113. "Jim" <reply@groups.please> wrote in news:9FKtf.2412$vL4.2365 @bignews1.bellsouth.net:> BTW.....Microsoft does see Dreamweaver as a competitor. I found the The previous post is a minority in this group. Last time I posted a similar > following after reading ClintonG's reply to the OP..... rant about VS.NET's HTML editing capabilities, most people agreed that VS.NET needs a major overhaul. VS.NET's HTML editing is "good enough" to get by. Hence that's why I build my templates in DW, then copy and paste the HTML back over to VS.NET! : ) -- Stan Kee (spamhoneypot@rogers.com) "john smith" <j***@smith.com> wrote in Not much of a web designer huh. VS.NET's HTML capabilities are news:#H9ldGpDGHA.3528@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl: > I completely, totally, absoluetely 100% disagree with what you said. > VS (or VWD) are FAR better than DW for making web apps (not even > mentionning the "programming" part as the difference on that is beyond > obvious). HORRENDOUS. > If there is one app I can't stand it's DW. I really wonder At least DW doesn't mangle HTML.> what you don't like about MS' tools, it generates all the markup I > need - although I tend to mostly create my master pages in "code > view". > None of us (in the teams I've worked on) have ever had issues I guess your templates must be simplistic. VS.NET is fine for generic > with "not making good looking web pages" (not to mention, that would > hardly be ASP.Net's fault like you seem to say - which is just a > server side technology - not a design app). HTML... but once you start adding complex javascripts, DHTML, etc - the limitations are obvious. > The pages generate all the If you don't see any limitations, you haven't really used VS.NET's HTML > xhtml (markup) it's expected to (the master pages add the "non-webapp" > markup), and the CSS styles it accordingly. I don't see any > limitations, lacks, or shortcomings of any kind anywhere whatsoever. editor much. > None of No, but DW's CSS editor is decent - and the HTML produced by DW is clean > these DW-like "design" apps come even close to knowing simple markup > and CSS (and there are TONS of very good CSS templates and resources > such as csszengarden on the web to get you started). - unlike VS.NET : ) -- Stan Kee (spamhoneypot@rogers.com)
programmatically copy table to another application
Referencing controls inside Wizard control newbie to creating web controls Code to select item in dropdown populated using TableAdapter Custom Treenodes in Treeview Closing window/page Would like to get two items from a dropdownlist Problem in Setting SelectedValue for DropdownList in Form DropDownList VS TextBox CheckBoxList - When does it actually databind? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||