Forums
This topic is locked
Upgrading from UD4
22 Oct 2002 17:59:38 mark capa posted:
<font face='Arial'>Hi,Just wanting a brief description of the advantages/improvements found in DreamweaverMX.
I've been using UD4 and I'm looking to upgrade if necessary.
Also, what's the future of asp now that .net is here!?</font id='Arial'>
www.gwenap.net
Free Vibrators to European countries.
Spice Up Your Sex Life!
Replies
Replied 23 Oct 2002 19:03:10
23 Oct 2002 19:03:10 Ned Frankly replied:
<font color=red>WARNING:</font id=red> Parts of this post are WAY OT for this forum. My opinions are mine alone. Did I mention that I'm an ordained minister? Excuse the preaching that follows.
For those of us writing ASP/MySQL for Linux servers, the future's so bright we've gotta wear shades.
Big projects require big, complex, interconnected tools, and if I had Fortune 1000 clients I'd be jumping on the .net bandwagon, but as a freelancer who primarily works on sub-$20k sites, a decent Redhat box with ASP and a few other toys is quite sufficient. Don't count out the open-source community when it comes to keeping up with the Gateses (Gateses?), or better yet, outdoing them.
I think Linux has a long way to go to be an acceptable general use desktop, but the server capabilities are proven, and getting better each day. GNU-licensed stuff is not as likely to push something like .net and Passport down everyone's throats as Microsquish is.
If anyone has ever wondered why I try my best not to code in VBScript (even though I'm quite capable of doing it) my fairly rabid anti-Microsoft stance should make it clear why this is the case. I say this as I type on my Microsoft Natural keyboard on a Win2kPro machine, so it should also be obvious that I'm a realist when I need to be.
Sorry for the OT reply, but sometimes you just have to speak your mind.
Now - UD to DMX (back OnTopic now): The snippets alone convinced me.
It's been a struggle at times, as DMX is still a bit buggy, but the interface is better (even though I use the UD4 mode) and dynamic elements such as List Boxes and Checkboxes have had a major overhaul and are a joy to work with now (instead of a manual-coded mess). I love to code by hand, but not when it's redundant stuff like conditional List Box code with mixed Static and Dynamic content.
In UD4 there was no way outside of handcoding to make a static ListBox use a dynamic field for the Selected value. For example, if you had a list of US States on a Record Edit page and you didn't want to add a 'STATES' table to your database, the only way to make it select the right one on page load was to manually insert the conditional SELECT on each option line. It's point and click in DMX.
I recommend the upgrade, but be forewarned that it will get frustrating at times. Search 'bug' in this forum and at macromedia.com for some fixes and workarounds.
Ned Frankly
For those of us writing ASP/MySQL for Linux servers, the future's so bright we've gotta wear shades.
Big projects require big, complex, interconnected tools, and if I had Fortune 1000 clients I'd be jumping on the .net bandwagon, but as a freelancer who primarily works on sub-$20k sites, a decent Redhat box with ASP and a few other toys is quite sufficient. Don't count out the open-source community when it comes to keeping up with the Gateses (Gateses?), or better yet, outdoing them.
I think Linux has a long way to go to be an acceptable general use desktop, but the server capabilities are proven, and getting better each day. GNU-licensed stuff is not as likely to push something like .net and Passport down everyone's throats as Microsquish is.
If anyone has ever wondered why I try my best not to code in VBScript (even though I'm quite capable of doing it) my fairly rabid anti-Microsoft stance should make it clear why this is the case. I say this as I type on my Microsoft Natural keyboard on a Win2kPro machine, so it should also be obvious that I'm a realist when I need to be.
Sorry for the OT reply, but sometimes you just have to speak your mind.
Now - UD to DMX (back OnTopic now): The snippets alone convinced me.
It's been a struggle at times, as DMX is still a bit buggy, but the interface is better (even though I use the UD4 mode) and dynamic elements such as List Boxes and Checkboxes have had a major overhaul and are a joy to work with now (instead of a manual-coded mess). I love to code by hand, but not when it's redundant stuff like conditional List Box code with mixed Static and Dynamic content.
In UD4 there was no way outside of handcoding to make a static ListBox use a dynamic field for the Selected value. For example, if you had a list of US States on a Record Edit page and you didn't want to add a 'STATES' table to your database, the only way to make it select the right one on page load was to manually insert the conditional SELECT on each option line. It's point and click in DMX.
I recommend the upgrade, but be forewarned that it will get frustrating at times. Search 'bug' in this forum and at macromedia.com for some fixes and workarounds.
Ned Frankly