Dreamweaver or Visual Web Developer?

[afe]

Which one is better Dreamweaver or Visual Web Developer?

[Rockonmetal]

Personally i like dreamweaver because its made by adobe and even though i don't own it... it makes creating pages simple and easy... some times its a pain in the butt but its a really nice program easy to use... Plus it has coding/visual features...

Take a 30 day test drive for both...

Also tell us what your gonna be doing...
like... do you have coding experience... What type of website your going to be making... stuff like that so we can help you a little more...

[afe]

I have both of them, and I am making a sport site, http://www.athletes4excellence.com

[Twey]

Don't use either. WYSIWYG web editors are flawed both inherently and in implementation.

[djr33]

Dreamweaver. There have been a number of threads recently about Visual Web Designer, each with some problem with adding a script or styling.

Dreamweaver is, despite what Twey says, a useful tool. HOWEVER, it is only a tool. You are not making a design, nor a "dreamweaver file". You are making CODE, and only code. Dreamweaver generates code, and often there are errors or unusual practices.

If you do use a WYSIWYG (preview based) editor, there WILL be problems, and you must be able to fix them. For this reason, don't become reliant on it to handle all of the html.

Here are my tips:
1. Always work in split view, code and preview (or just code). This will teach you what happens when you add elements and make sure you have an eye on what's going on, not just hoping for the best and letting DW mess up the page in the end.
2. Be familiar with the code. It's much faster to click a button for a table. But still know what <table> and similar code means, and how to use it.
3. Use the code view for colored code-- it will help you see the code visually. That's the best part of dreamweaver, though it's also available in simpler applications like Notepad++.
4. Take advantage (though also be a bit wary) of it's FTP functions. This makes things a lot faster. Open a file, edit, save, and no need to upload to test.
5. Don't rely on DW's preview. It might be wrong. Just like any other render engine in a browser, it will vary some. Test in Internet Explorer, Firefox, etc. DW is just a preview, not a defining factor.
6. Most importantly, never think that DW is writing your page for you. At any time you can go in and change/add/delete parts of the source code as you want, exactly as you want.

[BLiZZaRD]

Don't use either. WYSIWYG web editors are flawed both inherently and in implementation.

I agree. If you can't do it in notepad or notepad++ you shouldn't be doing it.

[djr33]

That's like saying if you want to talk to someone in Icelandic, you can't use a translator. You must learn the language.

Using the translator is the only way to start with actual communication, but using the translator makes the person lazy. The trick is to balance it.

[Twey]

That's like saying if you want to talk to someone in Icelandic, you can't use a translator. You must learn the language.

Are we talking machine or human translation here? It would be difficult for two people with no understanding of each other's languages to communicate via a machine translator. If you're talking a human translator, then by all means hire someone to do the page for you, but watch out: the market standard is pretty low.

[BLiZZaRD]

Thats what this site is here for, isn't it?

[djr33]

I was talking about a machine translator. Certainly not ideal, but it's a good way to TRY to get something done, if you have no other means. Then again, not a great metaphor anyway, because someone who knows what they are doing can use DW effectively.