Conference terri::web_authoring

    Laurie,
    	It's one of those you either love it or hate it applications.
    
    	Me, I found it unpleasant to work with, however a collegue finds
    	it fantastic.
    
    	I think, for someone of your skill level it'll be fustrating to use
    	but it's worth looking at just for some of the ideas it uses.
    
    Kevin

It's leapfrog time again...

Laurie,

I, too, have heard the reviews and have been tempted...then I got my March '97
edition of Internet World, with reviews of 11 tools...

I think you can find it at www.iw.com...

Some excerpts:

Best of the Test: Microsoft Front Page '97

...In this context [fulfilling a full range of authoring demands, coding, CGI,
plug-in media, scripting, java, site management], our clear favorite is
Microsoft FrontPage 97. Its link-managing tools are a significant help for 
coordinating complex sites, and its the only program to provide access controls
that let managers grant unique permissions for each member of a workgroup who
contributes to a site....the integrated Javascript and VBscript wizards and
rich graphics editor place the program far ahead of the rest of the pack...

NetObjects Fusion 2.0

NetObjects Fusion is an ambitious attempt to control both sides [building and
managng] of web developing with a single interface....

...The product's $495 [US] price tag is by far the highest in this roundup, 
but it's a reasonable price for managers who regularly redesign entire sections
of their sites....

....Web designers who like to tinker with HTML will be disappointed with Fusion. 
You can't view the source code; it's even hard to find the folder where Fusion 
stores it's HTML files....
...Fusion will appeal to anyone who wants to add database connectivity or forms
without using scripts....

...This groundbreaking effort controls so many aspects of the page creation 
process that it won't appeal to everyone, but if you need a product that performs
most Web administration tasks on it's own, you'll love it.

Here in CIM Engineering support in HLO, we're going with Frontpage...FWIW.

cheers,

gc

    I have a review of NetObjects Fusion and several other tools that I
    have used available on the SES Internet Users Group website
    (http://isoisa.zko.dec.com/station/org/iug/). Go to the "What's New"
    section and then to the "Notes from the fall internet forum."
    
    The forum was in November and it's now February so a lot of the
    information is out of date (i.e. new versions of FrontPage and HomeSite
    are out and the next version of Fusion is due out any day).
    
    Basically I found Fusion to be alot of flash with some nice features,
    but cumbersome to use on a regular basis. I like being able to work
    with the source code and couldn't do that with Fusion.  However, I read
    in the Boston Globe that the next version of Fusion has the ability to
    edit the source code. Overall I think $700 is a bit steep.
    
    --Geoff
    
    

    Microsoft chose Fusion as the "placeholder" while they finished off the
    Visual InterDev product.  So they must have thought it worth while.  I
    view three levels to web maintenance:
    
    1.  Edit web pages.  That's the MS Office 97 space.
        Everyone has Office; everyone can create web pages.
    2.  Manage web sites.  That's the MS FrontPage 97 space.
        Fewer people have FrontPage; fewer peope do site management.
    3.  Develop web sites.  That's the MS Visual InterDev space.
        Very few people have InterDev; very few people do development.
    
    Be careful that you compare apples-to-apples, as you go through tools
    selection.  I'd highly recommend FrontPage 97 as a Web management tool. 
    However, as soon as you get into the high end space, where you're doing
    development, ActiveX, JavaScript, etc., then you quickly outgrow
    FrontPage.  
    
    Fusion is in the high end space, by its price tag.  However, I'm not
    sure that it's in the high end space by its functionality.

    FrontPage appears to mess up JavaScript which you have already placed
    in a HTML file several ways. 
    
    I saw a demo of Fusion v2 and it seems like a winner.
    
       erik

    Thanks folks; I'd appreciate any more comments. I'm going to a mate's
    house for a quick demo this evening. I take Kevin's comment about skill
    level, but I have less and less time to maintain my sites, and still
    less to write any new ones. The requirements, however, are not going
    away, the opposite in fact. I need to find a tool that will take as
    much load off my hands as possible. I've almost reached the stage where
    I don't *want* to hack the HTML!
    
    Also, it's interesting to see how the look-and-feel of web sites has
    changed over the last 6 months or so, with much more emphasis on
    appearance, especially on the front pages. Whilst I don't wholly agree
    with this, it's making some existing sites look very old-fashioned and
    staid. This product, as far as I can see, does produce "fashionable"
    pages.
    
    Cheers, Laurie.

Gee,

Remember when we were all jumping up and down about Quicksite?

8^)

gc

	I just read an article in today's Boston Globe about another tool
  called Web-It Now!.  It was a rave review.  The URL given was www.webit.com.
  Anyone seen it?  There's a 30-day trial version available.

		Danny

Laurie,

Well, what's the verdict?

Good?...Bad?....Ugly?...Too soon to tell?

gc

    No time to play much. I installed it, and tried to pull in a remote
    site, but it seems a combination of RAS and the firewall won't allow
    FTP pulls. So... It'll have to wait for the weekend. So far, it looks
    pretty nice, I must say.
    
    Cheers, Laurie.

    Ok, I found that ftp site pull didn't work at all, so I loaded a local
    copy of a small site of about 30 pages, and about 30 pictures. It was
    painful to do it, and each page had to be done manually.
    
    I simply didn't like the tool, but to be fair, I have too little time
    to play with it, and my 30 days ran out before I had a chance to assess
    it properly.
    
    One thing I did like was the data objects, which seemed to work quite
    well, but again, too little time to compare it to the HTML tools in
    Access 95.
    
    The bottom line is that it's far too expensive for me to buy without a
    lot more testing, and even so, I wasn't that happy with it. I'd like to
    hear someone else's opinion on it really.
    
    Cheers, Laurie.