FrontPage vs. WP

by 1 replies
2
OK, I'm old-fashioned. I learned web editing through very very basic techniques because my main discipline lends itself to image creation. In no way was I techno savvy when I built my web site in 2002. I used FrontPage2002 and that's because of it's basic intuitive approach allowing you to create via WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) and you don't have to be a hand-coding expert. HTML frightened me....even going into my pages in HTML mode had me unnerved.
Now adding a script or tweaking tags etc. doesn't bother me.
With this being said, my site is STILL percolating along, my index.html page is continually updated when I check the cached page in big G (about once a week) and has a page rank of 5. Now I hear all of the luddites using front page saying go to CSS. Even more-so, many others say WordPress. It seems to me that "if it aint broke . . . ", well you know the rest. Very curious as to if I am the only one who thinks this way....and if anyone else has their own insights into what they're currently doing, feel free . . .
#website design #frontpage
  • "....am the only one who thinks this way...."

    Probably not.

    For all it's quirks, Front Page was a relatively easy way of developing web pages...a couple of hundred years ago.

    It's main drawback was that it wasn't clean code and would occasionally fall over on some browsers...probably still does.

    As far as sticking with it in your case...why not? If it works for you, don't fix it if it aint broke.

    Just ouit of interest, have you checked to see how the site appears on other browsers...Opera, Chrome, Firefox, etc? You may be surprised what others are seeing at your site...and it could be costing you money.

    CSS or WP? depends on the individual. With both there is a learning curve to get it right, but over time I'd expect that the development and upgrading of browesers will make your site unreadable on some because of the MS dependant code.

    Progress in the area of web development has been continuous for the last 15 years and everyone who has done web development has their favourite prog to use for the purpose.

    For basic sites, (no backend) it's quite easy to develop a site using MS Word or Open Office Writer and then saving the page as html. You still get the WYSIWYG and the code is cleaner than FP.

    WP is very popular because it is way more powerful than many other WYSIWYG editors and has an extensive support structure for hundreds of plugins.

    CSS are favoutred by some because the CSS can set the layout for basic sites easily and modifying the CSS will immediately change the appearance of all pages, so you don't have to do each page individually...a time saver, but no comparison to WP.

    Hope this helps.

    Alex
Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed

  • 2

    FrontPage vs. WP

    OK, I'm old-fashioned. I learned web editing through very very basic techniques because my main discipline lends itself to image creation. In no way was I techno savvy when I built my web site in 2002. I used FrontPage2002 and that's because of it's basic intuitive approach allowing you to create via WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) and you don't have to be a hand-coding expert. HTML frightened me....even going into my pages in HTML mode had me unnerved. Now adding a script or tweaking tags etc. doesn't bother me. With this being said, my site is STILL percolating along, my index.html page is continually updated when I check the cached page in big G (about once a week) and has a page rank of 5. Now I hear all of the luddites using front page saying go to CSS. Even more-so, many others say WordPress. It seems to me that "if it aint broke . . . ", well you know the rest. Very curious as to if I am the only one who thinks this way....and if anyone else has their own insights into what they're currently doing, feel free . . .