Apollo Hosting Company Blog

Microsoft isn't really well known among the general populace for giving away stuff for free. In reality, they do it a lot, which only serves to annoy a lot of people outside the general populace, including regulators from the EU and anyone who has to design a website that works in the following categories: "Internet Explorer" and "Other." Something slightly more interesting that's currently available for free (soon to cost a pretty penny, no doubt) are the components of their "Adobe Killer" Expression Suite of graphic and design software. These are "beta" builds, but Microsoft is probably aware that very few people will voluntarily shell out for these things in the future if they have nothing but the crowded promises on a highly over-produced box to go by.

I've downloaded and "fiddled with" the Expression Graphic Designer and Web Designer. That highly technical term (fiddled with) is meant to convey that I exercised no "methodology" at all that could be remotely described as "testable", and will merely be sharing my vague, overall impressions of each. So, fire up your completely genuine, legitimate copy of Windows and play along at home. This entry will deal with the Web Designer, at some indeterminate point the future, I will go over the Graphic Designer. All the better to generate more content.

Standard disclaimers apply, this is a "beta" and everything inside is subject to change. Though "everything" won't change, it's just a question of what individual bits might.

Expression Web Designer

Browsing the site devoted to this new entry, one will notice the term "standards-based" popping up with some frequency. Not only do they invoke the gods of standards, but a quick click on the "Features" link brings up a claim about Section 508 accessibility verification. Expressions Web Designer seems, at first glance, to be Microsoft's apology for their previous, and far better known attempt at a design program. It's called "FrontPage", and if you're groaning, you probably think of yourself as "legitimate web designer."

Having been guilty of the cardinal sin of using early versions of FrontPage in my "younger" days, I was struck when I started clicking buttons in Expression Web Designer to find that some things have, apparently, stuck around. Much of the user-focused aspects / terminology of FrontPage, "webs", "publishing", etc., have been preserved, and then... mixed in with Dreamweaver. Yes, currently it's like some weird hybrid between FrontPage and Dreamweaver.

What it borrows from Dreamweaver are in-depth CSS editing/management capabilities, enhanced code views, support for complex server-side scripting design, even an "optimize HTML" script that removes "Word HTML". I bet someone felt a little guilty about that one. A lot of the familiar "FrontPagey" stuff in the program works entirely differently. If you start modifying the text with those familiar "word-processor" controls at the top, you'll be generating simple, numbered styles instead of plugging in seventy iterated "FONT" tags. To the novice, the results are the same but the code is a little more "friendly" to all those browsers out there. To the pro, the styles can be quickly renamed and edited on the fly.

Thankfully, the "B" button is safe until the W3C decides to finally kill the "strong" tag.

One thing I truly enjoyed about the Web Designer was its very simple, direct CSS layout templates. You can create a page with all the basics, in a variety of column layouts, and it will pop on the screen, ready for the CSS to be tweaked to your heart's content. Dreamweaver's default CSS layout templates toss in everything and at least 2 kitchen sinks, creating a confusing mass of CSS styles that make me feel a little woozy. It may be a personal preference, but I like starting simple and building in layers of complexity, especially on CSS designs where each separate element can be a bloody, hellish battle to ensure cross browser compatibility. Let me get the basic layout down, then add forty different header, list, and paragraph styles later.

There is a selection of more advanced templates that do provide a lot more detail, including graphics, styles, etc. The difference between these and the old pariahs from the original FrontPage is they look pretty decent, and they create valid XHTML div layouts. It remains to be seen if these layouts will become as well known as the horrors from late 90's FrontPage. If they do, it will actually represent a victory of sorts for the standards zealots out there, as the web will become heavily populated by valid standards-based layouts.

All courtesy of Microsoft.

Anyone wondering if Expression will make it harder to deliver those ultra complex, nested table layouts need not worry. There's also some handy tools for creating table layouts from scratch, even special modifiers to add rounded corners and drop shadow (both via nested table), to other table elements. Oddly enough, while giving lip service to W3C design recommendations in the marketing copy, Expression Web Designer seems to represent a kind of full maturity in table layout design, while still providing all the "div" layout tools you need as well. On the bright side, all those table layouts it produces will still be standards compliant.

Which reminds me: stop saying "table vs. CSS" design. Tables and CSS aren't mutually exclusive. CSS can style tables just like anything else. Perfectly valid XHMTL 1.1 websites can be designed using a table layout. Tables still exist because they are the best way to display, wait for it... tabular data. You can have the best "div" layout site, but if you need to display tabular data... you're going to use a "table" tag, and style that tag using CSS. The "conflict" here isn't "table vs. CSS", it's "table layout vs. div layout." Saying "CSS" is just being lazy. CSS works on both types of layouts.

Bottom Line

Will I stop using Dreamweaver? No. Microsoft has managed to create something that might go a long way towards redeeming them in the eyes of a lot of "professionals" who despise FrontPage, but that hardly means those same people will be rushing out to install this. Yes, it's a good effort, but it doesn't do anything I can't do in Dreamweaver.

A lot of us don't require extremely complex power from a web design software, thus the irony is a lot of programs could fill the bill. We stick with what we know, and I'll be sticking with Dreamweaver. Furthermore, with Adobe now in charge of Dreamweaver, I have a lot to look forward to in terms of compatibility with Photoshop. Microsoft is wading into combat with a widely recognized "industry standard." They'll need to do a deliver a lot more than just a good knock-off.