Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board

Knowledge Base
Terry's Tips
Darren's Tips

cd versus frontpage 2004

A friend of mine is going to redo our church web site. I was going to do it myself using cd, he is wanting to use frontpage 2004. I used front page one time a long time ago, but dont' really know what it has now. Does anyone have any good arguments I can use on why we should use cd instead??


Wednesday, November 12, 2003

Front Page makes terrible html.  It has a low barrier to entry and a low ceiling.  For a novice, it probably will get something up on the web quicker than CD. 

Joel Goldstick
Wednesday, November 12, 2003

You can actually use both.  CD for the content management, and Frontpage to develop the overall HTML formatting.

I use Adobe GoLive to create my templates, and CD to create the content for each page.  Works very well that way.

hope that helps

Jeff Kolker
Wednesday, November 12, 2003

There are two intertwined issues: setup and ease of use.

The setup time and effort for CD is probably greater than for FP because you need to create templates, scripting and navigation structure before you begin adding content. With FP, you jump right in and make pages.

Once you've set up CD, it is much easier to use because all you focus on is content. In FP, the design of each page has to be touched and manipulated.

With CD, you get a consistent look-and-feel throughout because the templates drive the design. With FP, each page can be easily tweaked and each page can look different from the rest. For my money, consistency is better than a hodge-podge.

If there is any intent to turn this over to the church for content creation and site updating, CD is by far the preferred choice. Teach them how to use Articles, and the design elements take care of themselves.

Wednesday, November 12, 2003

As a mostly former Frontpage user, once I "got" CityDesk I never wanted to do another site in FrontPage. I still use FP to edit templates, it's still handy to have around.

I think that most people who have done sites in FP will recognize that CityDesk wins on manageability.

Why not have a contest. Use your product debate time to do prototype sites both ways then compare and contrast.

Wednesday, November 12, 2003

FrontPage 2004 is not available just yet. FrontPage 2003 is.

Great Product. In each incarnation starting at 2000 FrontPage has improved ... that is the Microsoft way. With FrontPage 2004 you are going to have a product that knocks your socks off ... Do NOT confuse older versions with newer versions they do not compare ... Microsoft seldom goes backwards [if ever] ... from my experience Microsoft moves forwards and the incremental changes do add up to magnificence’s. Do not criticize what you do not know i.e comparing 2000 to 2002 for example or 2001 and 2003.

Insofar as CD ... really cannot compare ... As a CMS IMO CD does the job and does extremely well.

FrontPage 2004 will not be out for sometime. FrontPage 2004 will have some very significant new stuff which I am not allowed to talk about at this time.

David Mozer
Wednesday, November 12, 2003

FrontPage 1.1 was pretty cool, a great improvement over Notepad.

Then came FrontPage 2.0, which was sort of nice.

Then came FrontPage 97, which was rather annoying.

Then came FrontPage 2000, which was vile. It was cumbersome to use, generated nasty html, and kept losing site-wide settings like shared borders.

There have been new releases since then, but I haven't used them. Once I discovered CityDesk, I stopped using FrontPage 2000. The last time I redid my home machine, I didn't even install it.

I suppose FrontPage might be a good choice if:

1. You're using Microsoft's web server. (I'm not.)

2. Your site is accessed only through Microsoft's web browser. (Mine isn't.)

3. You don't care about the quality of the HTML in your site. (I do.)

FrontPage 2000 had nothing like CityDesk templates & scripting. It's trivial to code up an RSS feed with CityDesk; it's darn near impossible with FrontPage.

Pat Rice
Wednesday, November 12, 2003

I use Frontpage 2002 for editing templates and certain pages and CD for site management.

I always keep templates in html view in CD and do the previewing in FP.

Ron Lane
Wednesday, November 12, 2003

The reviews I've read of the latest version indicate that it's becoming more of a serious tool like Dreamweaver and that the HTML preservation is now much better.

John Topley (
Thursday, November 13, 2003


These are just a few of the wide variety of RSS clients available today, including one that you can build yourself based on this article in the MSDN Library.

David Mozer
Thursday, November 13, 2003

RSS client != RSS feed.

John Topley (
Thursday, November 13, 2003

That's right John ... but  its coming and they are going to knock your socks off ... that's assuming you do wear socks.

David Mozer
Thursday, November 13, 2003

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home