Hi Ben,   I think we will have to agree to disagree, when it comes to 'the bigger the company, the bigger the target'.   Whilst it may be true for 'hardened' more experianced hackers, (especially those working in groups). There are simply too many lone/amateur hackers out there now who are 'cutting their teeth' and hacking sites 'just for fun'. These are the ones that target smaller sites, (unless of course they are complete idiots, and know nothing about how site security works these days).   My point however, was that discussions with the client should also include security, and future goals for the site, as these should be part of the buisness objectives for a site now. The days when it was good enough, just to have a site are long gone. Developing a plan, and building a site how it was done 10 or even 20 years ago, should not be the goal anymore. Instead the user experiance, and requirements for growth of the site/buisness (including legal/buisness/client) should also be discussed with the client.   Maybe the reason over 95% of all sites on the web today fail to deliver, (and become zombie sites within months of 'going live') is because too many people fail to ask themselves, 'what do I and the visitor(s) want from the site'. ... View more

All very interesting.   However, as this discussion has gone off-topic as far as the original post is concerned, I think I can add a little to what is being said now.   Web development when it comes to medium or large companies, will not touch open source solutions for the back-end anymore. Why? The answer is simple, security. Once a hacker has access to the code that is used, the problems they face in hacking a site are vastly reduced, because thay can read the code that the site is using, it is all there for anyone to read who wants to read it.   whilst php/mysql, or node, (insert any open source framework you wish) is cheap to use, security is no longer a 'second' consideration, but first and foremost, (also has a big legal cost if one gets it wrong, these days). In medium to large applications, sites, what the general public have access to accounts for less than 1% of the overall application, and the first item considered is 'what database should be used' not 'how easy it is to learn', (db is often mssql or oracle)   It is also easy to say that small sites/back-end cms's, do not require the security of larger sites, but before anyone says that, one should ask the client! If they do not intent to grow, fine, but if they do see the small initial site as a 'steping stone' to something more, then the ability of the site to grow, without a major overall for every update, should be considered, (and discussed with the client).   ... View more

Sorry to disagree Os, but there are web standards and regulations.   The standards are published by the W3C, (I wonder how many developers even know who/what W3C is), as for regulations they are in the main legal requirements, such as accessibility, but again, how many people even know what are legal requirements?    I remember a post by yourself, (sorry did not reply) regarding in-line css, which is not recommended by the W3C in their guide to web authoring standards. As far as authoring software goes, (which is what started this thread) Dw used to be one of the few editors that did enforce the standards and recommendations of the W3C, but that has not been the case for a long time.   a quick 'joke' - most people probably still think w3schools are part of the W3C, and that the code shown by them, is web standards, (much of it is not). ... View more

I don't think outdated methods or valid outdated code is a real problem, unless the creator is charging someone.   The real problem is in-browser error correction, and if we could get rid of that then all the real problems would be solved. After all if someone does not want to use modern layout methods, then that is their prerogative, providing they are not being paid for what they are doing, or asking 'how do I do this, or what is wrong and why does it not display correctly. ... View more

Hi Jon,   Lets be honest about browsers, if they did stop rendering old or invalid code, then at least half the web sites on the web would stop working. Which would not necessarily be a bad thing, as at least that many are probably 'zombie' sites anyway, that have no real visitors.   There was a 'question' asked about 5 years, regarding browsers and old html/css/javascript, and if they should stop supporting the use of, (the question was asked by the W3C), but it was decided that the whole point of the web, was that anything ever published, (and still available) should always be viewable, providing it did not use plug-ins or propriety code.   One of the questions I would like answered is, "did Nancy include Dw CC, in her obsolete authoring software list?". As for me it should be, due to the number of css properties not supported, (and dont get me started on html and javascript). ... View more

All I could think when I read this post was, 'well finally'.   I agree with Os, but I have to say that Dw has been 'outdated' for years. In many ways Dw CS6 is still better than any CC version, especially if one knows how to write extensions that can update code hints, (etc). That said adobe never wanted Dw, (and many others associated with Dw also).   I would be surprised if Dw gets more than just maintanance updates in the future, as its user base is the casual developer, and no serious developer, (who knows what they are doing) will pay for a CC subscription, (another possible reason for not using Dw), after all fireworks and Ps CS6 offer as much as any CC version when it comes to the web. So why pay for a CC subscription?   Assigning blame is pointless though, as the web has moved on faster than most people thought it would since mobile devices became available, and even though 'small and personal' web sites are still maintained and developed, they are no longer the real focus of internet development, (notice I said internet, and not web). Earning a living, (or making money, to put it bluntly) is what most people comming into web development now, are interested in, and that means developing for the internet, as a whole, and not just web sites for the publics use.   In fact I cannot see why anyone would build a web site themselves or pay someone to do so anymore. Small buisnesses have much easier and cheaper ways to get a web presence, and personal sites have facebook. ... View more

Quote 35k a year pension, are you by any chance looking for a partner to share it with, lol?   Reply I'm looking for extra donations, interested? lol ... View more

Hi Os,   There is always a trade-off, when it comes to earnings vs job satisfaction, but what I am trying to point out is -   No company who claim to produce software for professionals, will invest in a product used primarily by beginners and part-timers. Which is the direction Dw has moved to. Also no one is going to get involved in a profession which does not provide a future, (be that money or satisfaction).   What I have read, (looking through this forums posts over the last few months and other sources) is that web design/development, has no middle ground. It is either cheap and chearfull, (or nasty) or highly specialised design/development, which is giving a false impression of what is possible and the knowledge required by everyone in my opinion. ... View more

I don't look-in on this forum often anymore, but it's nice to see nothing has changed, (and I do really mean 'nothing').   Dw has not been for the serious web designer/developer for years now, and there is only those who are not professional web designers/developers, but whom Adobe listen(ed) to when it came to web design/development, to blame.   I doubt if the majority of users are actually building sites worth more than £250- £1000, with it. Most users are NOT serious about web design/development, and view it as something that is now 'fixed' in what is required and how it works, (with no inovation). Cheap and nasty, appears to be the rule, and if a client wants anything more, then the advice is to use wordpress or some other site builder, (and if you know code, some other editor).   Maybe most do not even know what can be earned by a professional web designer/developer, as I can remember someone quoting £35000 a few years ago, as though it was a 'fantastic' salary, (gods, my pension is more than that). The conception that web design/development is not a highly paid profession, may have made Adobe (and what is expected of Dw) think there is no point in developing a progran that is not used by professionals. After all if Dw is for beginners and 'part-timers', then Adobe may not really want to be assosiated with it. (I know I no long do) ... View more

I fully agree Os. The point is though, is that those types of salaries are possible. The main drawback for many thinking they can, (or should) get those salaries, is frameworks, and 'point and click' environments, as once you move beyond the 'front-end', which I have already said, "is the cheapest part to produce" (static or dynamic). Many are 'lost' as to what is required.   Dw and other similar programs, are I think responsible to some degree for the problem of under-earning, (or should that be, under-achiving) for many, who look at what is possible, but only see 'quick and easy' solutions offered, and even worse they then start to think those solutions are the norm.   Some people are surprised when they see Dw, (etc) listed as UI creation programs, but if one thinks about it, that is all they are good for in the modern arena of web development. As for not many earning very good salaries, I would disagree, as one simply has to think of the number of buisnesses who supply device specific apps, (which all use web techs, as even C++, C#, etc are now possible to use as part of web dev). ... View more

As everyone knows, I do not often join in discussions anymore, (Dw is dead as far as what I will now write).   Sorry to disappoint you Os, but £125,000.00 is not unusual in web development, especially for managment roles. However, (and this is a big HOWEVER) you are probably thinking that web development as how it used to be back before creating 'full scale applications' was possible, (and yes, $14 per hr is about right for traditional web sites).   The real money, as I have said before. Is now in what was once the domain of stock-management, distribution, sales, poduct support and on-line training, (sometimes including all those, in one package). Done using dedicated programs such as access, powerpoint, etc. or even custon written in C++, or Java. That is no longer the case.   Now it is 99%, done using web techs. and to make matters worse, they are all behind 'closed' secure gateways, (so no examples, sorry). If you want an idea of what web developers are doing now, (for that amount of money being talked about) think about companies such as Amazon, and everything they require to operate and run their buisness, from the customer placing the order, (front-end, and cheapest part to create) to everything requiered on the back-end, such as stock control, 'picking' the item(s), deliver to customer, accounting, etc, etc, and you will have an idea, why those high salaries are possible in web development now, as they are now all done using web techs.   Traditional web sites, especially static ones, simply do not 'fit' into what web development entails now, and if someone wants to earn a good living now, everything that one must know goes well beyond e-commerce as it used to be. ... View more

The question is - did you build the database cannection code and server behaviours using mysql, (such as used by the Dw server behaviours) in the last 10 years? If the answer is yes, then you are responsible for the problem. PHP issued a security notice about using mysql back in 2009/10, saying that the mysql database connection code was insecure and should NOT be used. Instead developers should use mysqli or pdo to connect-to and query a database.   If you did use mysql, (and not mysqli/pdo) and the site was built in the last 10 years, then the client could also ask you to rebuild the server side, for free. Simply because you as the developer are legally responsible to build a site that is, 'fit for use'. Which includes not using out-of-date and insecure code.   ... View more

You are trying to build a page using images with hotspots?   If you did the images via the computers built in screen shot, then they will also include meta-data such as the image size in inches, along with the resolution data of the monitor.   What you will have to do is use image editing software, (such as photoshop) to resize, (and resample) the image to the desired size in pixels. Then recreate the image hotspots as desired, (this would not allow the page/image to resize to any other viewport though).   It is possible to simply use css to set the image to fit any viewport size, but as you are also using hotspots, (not recommended anyway) the co-ordinates for the 'hit' areas would not be correct except at the original size of image they where crated at. ... View more

Not certain what the stats are for VS Pro anymore, but the last time I looked, (about 2 years ago) it was over 3 million users, who used it for web development. So even VS Code becomes insignificant when compared to the paid for version, (and it costs as much as a CC subscription per-year now).   Which goes to prove what I have always said, "people will pay for a tool, when that tool is worth the cost". ... View more

The more interesting question is - "What does the color of the icon indicate"?   I'm not really a Dw user anymore, (unless you count CS6). But I would like to know in which category of programs Adobe places Dw in. As this would indicate not only the type of user but also how Adobe views the use of Dw now.   Lets also be honest Dw is going nowhere as a professional web development IDE, and has not been considered as such for many versions. We used to hear many people say that Dw should be more like other code editors, (sublime comes to mind as a prime candidate) but if a serious developer wanted an editor with the features of sublime, then they would buy sublime.   Even incorporating the Brackets code editor into Dw, has proven a disaster, as Brackets development almost stopped when they did so. Leaving both Dw and Brackets code editing in a 'no more development' state.   Maybe it is time for Adobe, (and everyone else) to simply say RIP Dw, and let it die. Instead of complaining about what is missing, and what it cannot, (and will probably never) be able to do. ... View more

The php run time that one can download from the php.org site, is the interpreter.   The php code that Dw or any other code editor creates, is simply a text file that must be passed to the php run time  to work. That is why Dw must be up-dated to support the syntax for any new versions, with added or new syntax. ... View more

You don't requier a php server to run php.   You can run it on any server, or without a server.  ... View more

"So, you can run the PHP interpreter without Apache?"   Actually you can run php without Apache. Apache is just the server, that php is installed on. ... View more

Hi Ben,   Personaly I could not care if someone uses a framework or whatever anymore. I once use to complain about a pages weight, but unless load times are an important feature it is for the individual developer along with the client to decide. After all a web site is subject to the 'fit for use' catagory of the consumer protection laws in most countries now. So if the site does not do what was requiered by the client, they don't have to pay the developer anything, (and can even claim for any losses).         ... View more

Sorry Ben, but using your interpretation of a framework, then C is a framework, simply because it has routines built in to convert it into binary code, (which is all a computer can understand anyway).   Even browsers are by your definition a framework, because they must interpretate html, css and js, plus they have js api's built in. Which make it easier for anyone coding a web page.   Even C++, when it is used to build platform specific programs, can be called a framework according to your definition, as they have routines built in for file managment, menues, graphics, etc, etc.   So what is not a framework? (even assembly language is acording to your definition, a framework). ... View more

The video just proves my point Ben.   It advocates that children SHOULD be taught to think logicaly. Once a child is 'programmed' to think that way, individuality and the ability to think beyond what is possible, has gone 'out of the window'.   I agree that teaching anyone to do something that will cause harm, (to them or others) is stupid, but to teach that logic is the best and only way to think if they wish to 'get a job', is why we see so many 'robots' in society being produced by educational institutions these days, (the 'robot' pun was intended). ... View more

Just to add to my last post, and why teaching anyone to think in a logical fashion is wrong.   A 'bumble bee' aerodynamically cannot fly, but the 'bumble bee' does not know that, so it continues to fly. By teaching anyone that something/anything is done 'just so', and it cannot work any other way, forces them to think it is so.   Question -If the 'bumble bee' knew it could not fly, because it cannot do so, aerodynamically. Would the 'bumble bee', then be unable to fly? ... View more

Sorry I'm a little late to this discussion.   A lot of what is said in the article, is o/k, but teaching anyone, (kids or adults) to think logically, (hi mr spock) is I think missing the point. Simply because it forces them to think in a 'if this, then that' way of thinking. Which is also wrong, as it completely misses out on the importance of the 'what if' way of thinking.   Yes I know that the so called 'creative types' will also say 'what about creativity', but most 'creative types' are also thinking in a logical fashion, simply because they also think of how something should be done, and how it should look. One has only to look at web design, to realise that it is also being done in a logical fashion, with a 'this goes there, and this should look so' thinking.   If anyone is taught how to code, then it is important to also teach 'how to think differently', because without doing so inovation, and progress stops, and we end up with the 'it is done so, and no other way' mind-set. ... View more

Hi Ben,   I remember that pdo extension, (and some of the problems I had writing it). The main problem I found was that there was no documentation for the Dw SB's, and even the developers for Dw could not find any, (lost durring the take-over by Adobe!).   One of the reasons I stopped development, was that pdo could be written in a number of ways, and at the time I talked with Silas, and Scott (remember them, hope they are doing well) about using pdo, they agreed with me, that untill 'the best way' was clear, caution was advised. At the time though many did not realise how fast php 5.x would become obsolete. ... View more

I have no intension of trawling through articles 10 years old.   Also, as you may know interakt, (the developers of PHAKT) was aquired by Adobe over 10 years ago, so who are the developers that you mention, who are still developing the products?   The only place I can find to download the extension is from dmxzone - dmxzone page for phakt    As you may also remember, there was a sub-dreamweaver forum for the extensions, (which apears to have gone with the forum update). But as the dmxzone page mentions, the extension was for Dw MX/2004.  ... View more

The problem with the PHAKT extension was that even the developers of it said it was not secure enough for all the regulations that became legal requierments. ODBC was also a problem, in that many server providers regarded it as a serious security concern than hackers could exploit.   ... View more

Hi Ben,   I'm going to say something very unusual for me now, (I'm going to defend the Dw team regarding SB's).   As I said to the Dw PM at the time, replacing the old outdated SB's before everyone had stopped using them, would have caused a lot of confussion, bad and incompatable coding, and made the extensions available for DB's unusable, (e.g. Shopping carts). It would I thought be better if at least 4-5 years passed before any replacement was implemented.   I did not expect 8 years to pass, but then again, given the number of people still trying to use the old SB's, I'm starting to think that maybe 8 years was not enough time between removal of the old SBs and the new implementation.   ... View more

The only reason I can see for using node now, is when you want to have a server/database set-up within the program/app you are creating.   Like angular.js though much of what they say about the advantages of using both node and angular may have been true 5 or more years ago, but not anymore, as html5, (note I said 5) css and ecma6 can do all of what they can do.   I also think that both node and angular, are now nothing more than js versions of  php, (and other server-side db combinations) or php/mysql cms's for js programers. ... View more

Hi Birnou,   This has become more common with adobe programs over the years. You will probably find that it is related to what Dw, (and other programs) are doing with the node.js 'watcher', for that program, which for some unknown reason Adobe has incorporated in many of its programs, (though I do have some suspicions as to the what node is doing and the why, sorry only suspitions, as I'm not interested enough to confirm).   In discussions regarding other programs where similar to your question have been posted, node has been the reason. The problem though, is that disabling node often disables functionality, and / or causes the program to crash. ... View more

Only the autoprefixers that one can set the number of browser versions back, are 'up to date', and that is because all such autoprefixers check with 'can I use' to decide what prefixes are required.   These days it is not so much desktop browsers that autoprefixers are required for, but mobile devices, game consuls and smart tv's that require them. I have even come across new android smartphones and tablet devices that are starting to use older versions of the OS, probably because of cost, (android is no longer 'free to use'). So prefixing is probably going to be a requirement for several years to come, (at least). ... View more