dreamweaver cs4
Out of context: Reply #14
- Started
- Last post
- 17 Responses
- airey0
also, just felt i needed to rant.
the bloated code angle is an interesting one. dreamweaver adds absolutely no more code to your css than you make it. if you go with inherited values then it's more a user managed issue that a dw created one.
as for bloated code/files i actually wonder why this is the argument / point that people make it. i've been designing and building webpages since 1996 and that was when 14.4k modems were standard (and as good as it got). when you wanted a page to load quickly on a 14.4k modem you really had to squish filesize. it sucked. badly. i even used the <blink> tag for visual interest. i'm embarrassed even now. luckily my crimes against mankind have got worse since to cover it.
so here we are with 'in general terms' broadband being standard. not always, but for the majority of my clients/target market it is. we're using flash based online video and youtube is a useful tool. through all this some designers still think that saving 5k on a page load could mean shit. it doesn't. it means diddley-squat. it's solely the realm of complete OCD sufferers to think it could matter. and then, which makes it even sadder, you get the comment, "well that 5k a page really adds up on a huge website". maybe. maybe that would matter if the user was loading every single webpage on your site at once. but they aint. i spent 2 hours going through a css sheet with a developer and after all that the filesize was 12k smaller. i want my 2 fucking hours back and that developer needs either a girlfriend, a hobby or a gun.
so although i theory i totally support cleaner code and smaller page/file size, unless the target audience is specifically operating from a small coconut-oil driven commodore 64 on a pacific island, population: 5, it may in fact not be the most important issue when talking web design. crazy things like the navigation actually appearing in all major browsers or small things like that might be more important.
my 1.3 cents. i could be wrong.