Frontpage extensions versions

[xperience2]

Hi!

Customers keep asking me: "Do you support FP 2002 extensions? What about Frontpage 2003?"

Cpanel just talks about Frontpage 5.x - what does this mean?

Does cpanel support Frontpage 2002? 2003?

Thanks!

Simon

[Peoplespaces]

There were no new extensions introduced for FP 2003. The current extension package supports anything you would find in FP2003. To my knowledge though, sharepoint services are not supported.

[cyberspirit]

Microsoft announced that there would be no new extensions for Frontpage on non-Sharepoint Systems.
This means that Frontpage will be a dying technology in the linux/bsd hosting world.
So prepare your customers and explain them that it was Microsoft's decision to no longer support them!

[sneader]

To answer the original question, Front Page 5.x = Front Page 2002.

So, you can tell your customers you support Front Page 2002.

Regarding Microsoft's decision to stop supporting *nix with future extensions, that really blows, but you know what, I will be happy to start getting my customers to use something else. Two can play this game.

Probably should be a different thread, but what else is out there for a WYSIWIG program for the relative newbie. I think Dreamweaver would be way overkill.

- Scott

[cyberspirit]

Well, there is homesite which is originally from Allaire but I think Macromedia bought it. There there is Hotdog Pro and Namo Web Editor which I think are good packages for beginners.

[sneader]

Thanks for the suggestions. HomeSite is definitely not a WYSIWYG editor, although it is a cool HTML editor (I've used it for a long time, until Macromedia bought it and incorporated most of the features into DreamWeaver).

I'll check out the others. Thanks again!

- Scott

[Peoplespaces]

Actually Microsoft has not said they would not be supporting extensions in future releases. What they have done is begin to replace proprietary extension requirements with standard programming. In other words using their form handler (which requires extensions and is probably by far the easiest handler to get working properly) will be available only on servers supporting extensions, but if you are not using any of their proprietary programs, you can now upload to any server whether FP extensions are installed or not and whether it is unix, windows, linux or any other server.

Seems like a move in the right direction to me.

[cyberspirit]

Peoplespaces,
Microsoft is doing with Frontpage what they have done with other applications. They make most of the general functionality work on most systems but if you want the bells and whistles you need to use their platform.
Just look what they did with Outlook. You can use it with any imap or pop server but if you want the full collaboration functionality you have to use Exchange. This is the reason why most of the corporations use Exchange. Otherwise Exchange would have never been implemented from a technical and safety point of view. And on top it is a proprietary standard so nobody can offer an alternative.
Their move with Frontpage now will backfire though because 90% of the hosting world runs on some sort of Unix/Linux/BSD system and they actually degrade Frontpage for these users to a simple html editor.
Look what you already can do with things like Dreamweaver and Frontpage without the extensions will not have a chance in that competition.

[sneader]

Sadly, I disagree. There are no other real WYSIWYG web page editors out there that work like Front Page does (tell me if I'm wrong), and the Front Page users will simply move their hosting to one of the Windows 2003 servers out there. And there are bound to be more and more of them, if it is true about Microsoft pulling back on their *nix support.

But if Peoplespaces is right, then we have little to worry about.

I know that the amount of queries I am receiving about Front Page support have only gone up in the last year, and I see no stopping it.

- Scott

[easyhoster1]

From what I was told, and is hear say. That the 2003 version will not require any extentions and can be used on *nix.

Correct me if I`m wrong, but this is good news as users will no longer corrupt there webs if they use ftp://

[Devil Inside]

So my question is - even though it may not be needed. Sometimes the latest release looks better to the non-informed customers...

will I have any problems upgrading from 2002 to 2003?

or will users already on the server with 2002 have NO problems after the upgrade?

Thanks!

[Devil Inside]

anyone?

[sneader]

Buy me a copy of Front Page 2003, and I'll test it for you.

- Scott

[Peoplespaces]

Originally posted by Devil Inside
So my question is - even though it may not be needed. Sometimes the latest release looks better to the non-informed customers...

will I have any problems upgrading from 2002 to 2003?

or will users already on the server with 2002 have NO problems after the upgrade?

Thanks!

You will not have any problems unless they want something specifically related to sharepoint services. We've been using FP2003 since release date and even on old sun servers supporting only FP2000 with no problems.

Here's an address comparing FP 2000, FP 2002 and FP 2003.
http://www.microsoft.com/office/fron...o/compare.mspx

[sloop]

just had a similar problem. user was unable to login (auth failure) with frontpage 2002. to fix it, i changed the group of public_html from nobody to the user's group, then re-installed FP extensions for that site.