Rating: 
Summary: It's Microsoft
Review: This product is like any other proprietary HTML editor, adding it's own code into the document. I used FP 98 for a while and decided to hand write my own HTML after having problems with layout. Since learning ins and outs of HTML for a while, I picked up FrontPage2000 and find some of it's features are great, but to get the meat of what this program can do, you must have the server extensions installed on your web server. Without them, this program just isn't worth it. Another downside to this program is that since it is proprietary, it has it's own way of doing everything. Meaning the standard way just won't work. An example being Includes. FP does it's own includes, so using the standard #include won't work. If you are learning HTML and aren't familiar with code or if you don't have time to mess with code, this is the program for you. It does all the code for you and you don't have to do anything.I must repeat though: to make use of the truly great features of this program, you must have the server extensions installed. If you don't, I would recommend another program entirely to do your HTML editing with.
Rating: 
Summary: you should have 0 star option
Review: Web design is my hobby and my job. I got to use many many different editors but at the end one is the most productive with EditPad. On ocasion I try a new product si\o I gave a shot to FP. It is good for nothing. If you want WYSIWYG buy Macromedia's Dreamweaver. Bottom line with FP is that pages it creates can't be seen. It is not so big issue finding server willing to host FP extensions, but you are making your pages unavailable to Netscape users, and everyone else not using Internet Explorer. Begginer or profesional FP is mot good for you!
Rating:
Summary: No improvement over FP98
Review: Microsoft has taken a promising product here - they didn't code the original version, but purchased it - and turned it into a Microsoft-centric, clunky application. Look, it isn't the Web if everything is dominated by Microsoft "standards." And that is the main problem with this software. Yes, it works, but one doesn't even know how bad the code is until one learns something about HTML. THere are better freeware editors floating around, like Nano and even Netscape Composer.
Rating:
Summary: Maybe it's just me...
Review: Maybe I'm against using web editors and such (always been notepad for me) and I have no idea how to really use this although I have played with it a few times, but this has to render some of the ugliest code I have ever seen. I know this because I have several friends that send me pages to "fix" after having used this and they find it isn't doing what they want. Now I don't mind helping out my friends with their coding, but the first thing I ask now is if they used Frontpage. If they say yes..."I can't help you." On the other end of the spectrum, maybe this is fine for those of you that have never written code and don't mind what "View Source" means...you just care what it looks like on the outside. This could be for you if it happens to be easy for you to throw together a page. Maybe some of you have used this product long enough to understand the gibberish it spits out so you would be fine too. I guess, in closing, all I can say is that you can have your several hundred megs of web page editor...I want my little notepad and its endless resources of my imagination.
Rating: 
Summary: Unusually useful product from Microsoft
Review: It is true, this version of FP is actually more than I expected. It provides a lot of what novices and intermediate users need to create a page or pages with class and a distinguished style. Though it does not give a total control over every aspect of design, I still think it is an excellent product. There is a lot to say between FP 98 and FP 2000. The most important is that it is much easier to use and that you can see exactly what you are putting on the page without having to save the page and lauching a browser. It also estimates the time that a page will take to load on a 28.8, 56, ISDN and T1 line, to get an idea if your visitors will wait for all those awesome graphics to load or if they will press stop and go elsewhere. However, it is true that Microsoft FP will overwrite some things that the user may edit in HTML, which is bad because Microsoft is not God and it does not make perfect corrections, so tread lightly (the code will still work, it is just many times redundant in nature.) All in all, it is a very good product. Strange for a company known to speed product out the wazoo, rather than wait for a authoritative version. Buy it if you are a novice or intermediate user, and if not look for Dreamweaver.
Rating: 
Summary: What Frontpage 98 should have been
Review: I used FrontPage 98 daily and was glad to see FP2000. However, although it has the Windows 2000 interface it feels like using Office 97. It still has the same annoying bugs in and importing HTML files is a nightmare as FP goes and changes all the code for you. There is no advanced features - It is your basic webpage editer. The templates are not brilliant but at least editing is easier now with the standard Office toolbars. Forget about animation though and 'cool' looking pages. The best thing about it is the organisation of files. You can move pages and get the links updated etc. and there are tools to see broken links. Editing wise it is very basic. So it is excellant for beginners. Dreamwaver is the package of choice here but FP2000 is definitely an improvement on FP98. I just wish FP2000 came out 2 years ago cos it already looks aged
Rating:
Summary: Great product needs training
Review: FrontPage is a powerful tool for building professionalweb-sites, but there's a lot to learn. The fastest and easiest way toget up to speed is to use a training product. [........] END
Rating:
Summary: Style master from Western Civilisation: a perfect complement
Review: Front-Page 2000 is a standard. If you manage teams from various countries, you will appreciate multi language support from Microsoft (either online or through call centers in each country). Working from France with colleagues from USA, Austria, Spain and Greece I chose Front-Page 2000 for its multi-lingual versatility. What I like most in Microsoft is homogeneity: if you use Windows NT as a server, SQL server as a data base engine, Site Server for e-business, you will use Front-Page 2000 and Office tools with pleasure. But you will still miss "style master", a perfect, simple, style sheets editor from Western Civilisation.
Rating:
Summary: Sorry, FP is better
Review: My computer was so messed up that FP was a nightmare. I was trying to run the program without reading the installation requirements. Web managers that I use to edit HTML were not giving me errors. After I read some of the book (and had a friend fix my PC) it's remarable how cool FP performs. Obviously, the negative comments on FP are written by other novice web developers. Be patinet, read the book and you won't be dissapointed.
Rating:
Summary: Frontpage 2000 - - A dream come true!
Review: Frontpage2000 is a dream to use. Yeah I know FP98 was terrible at best but 2000 Rocks! Frontpage2000 doesn't touch your code (Like 98 did), and you can build complicated table structures in a snap. Its very easy to use. The one Big reason I love Frontpage is the way you can use the pencil and eraser tool to just draw out tables and cells and erase them easily. This saves me an unbelievable amount of time, to just draw out cells with a pencil, instead of using, say, Dreamweaver, VI, or Homesite, where you have to calculate your table and cells. And I Like the Frontpage2000 server extensions, which allow me to work on my web site at work, home, my friends house, whatever. Im no Microsoft fan, but they won me over with FP2000. Great purchase! My only gripe is that anytime I double click on an image to open up photoshop, Frontpage forgets that Photoshop is my default editor and I have to enter it again. It's annoying, and takes about 10 seconds to remedy, but well worth it.
| 
