Prev: Could not create the flash button because a component ofDreamweaver is missing. Please reinstall Dreamweaver.
Next: Unable To Create Remote Folder
From: Searcherx on 30 Sep 2007 09:24 DW's FTP is all I have ever used.. Erm, how to put this Murray. I'll pretend I believe you, because that could be the only reason why you never experienced problems with the DW's ftp.. I have used many many different ftp clients and servers as I am a sys admin and a power user at the same time, so I keep playing around with settings and I am constantly testing all kinds of software applications. DW works great on the localhost, that is very true. But if you try to work on 2 sites at the same time, one local one remote, even the localhost is capable of timing out. There is definitely a problem with switching or keeping the connection open, no matter what your settings are. Passive, SFTP, firewall, sync info, check in/out, testing server, cloaking, design notes, cache.. nothing makes much difference. But generally speaking, the best settings are: cache enabled, remote ftp is ip address not host, passive, no sync info, no check in/out, no testing serv, no cloaking, no design notes.. and <20ms ping helps, too ;) Surely firewall and antivirus can affect all communication channels and I'd even accept that Norton is killing DW while it does nothing with other ftp clients, but I DO NOT have a firewall and I DO NOT have an antivirus. Of course this isn't that simple, but the bottom line is, DW behaves erratically even on a clean system. It is generally very good (which ftp isn't) when working with low latency sources, but when your ping to the remote server is above 100ms, DW is almost useless. If you're lucky, it works very well shortly after connection, but it doesn't last. For a comparison I usually use Total Commander and manually upload the files I edit, because it is just incomparable faster. And I experienced timeouts with TC very very rarely. Maybe the DW's developers ought to look around a bit before CS4.. And no, I am not speaking from a 2 weeks experience. I have never met any developer who didn't complain about the DW's ftp actually. People who don't, probably just don't know any better or they work solely on fast connections. @ ewkyle, you're right, I wasn't too happy with MX 2004's ftp either, but it IS better than the new versions.
From: Murray *ACE* on 30 Sep 2007 10:17 > Erm, how to put this Murray. I'll pretend I believe you, because that > could be > the only reason why you never experienced problems with the DW's ftp.. I don't care whether you believe me or not. I have no agenda here. DW's FTP is all I have ever used on my sites, ever since I began using DW2. And I am not alone here. I don't see many (if any, really) of the many regulars here complain about DW's FTP. > I have never met any > developer who didn't complain about the DW's ftp actually. People who > don't, > probably just don't know any better or they work solely on fast > connections. Perhaps you should get out more often. -- Murray --- ICQ 71997575 Adobe Community Expert (If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!) ================== http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com - Template Triage! http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/ - Macromedia (MM) Technotes ================== "Searcherx" <webforumsuser(a)macromedia.com> wrote in message news:fdo82j$i9c$1(a)forums.macromedia.com... > DW's FTP is all I have ever used.. > > Erm, how to put this Murray. I'll pretend I believe you, because that > could be > the only reason why you never experienced problems with the DW's ftp.. > > I have used many many different ftp clients and servers as I am a sys > admin > and a power user at the same time, so I keep playing around with settings > and I > am constantly testing all kinds of software applications. > DW works great on the localhost, that is very true. But if you try to work > on > 2 sites at the same time, one local one remote, even the localhost is > capable > of timing out. There is definitely a problem with switching or keeping the > connection open, no matter what your settings are. Passive, SFTP, > firewall, > sync info, check in/out, testing server, cloaking, design notes, cache.. > nothing makes much difference. > But generally speaking, the best settings are: > cache enabled, remote ftp is ip address not host, passive, no sync info, > no > check in/out, no testing serv, no cloaking, no design notes.. and <20ms > ping > helps, too ;) > > Surely firewall and antivirus can affect all communication channels and > I'd > even accept that Norton is killing DW while it does nothing with other ftp > clients, but I DO NOT have a firewall and I DO NOT have an antivirus. Of > course > this isn't that simple, but the bottom line is, DW behaves erratically > even on > a clean system. It is generally very good (which ftp isn't) when working > with > low latency sources, but when your ping to the remote server is above > 100ms, DW > is almost useless. If you're lucky, it works very well shortly after > connection, but it doesn't last. For a comparison I usually use Total > Commander > and manually upload the files I edit, because it is just incomparable > faster. > And I experienced timeouts with TC very very rarely. Maybe the DW's > developers > ought to look around a bit before CS4.. > > And no, I am not speaking from a 2 weeks experience. I have never met any > developer who didn't complain about the DW's ftp actually. People who > don't, > probably just don't know any better or they work solely on fast > connections. > > @ ewkyle, you're right, I wasn't too happy with MX 2004's ftp either, but > it > IS better than the new versions. >
From: Searcherx on 2 Oct 2007 06:11 > I don't care whether you believe me or not. I have no agenda here. DW's > FTP is all I have ever used on my sites, ever since I began using DW2. And > I am not alone here. I don't see many (if any, really) of the many regulars > here complain about DW's FTP. Your point of view is quite understandable, if you never had any problems. So my only question is how does your DW behave if you work on a site with many files and folders shown in remote view using a server with 100ms+? You might not see many regulars complaining about it maybe because the people who actually can see and understand the difference have nothing to look for on the forums.. I came here for the first time after who knows how many years only to ask how to enable autooverwrite in CS2 (new feature) and I am ranting here about the ftp only because I accidentally stumbled upon the topic, otherwise you would never hear from me (pity, innit) > Perhaps you should get out more often. I do as a matter of fact, but I hardly ever socialize with web people and never talk about web stuff when I'm out, surprise surprise.
From: Murray *ACE* on 2 Oct 2007 06:37 > Your point of view is quite understandable, if you never had any problems. > So my only question is how does your DW behave if you work on a site with > many > files and folders shown in remote view using a server with 100ms+? Dunno. I have sites that qualify for the many files and folders, but I'm not sure what the response times are, assuming that is what you meant by the 100ms? I do not time out on them. > pity, innit Yeah. I only ask you not to generalize your experience more than warranted, and try to point out to you that there are many who do not share your opinion. -- Murray --- ICQ 71997575 Adobe Community Expert (If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!) ================== http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com - Template Triage! http://www.projectseven.com/go - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/ - Macromedia (MM) Technotes ================== "Searcherx" <webforumsuser(a)macromedia.com> wrote in message news:fdt5gq$3rr$1(a)forums.macromedia.com... >> I don't care whether you believe me or not. I have no agenda here. DW's > > FTP is all I have ever used on my sites, ever since I began using DW2. > > And > > I am not alone here. I don't see many (if any, really) of the many > > regulars > > here complain about DW's FTP. > > Your point of view is quite understandable, if you never had any problems. > So my only question is how does your DW behave if you work on a site with > many > files and folders shown in remote view using a server with 100ms+? > > You might not see many regulars complaining about it maybe because the > people > who actually can see and understand the difference have nothing to look > for on > the forums.. I came here for the first time after who knows how many years > only > to ask how to enable autooverwrite in CS2 (new feature) and I am ranting > here > about the ftp only because I accidentally stumbled upon the topic, > otherwise > you would never hear from me (pity, innit) > > > Perhaps you should get out more often. > I do as a matter of fact, but I hardly ever socialize with web people and > never talk about web stuff when I'm out, surprise surprise. >
From: Searcherx on 7 Oct 2007 07:37
> I have used more FTP clients than you have years under your belt. I've just > never felt the need to use anything other than DW for my websites. That's quite bold, do you know me? ;) > However, I don't feel the need to continue to participate in this discussion > with you. If you have a problem with DW's FTP please contact Adobe > directly.... Understood, there's nothing much left to say anyway. And keep including all quotes too, don't mind me ;) Take it easy and keep up the good work! |