Frames based website controversy

[Dark Dragon]

A while back I believe I had posted about a company and its desire to make people pay a fee for using frames as it claimed it created the concept so therefore others should pay a fee to use such a format.

I have also heard that there are other issues involved in using frames for web design...does anyone have any ideas or info on hand as to why this is an issue in some circles?

[PeOfEo]

I displike frames a lot... Iframes are much easier to use an look better. You also dont have to worrie about browsers that dont support them either if you just put a link to the page inbetween the <iframe> and </iframe> tags.

[pyro]

I dislike using frames for one big reason. You can't link to pages individually, unless you set up some javascript to set up the frames when they get to the individual page. Unfortunatly, this fails for 13% of uses, as they have javascript turned off. Also, I'm not sure what the implications of using frames are on ones search engine ranking...

[Dark Dragon]

Huh..I guess I never really fully thought of that....I thought frames were easier to use and all.

I am not so sure about iFrames though as that is a new format....I liked frames because my menu, for example, is always in one spot and readily accessible...Hmm...guess I should revamp my site someday. :D

[MotherNatrsSon]

iframes are not necessary most of the time either. I wouldn't use either unless absolutely necessary and thatis very rare. They are a pain in the butt.

MNS

[Dark Dragon]

Well..my thinking in using iFrames is that I can have linked content appear in the iFrame and the whole page loads faster because it doesn't have to load up uneccessary graphics.

While I use frames on my current site I want to try and use an iFrame so a person clicks on a link and content, mostly a graphic, will show in the iFrame.

Many people still use Dial-Up, like myself so having too many graphics on one page can clog things up.

There seems to be less and less alternatives unless I try to learn Perl or some other language, which I won't because I am having enough trouble learning basic CSS and JavaScript ;)

[pyro]

Originally posted by Dark Dragon
There seems to be less and less alternatives unless I try to learn Perl or some other language, which I won't because I am having enough trouble learning basic CSS and JavaScriptI can almost gaurentee that PHP would be easier to learn than Perl... And having said that, I use PHP includes on my site to keep updating it easy -- I can change my whole site by just editing the template files.

[Dark Dragon]

Well of course you'd use PHP..you are smarter than I when it comes to coding.

I am not talented in the use of codes..CSS is enough of a challenge for me right now. :)

[MotherNatrsSon]

You can do the same thing with Server Side Includes without knowing any language. Do a search and you can find tutorials for it.

MNS

[pyro]

Though SSI includes are no easier than PHP includes. Same concept, very similar code, different languages...

[PeOfEo]

Originally posted by MotherNatrsSon
iframes are not necessary most of the time either. I wouldn't use either unless absolutely necessary and thatis very rare. They are a pain in the butt.

MNS They are neccessary for people like me. I dont feel like updating every page when I use a link and I dont feel like using ssi. This is the easier solution.

[pyro]

Just because you don't feel like using a serverside language to include the content doesn't make iframes necessary... ;)

[PeOfEo]

Originally posted by pyro
Just because you don't feel like using a serverside language to include the content doesn't make iframes necessary... ;) SSI isnt supported on my server and I dont want to do it with ASP.NET. I frames are a better solution, they cut down on load times to not have to load the menu's or tracking and stuff like that whenever you click on a link saves some stress on the server.