Pretty much any gui / 'wysiwyg' / dwim tool for developing markup for the web was a trainwreck when it came to production / deployment - the tools created the i

Pretty much any gui / 'wysiwyg' / dwim tool for developing markup for the web was a trainwreck when it came to production / deployment - the tools created the impression of publishing online being approximately like publishing for print, that layouts can be pixel-perfect, and that the publisher can define every aesthetic and aspect of behaviour. Since then we've come to understand that user agents can render things differently, behave differently, and should often be allowed to. Frameworks that make use of active scripting to bypass platform differences are generally heavy, and end up punishing users with their weight to save some lifting by developers. Nowadays, although more browsers fall behind the support curve and the 'newer' browsers approach greater consistency (at least, while comparing the older features), greater variance is beginning to creep into the field in other ways - tablets, netbooks, mobile broadband. It's a constantly evolving arena. An arena which requires agility, skill and grace to succeed in mastering - slow moving toolchains will find it hard to hit the moving targets. Philosophically, wysiwy(m)g tools annoy me, as they're intoxicating to the general market - drunk with new found 'expertise', actual knowledge is maligned, and art is lost. All of a sudden, every guy with a 3d printer thinks he's a sculptor. Sadly, this has happened before, and will again - and despite my resentment, I have to admit it's just nature - these things will find their own niche. Wysiwyg is not web development. Word is not a DTP tool. They have their place.