I'm not sure why this is a big issue with Expression Web. FP2003 names your index pages index.htm by default. I prefer them to be index.html so all I would do is Rename them from the folder list. FP would then go through the entire web and make sure all links pointing to old index.htm were updated to index.html. That's a pretty standard FP operation. Can't EW do this?

gabby and bill,

EW does create default.htm as the home page when you create a new web. There was speculation on another post [webmasterworld.com] about this as Microsoft's attempt to force people off Apache servers. I have searched EW on how to change the default home page to index.htm, but with no success. You can, however, manually change default.htm to index.htm, or .html, and EW will adjust the links. As before, you right click the file name and select "rename", change it to index (or whatever) and click again to save it. EW will ask you "There are x-number of files linked to this. Do you want to update them." Hit yes and life is good.

Marshall

If Microsoft is truly trying to force people off Apache servers it seems pretty short-sighted on their part.

I think most people would think that the problem lies with Expression Web, and not with their server.

I believe most people would switch software before switching servers.

In my opinion, I seriously doubt it is some Microsoft conspiracy and I suspect that if one searches deep enough, say on MS's site, you can find how to change the default page setting. Until then, just change it to index.whatever. Of course, the flip side is with EW, MS is more or less pushing asp.net. But even then, you are not required to use it.

Marshall

I agree with Marshall. This is no MS conspiracy. They've always used file names that work best with Microsoft servers. You can change the name simply if you want. There's no need to reconfigure your server unless you really want to.

used file names that work best with Microsoft servers

If Microsoft servers had the majority of the server market share then this might have been a reasonable thing to do. As it is it seems to be yet another case of them abusing one monopoly to try to create another.

The internet suggests the default list supported by IIS is: default.htm, default.asp, index.htm, default.aspx. Had Microsoft wished to make things work well for most people, then index.htm would have been the logical choice as it would have worked fine with IIS and with Apache by default.

This thread seems to be pretty-much the same as: [webmasterworld.com...]

If Microsoft servers had the majority of the server market share then this might have been a reasonable thing to do.

If the latest web server surveys [news.netcraft.com] are any indication it looks like Apache use is declining sharply and IIS uptake is on the rise. ;)

Regardless, your point is well made across these two threads. The old FP default was more compatible with Apache. However, the fix seems pretty trivial in EW if you're simply renaming the page.