>>He didn't. What I'm telling you is the way Microsoft envisions WPF design to be done.
>
>Well if that's the case why did MS put an "XAML editor" in the VS IDE? Oh wait. Let's see. We'll give em a free, crappy editor that they'll find powerless to create those nice UIs/UXs. They'll quickly give up then we can make em fork over some more dough to buy a real XAML editor.

I think you're confusing a XAML editor with a XAML generator......
FWIW I'm not a big fan of ExpressionBlend - nice for creating complex gradients, animations etc - but it also tends to generate a *huge* amount of superflous XAML.....
>
>>
>>>Where does Bernard say that he's using Expression Blend? Did I miss that in his post. I assumed that he was referring to the VS IDE.
>>>
>>
>>Since when does "VIsual" mean Wysiwyg?
>
>I would hope that a "Visual" UI editor would produce WYSIWYG. Imagine if today's version of Word didn't print what I edited and saw on my screen.
>
>>
>>
>>>How can you say it doesn't work when Bernard seems to have proven that it does not! I, like Nicholas, also find that amusing. Gotta love the "Visual" in VS.
>>>