Well it is true that in asp.net world there wasn't much focus on valid xhtml css usage to make sure all skins look the same in all browsers. Most of the skins are still build in crappy nested tablles. In my eyes it was seriously lacking on not behaving nicly in xhtml doctype form the start ( misplaced acion menu's ). The default facto standard for alsmost any website or portal menu is anunodered list but this has never been the case for dnn ( there are plenty of 3rd party solutions for this )

But even now that we have dnn5 and valid xhtml teh defautl usage of the menu still doenst do what all others do. Output nice clean unordered html that is very easy to style. Instead its anothe bunch of crappy nested span structures that is hard to deal with again. Every system adopts the semantic usage of the unordered list except for default DNN.

Because dnn never followed these principles and still dont its hard for real designers to make dnn skins. Firstly because dnn was never much for valid html webdesigners could always count on there designs looking as they designed it to be because of invalid html the outputted design couldnt be guaranteed for 100%. Most good designers know how to make good webdesign with pure css and xhtml and have menu systems in unodered lists. They know all the tricks to make sure it fits all the browsers. However early dnn by dafault coulndt guarantee this so any good designer would not even go there.

It is true that dnn5 now outputs valid html but still i see problems with teh fact that even now ( by default ) there still is no unodered list outout. So you could make a nice skin but for the menu you still have a lot of trial and error because of the unfamiliar html code used for this.

I have heard this numerous times from designers Ive worked with and indeed was dissapointed that even dnn5 is a nice step there still is no default unordered list output. Lot of things can be doen with 3rd party skinobjects. I use the on from snapsi myself.

Ive been usisng a dnn css grid framework for a while now that im about to release for free as soon as I have set up a site for it so anyone can make nice css designs with dnn5.

As for php sites looking better than dnn sites the can look the same

php: http://demo.rockettheme.com/jan09/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=51&Itemid=58

dnn: http://rockettheme.todnn.com/2009/Jan09Mixxmag/tabid/73/Default.aspx

Armand Datema

Get my new skin ( lots of design variations [18 headers, 30 titlebars, 30 breadcrumbs, 3 footers ], 50+ typography containers , 50+ page templates and an online theme builder for unlimited skin variations) Aura>

For all your skin conversions

2DNN

Follow me on Twitter

I don't agree with this statement.  I'd agree if you said that initially when ASP.NET was released there wasn't much focus on valid xhtml/css usage but to say that there still isn't is a fallacy.  Microsoft has made major steps both in ASP.NET 2.0 and subsequently in 3.5 that make it easier to accomplish valid XHTML/CSS in ASP.NET.  The problem is that a large number of developers themselves don't care or make an effort.  The tools are there. 

Same on the menus -- the DNNCore (nav) has the ability to render out as unordered lists and far as I can tell it is just a switch of the rendermode in your skin.  There *is* a bug and Jon Henning has been working on it for the 5.0.1 release.  That said, I prefer to use other menuing components such as Telerik or Snapsis.  So perhaps it could be requalified that 4.x native support for unordered lists is lacking.

One comment here on the thread mentioned that DNN was built by developers [initially] for developers and I'll agree wholeheartedly with that statement.  That isn't to say that they aren't trying to change things; with each release they are trying to make it more accessible to a designer or other end-user and from where I sit I think they're doing a good job. 

The problem is that programmers just don't normally have an eye for what looks good.  They churn code.  I'd like to believe that I can cross that bridge in a semi-acceptable fashion but I've worked at it for years trying to hone my skills on both sides of the fence.  I have two brothers who are also programmers and anything they put out (Windows applications or web applications) look like trash.  Under the hood they are great programs but they look awful.  Their idea of a good design is slapping a table with some labels and other controls on it, maybe changing the background or text color and voila!  That is common programmer mentality.

But to bring it all back around to the original point -- ASP.NET is just as capable as PHP or any other platform out there of presenting a good looking and good functioning website including but not limited to the DotNetNuke framework.  The tools are there and they are always getting better.

What is a Flash skin exactly? I don't believe Flash is necessary. There are some DNN skins out there with customizable Flash banners using xml files.