I am wondering if the Telerik content editor is an improvement at all.
 
 Leaving aside the background colour css issues my big complaint/moan is around usability.
 
 1> In FCK when you open an image folder you right away get thumbnails of your images. In Telerik one needs to click though panel after panel of just File Names(!) so you had better know the name of what you are looking for.  The popup window cannot resize (Duh!) so it takes admins much longer and some of mine are now asking to move back. I have to agree with them. To me it looks like a nice bit of work and yes it writes better code but I wonder if the people who made it ever actually have to use it on a big site with hundreds of images and files.
 
 2> Most of my admins use tables for content as they understand them. In Telerik is seems impossible to delete or properly select more than one row at a time so again it all takes longer. 
 
 3> Things like image bounding boxes are not working in Google chrome and neither are table bounding boxes. 
 
 4> Unusually for a major update / change it was made the DNN default without any documentation being made available . . . oh wait. . .
 
 5> It is possible to resize the editor window and then find it will not size back and so leaves update links hidden and unusable (so you loose any changes content you had made.
 
 What is the point of a new tool that works less well than the one we had?
 
 A more cynical person than I might say that this editor was thrown as a bone a week after the dust up over dnn buying the document manager company and taking a good module off the market.
 
 If I was asked which part of dnn was a candidate for a cut down rad control I would suggest the file manger which has remained clunky for years.
 
 I know that dnn is provider based and that its still quite easy to run FCK but that is not the point. The editor is the bit of dnn that most users see the most and it needs to bring confidence not complaints.
 
 </rant>
 
 Ian

---

Mutate and Survive