Dreamweaver dethroned?

[radiantm3]

To be fair when you hand-code everything, it's fine when you are doing a moderately sized site. But you will get sick of coding that dropdown button or that mouseover effect, if you need to redo it again and again for different sites or bigger sites to the point that you wish for a easier way to do it. That's why we have companies who produce ajax libraries or DW. You are not being an idiot for not hand-coding everything but it saves us time to do more important stuff instead of those repetitive tasks.

That's why texmate has a a super secret feature called bundles. A smart web designer/developer has all the tools necessary to save lots of time without needing dreamweaver or any other wysiwyg editor. With snippets, web frameworks, and scripting languages available today, dreamweaver is a thing of the past. The only reason dreamweaver is needed is for heavily table-based layouts and I for one haven't built one of those in at least 3 years.

I used to think just like dpaanlka 4 years ago. I thought people who said they preferred hand coding preferred it because it made them feel cool. I thought a wysiwyg editor like dreamweaver was the most productive way to work. But I've grown and matured as a web designer and hand coding everything is the fastest and most invaluable way to build css-based websites. As a result, I understand html and css very well so debugging even browsers like IE is a fairly simple and routine task. I know how to avoid most pitfalls and I can spend more time building sites and less time debugging. If I need to work on my website away from my own computer, I can quickly ssh into my web server, and work in vi without any trouble. There are countless benefits to getting in the habit of hand coding. If you don't see it that way, that's fine. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But I've done the wysiwyg (dreamweaver) route for years and I would never go back to that again.

 

[angelneo]

That's why texmate has a a super secret feature called bundles. A smart web designer/developer has all the tools necessary to save lots of time without needing dreamweaver or any other wysiwyg editor. With snippets, web frameworks, and scripting languages available today, dreamweaver is a thing of the past. The only reason dreamweaver is needed is for heavily table-based layouts and I for one haven't built one of those in at least 3 years.

I used to think just like dpaanlka 4 years ago. I thought people who said they preferred hand coding preferred it because it made them feel cool. I thought a wysiwyg editor like dreamweaver was the most productive way to work. But I've grown and matured as a web designer and hand coding everything is the fastest and most invaluable way to build css-based websites. As a result, I understand html and css very well so debugging even browsers like IE is a fairly simple and routine task. I know how to avoid most pitfalls and I can spend more time building sites and less time debugging. If I need to work on my website away from my own computer, I can quickly ssh into my web server, and work in vi without any trouble. There are countless benefits to getting in the habit of hand coding. If you don't see it that way, that's fine. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But I've done the wysiwyg (dreamweaver) route for years and I would never go back to that again.

Not only that, you have libraries like Prototype, Isomorphic, SmartClient. An enterprise web GUI can take ages if you build from scratch without all these tools. Imagine that the frontend can contain 10 times more code than the backend. I agreed that DW is really outdated, even for me I seldom opened up DW now (well, I uses pspad as my primary machine is still a windows). Hand-coding is necessary to learn the trade well but to stick to it even after getting your "master" degree would be a waste of time.

 

[bousozoku]

Some applications gained reputation over the years for their quality.
One of them is Dreamweaver.
It is the king of web design programs.
But I cannot tell for how long. Technology in web seems to run very fast these days.

Besides the visual approach in web development which is undoubtly useful, there are also other elements in modern sites.

I have many thoughts about how we will build the sites of the future.
We learned dreamweaver, it is powerful, each version take us to a new level.
But please take a look at these:

http://dn.codegear.com/article/34068
http://www.codegear.com/Products/Delphi/DelphiforPHP/tabid/237/Default.aspx
http://www.codegear.com/Products/Delphi/Delphi2007forWin32/tabid/236/Default.aspx


I do not know if I misunderstood something but I thought dreamweaver was the killer application out there, about almost anything related to the web development. Am I wrong?

If delphi for php is a revolution in it's area, does this mean that dreamweaver will be used only as a visual editor? No better than the existing basic php implementation will be introduced in future version?

I know that we all wait a new version of dreamweaver.
I do not think will beat delphi-for php in its area.
Seems to difficult an application like dreamweaver to beat every other similar application.

Not to mention about mac versions of these tools...

Please think about it twice.
We love dreamweaver but does the future web belongs to it?
What the future holds for web development tools, dreamweaver, and mac os x related applications?

Delphi is a great, productive development environment. It won't replace Dreamweaver but can help you get more done with PHP in this latest product. It seems like a really good way to get your in-house Windows developer to create some web code quickly since that person is already familiar with Delphi.

Since it's Delphi, there won't be any Mac versions, though there could be a Kylix for PHP on Linux in the future. The only recent Borland product running on a Macintosh operating system was JBuilder 2005.

Besides, there is a whole lot more to Dreamweaver than PHP editing.

 

[cookie1105]

I hand code because I'm too cheap to buy dreamweaver...why bother spending that amount of money when TextMate is only €39 and skEdit is $25.

I also like learning a skill from the ground up. IMO You have much more feel for a site when you know its code inside out.

The only drawback to not getting Studio 8 for me is that I never really got round to learning Flash. Oh well maybe one day.

 

[Flowbee]

The only drawback to not getting Studio 8 for me is that I never really got round to learning Flash. Oh well maybe one day.

Flash???! If I want animation on my website I draw and paint each cel by hand, shooting one per frame, thirty frames per second.

 

[andy89]

If you think Dreamweaver is bad you should try NVU.

That sucks the most out of all the apps I've tried.

It wont let you save your docs without a closing tag for all elements.

That means your screwed when it comes to PHP headers and footers


So far I'm settled with Bluefish, although I used to like DW's preview feature.

 

[cookie1105]

Flash???! If I want animation on my website I draw and paint each cel by hand, shooting one per frame, thirty frames per second.

Why?

 

[radiantm3]

Why?

He's trying to compare that with hand coding over using a wysiwyg, but it's like comparing apples and oranges.

 

[cookie1105]

Cheers for the explanation. Well over my head. But I thought I detected a note of sarcasm.

 

[ChicoWeb]

Sounds like a spammer is trying to hype up the boards.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I found Dreamweaver useful back in the days of table-based design. Keeping track of all those nested tables was a little tricky (for me, anyway) in text mode. Since jumping on the CSS bandwagon, I don't think I've opened Dreamweaver once. I know DW has CSS tools, but there are other - cheaper - apps that I'm perfectly happy with.

Speaking as another pro developer, my situation is the same. Back in the table-soup days, you needed Dreamweaver. Nowadays, there's really no use for it (unless you like its text editing features). The pages I code by hand in skEdit are quicker to make and more efficient than anything I built in the Dreamweaver days.

 

[iEscapePod]

Ok, after reading this my head exploded. I had to register here just to say this.

If you can't hand code then you should not be building websites for a living.


I don't know a single program that can do what I do day in and day out. There is a reason you are cool if you hand code. That means you know what you are doing. 11yrs ago I got started using front page and let me tell you, I will keel over dead if I see someone on my team use something like that nowadays.

Hand coding lets you do whatever you want to do and when you get good at it making select boxes and drop down jscripts comes out of your fingers easier than anything.

Its like learning to type. First you have to look at the keyboard to type but when you learn it just flows out of your fingers without ever thinking about it. If you used a typing program that helped you type you would never learn to type by yourself.

Moral of the story here is hand coding is the only way to build sites. If you use dreamweaver or frontpage you might as well be my mom building a website.

Thanks.

 

[Westside guy]

Ok, after reading this my head exploded. I had to register here just to say this.

If you can't hand code then you should not be building websites for a living.

...

Moral of the story here is hand coding is the only way to build sites. If you use dreamweaver or frontpage you might as well be my mom building a website.

"Can't hand code" is not the same as "if you use Dreamweaver you obviously don't know how to hand code". Also, comparing FrontPage and Dreamweaver demonstrates that you are not particularly familiar with either app.

I actually agree that hand coding is the best way to build a site design; but frankly that's only a very small part of maintaining a site (especially a large one). Dreamweaver + Contribute is a very nice site management system. The bottom line is it saves me time over my old "Only hand coding here, l0z3r! w00t!" days.

 

[Sdashiki]

DO WHAT WORKS FOR YOU!

if you make a great site, who gives a flying crap how it was made.

if you make a crappy site, it will show.

it matters not what program was used, thats just BS posturing of "elite" coders and the like.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

Ok, after reading this my head exploded. I had to register here just to say this.

If you can't hand code then you should not be building websites for a living.


I don't know a single program that can do what I do day in and day out. There is a reason you are cool if you hand code. That means you know what you are doing. 11yrs ago I got started using front page and let me tell you, I will keel over dead if I see someone on my team use something like that nowadays.

Hand coding lets you do whatever you want to do and when you get good at it making select boxes and drop down jscripts comes out of your fingers easier than anything.

Its like learning to type. First you have to look at the keyboard to type but when you learn it just flows out of your fingers without ever thinking about it. If you used a typing program that helped you type you would never learn to type by yourself.

Moral of the story here is hand coding is the only way to build sites. If you use dreamweaver or frontpage you might as well be my mom building a website.

Thanks.

As it turns out, I use Dreamweaver at work (on Windows, yuck ) to work on web sites. However, I only hand-code, and don't even touch the WYSIWYG view. The only reason I use Dreamweaver, and not a text editor, to hand-code my sites is because of Dreamweaver's powerful template support.

 

[besson3c]

I think this is a totally bogus statement, but whatever floats your boat.

I hand-coded for about a decade. Then I started using Dreamweaver maybe a year and a half ago. Hand-coding is still what I do when I'm first laying out a new design; but then I create a Dreamweaver template (or set of templates) and generally work from those since it is just plain faster. Combine those templates with Contribute, and I have a way for my co-workers to easily manage content without having to worry about HTML coding or lots of training - and that frees me up to work more on scripts and less on basic web maintenance.

You should look into a simple CMS such as WordPress... I have lots of experience teaching classes using Contribute, it is a horrid little program full of quirks and suckyness.

 

[besson3c]

The reason why Dreamweaver is a thing of the past is simply due to its design.

As a whole, we are done with static content. Static content is a thing of the past. Nowaways, we work with content management systems. Any large enough site will be dynamic, and most will be driven by a CMS.

How does Dreamweaver fit in here? I know some people that use it as a text editor, but it's a very expensive one, and not much is gained using it in this fashion.

Dreamweaver was good, and is still great for making static content, but most of the industry is no longer interested in static content.

 

[cool11]

If dreamweaver is all about designing static content of the web, what else is better in mac os x platform for designing dynamic content?
Please tell me something like a complete application, not just solutions like textedit, textmate etc.
It is like wanting buying a car because I need to do my job fast and someone suggest me buy a horse! Maybe dreamweaver is not the best package but I will disagree with you in simple solutions like text-like apps.
I want something to write the code for me, even if it is not perfect. Authoring package.

It reminds me some guys that when I told them about bad windows platform, they tell me about the superior....ms-dos. Command line situations and all these old stuff! Come on, we have to go on with something better, if it exists.
Pc platform seems to have some good solutions for designing the next generation of dynamic web sites, but what about mac?

 

[besson3c]

If dreamweaver is all about designing static content of the web, what else is better in mac os x platform for designing dynamic content?
Please tell me something like a complete application, not just solutions like textedit, textmate etc.
It is like wanting buying a car because I need to do my job fast and someone suggest me buy a horse! Maybe dreamweaver is not the best package but I will disagree with you in simple solutions like text-like apps.
I want something to write the code for me, even if it is not perfect. Authoring package.

It reminds me some guys that when I told them about bad windows platform, they tell me about the superior....ms-dos. Command line situations and all these old stuff! Come on, we have to go on with something better, if it exists.
Pc platform seems to have some good solutions for designing the next generation of dynamic web sites, but what about mac?

I don't think your analogy holds. There is a place for static content, and there is a place for dynamic content. If your content is static in nature, it may not warrant a dynamic backend, but you must realize that tehre will be things you cannot easily do, such as the searching you desire.

There is no magic bullet in programming dynamic content. Lots of Mac users look for and desire nice clicky solutions with a pretty GUI, but such an app does not exist and will not exist, that is the reality of the situation.

I suggested WordPress because it is the closest you will come, as it does a lot of the heavy lifting for you. All you have to do is build your theme and come up with your URL scheme and it will help you manage everything else for you via a user-friendly web GUI.

If website development was as easy as you want it to be, there wouldn't be much work for web programmers and designers!

 

[Cult Follower]

DW is here to stay, and i love it.

 

[besson3c]

DW is here to stay, and i love it.

I highly doubt it. More and more sites are moving to a dynamic back-end, which is very much a part of this so called Web 2.0 thing. That includes blogs, wikis, and any CMS driven site.

If you are interested in this kind of site, all Dreamweaver buys you is a text editor, and an expensive one at that. DW will not survive simply as a text editor.

For entry level static page creation, the trend seems to be moving towards tools like iWeb and Rapidweaver. There are a few problems to be solved there, such as making the selection of a vast number of site templates manageable and not so overwhelming, but we should get there. These tools are becoming a far more attractive option than Dreamweaver for novice users and individuals wishing basic sites.

There is Contribute, which is sort of an interesting hybrid, but it is riddled with a number of problems such as weak CSS support and a number of quirks and bugs. As Javascript based WYSIWYG toolbars advance (such as TinyMCE), there will be little point in running Contribute. These toolbars are already rapidly gaining ground, and of course Contribute can never be Ajaxy by design without being able to connect to a database back-end.

Dreamweaver will eventually cease to be useful.

 

[angelneo]

Dreamweaver will eventually cease to be useful.

I think you fail to take into account that there will definitely be changes and improvements made to DW in the future. As for whether these changes are for the better or worse, we still do not know. Although it is true that the current DW has been lacking for a while, I would wait to check out the new DW before jumping to any conclusion that DW is going to be a wash out.

 

[besson3c]

I think you fail to take into account that there will definitely be changes and improvements made to DW in the future. As for whether these changes are for the better or worse, we still do not know. Although it is true that the current DW has been lacking for a while, I would wait to check out the new DW before jumping to any conclusion that DW is going to be a wash out.

It is currently so focused around one approach to web design that it would probably be far easier to just start from a clean slate, borrowing from code from DW perhaps, but likely calling the product something else entirely.

 

[radiantm3]

DW is here to stay, and i love it.

Dreamweaver will never go anywhere and will stay popular in the mainstream. But that does not make it the best application for web design and development. In fact, I see highly skilled professionals who embrace css-based design and web standards moving away from it while novices and hobbyists finding it very accessible for them. I mean take a look at some of the most well known modern web designers on the net and you'll notice that 90% of them are not using dreamweaver.

 

[Sdashiki]

I mean take a look at some of the most well known modern web designers on the net and you'll notice that 90% of them are not using dreamweaver.

how can you know this?

and again, who cares.

you can use notepad to create a website, and if it sucks i wouldnt blame notepad, id blame the designer.

If you can make Gold with DW, then go for it. If you can make Platinum with TextMate, awesome.

Its not about HOW you make a website, but HOW the website exists.

In fact, I see highly skilled professionals who embrace css-based design and web standards moving away from it while novices and hobbyists finding it very accessible for them.

What?