Printable View
Link.
Man this sucks. I hope to God that the SEC stops this, but I somehow doubt it, seeing as how Oracle was eventually able to take over Peoplesoft. If you like Fireworks and Freehand, get 'em now. Adobe will probably kill those so you have to use Photoshop and Illustrator. Hopefully they'll leave Dreamweaver, Flash, and Cold Fusion alone. Geez this sucks.
:cry:
They had BETTER leave Dreamweaver alone. :|
Eh... Dreamweaver is for sissies. An HTML-skewed text editor is all I've ever needed.
you obviously havent used the later versions of dreamweaver.....
Photoshop and Illustrator are better than Fireworks and Freehand, though. I know you may think this is a bad decision, but as a graphic designer who uses these tools daily I must say that I'm a bit relieved. Sure, it's bad for the guy who uses Freehand, but Illustrator is the industry standard that everyone should be using. I hate going into a job not knowing which software people will have on their system. I deal with it, but it'd be nice not to have to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolffen
I guarantee you that if this does happen Adobe will take the properties inspector payne and integrate it in to all of their own programs. They'll also be doing it to own Flash, Dreamweaver and Cold Fusion, which are industry standard programs (I don't know what Cold Fusion is).
I think this is a good decision.
Cold Fusion is the backend for a dynamic web sites. It's akin to PHP, ASP, etc. Over the last 2 iterations, Dreamweaver has integrated further and further with CF, allowing for some cool data driven stuff. The latest version has some really cool stuff, like dynamically generated Flash-forms, report generation capabilities, etc. It's expensive though (especially compared to free, like PHP and ASP).
Well I guess that's why. I'm print oriented over web.
BBEdit forever. People who don't write their own code are limp-wristed sissies.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
That said, I don't think either Adobe buying Macromedia or GameStop buying out EB is a good thing by any stretch of the imagination. Lots of great news I woke up to today.
As long as they don't touch Flash. I'm ok with this.
You're right, I haven't used it. So tell me what it can do that I can't do with a copy of Photoshop and a decent text editor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nercm
I like this news. Adobe knows what the customers want. Macromedia's Studio products, like Quark, are a hassle to get and keep registered and licensed. The programs are buggy and I've never had a customer who had a good experience with them over any period of time. Adobe will most likely integrate the products into their current line as features, which will be great.
Perhaps this will also encourage all these babies who can't write their own code to make web sites with good formatting that conform to standards instead of the crap you see generated by Dreamweaver et al.
EDIT: I was going to suggest purchasing some Adobe stock, but:
YIKES. :|Quote:
Adobe Systems Incorporated (Nasdaq: ADBE) today announced a definitive agreement to acquire Macromedia (Nasdaq: MACR) in an all-stock transaction valued at approximately $3.4 billion.
I don't believe Quark is owned by Macromedia. The two don't even have anything to do with one another:
http://www.quark.com/about/legal/
Quark is its own company based in Switzerland. I could be wrong but I don't think I am.
Quark is a separate entity from Macromedia
So how did you web designers get clients starting out. Give me some tips.
I know HTML back and forth but Dreamweaver just makes it easier. Jeez, I dont know what the fuck is wrong with people who feel the need to flash their e-penis by saying they tediously write out HTML code by hand. Fuck you if youre one those.
As for this announcement... eh hopefully it will benefit the products, because thats all that matters.
You're right about Dreamweaver making it easy for people to make websites. Dreamweaver helped me understand how to implement dynamic content with JSP on my web pages some time ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
However, at some point, you'll want to move towards a text-based editor like Homesite because you'll start to hate how Dreamweaver generates your code. Although Dreamweaver does have an integrated text-based editor, I find the program's interface too cluttered and busy. Though after I'm done coding with Homesite, I use Dreamweaver for its excellent templating capabilities.
I agree. My flash teacher in college used to say it, but his tone wasn't snobbish. He just said that he's so accustomed to HTML now that he uses the DW notepad and does it mostly by hand. But he didn't discount anybody. He said if you want to use Dreamweaver you're not losing points or credit or face. It's just a different tool to accomplish the same task.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
And really, it saves you time.
To be honest, I really couldn't care less what people use to make their websites.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
My problem is I think it is a bad idea to learn and live by things like Dreamweaver, where you have no real working knowledge of how the HTML you are creating works. There are always going to be times when they can't create the page exactly the way it needs to be, and you need to get your hands dirty directly in the HTML.
For me, personally, I'm very anal about how my code looks, so I won't let any WSYWIG programs like Dreamweaver touch it.
he worded it oddly. he meant to say macromedia products and quark are hard to get and keep licensed. not that they are the same company.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew
Have you ever made a website for somebody with someone else coming in to webmaster it in mind? You may lose some work for your anti-Design program attitude (not that it's bad). I know some people want you to be versatile and keep on all of the latest tools, even if it means swallowing your pride.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
99% of the fun for me is the hand-coding - so even though I've always said Dreamweaver's for pussies, I guess everyone has their own way of doing things.
I still haven't tried out Dreamweaver 'cause I've absolutely hated all other HTML editors I've used before. Always screw with my code and make it look ugly :/
Whatever gets the job done, quickest.
At the end of the day, if I get paid and the client is happy. I don't really give two shits what some internet nerds think of my DW use.
I think VB.NET is a horrible thing to use as an HTML editor.. everytime you press enter when designing the page it inserts a <p></p> tag. Do you know how fucking annoying that is? So I prefer to hand code it.
The point is that HTML and CSS are not hard in the slightest bit. If someone makes a page properly, you don't even need to know the code to change things. (And really, a webmaster should know the code anyway.) It has nothing to do with 'flashing an e-penis,' it's about adhering to standards and making your code easy for others to take apart and modularize if they need to. Part of proper HTML is good formatting. Every PHP script I write generates properly formatted output. When I designed my old company's site (MacTalk) I did it by hand. The code was very neat and organized. Now look at it, after Dreamweaver had its way. (Not to mention putting in graphic links and poorly chosen fonts.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew
It's a nice tool to learn what changes you make affect the page, but it shouldn't be used to maintain a page. But diff's right, in the end, if the product improves that will be awesome. I'm of the opinion that it will improve because Adobe has a good grip on what their customers want.
Microsoft products are shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thief~Silver
IIS does this when inserting database information, so that any code you write has to remember to remove the extra %0A%0D combination.
Hrm When do you use IIS to enter database information?
Do you know a better ASP.NET Editor?
Using PHP to do inserts/updates/etc. Even on a one-line entry, it tosses that return/break crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thief~Silver
Dude I used to feel the same way 5 years ago. You don't have to work in WYSIWYG -- you can use Dreamweaver in straight text edit mode and no there isn't any hidden junk code (a la Frontpage). Also you can preview the page as you build it. It makes things easier and quicker and if you must you can edit the code. It's like saying riding lawn mowers are for sissies cuz I push mowers around myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
Right, but I can do all the things Dreamweaver's text editor can with BBEdit Lite for free. Using DW for its text editor is a waste of the program. It's a great piece of software for starting out and Flash is great for band websites and whatnot.Quote:
Originally Posted by soundwave
Riding mowers where you sit down aren't for sissies, but they're nowhere near as cool as the ones where you stand.
Ah ok, I've only done it with ASP.NET so never actually had to do anything through IIS (for the most part)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike
Yeah, my buddy's hosting servers are run on Windows so any time I write code that interacts even with SQL, I have to make sure to urlencode it, wipe out the extra line breaks, then urldecode it. On my machine, I don't have to do that since I'm using Darwin, Apache, PHP, and MySQL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thief~Silver
'Straight' Programmers... all the same. Ignorant and willing to unchange.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike
(I say straight, because I program Actionscript, PHP, CSS and HTML but I use graphics and Flash. Flash is a great piece of software if you know how to use it. The future.)
Yeah, Flash is great for a website.
Oh, wait, I want to go back and re-read what I was just looking at. Whoops... can't, because it is Flash.
Hey, I want to copy this text I'm reading and save it for myself. Whoops... can't, because it is Flash.
Just two examples of why I hate it when people think they need to use Flash to build an entire website. If you're going to have some fluff site that isn't all that important, where you rely on people staying there due to being flashy and pretty versus your content, that's fine, use Flash.
But for any REAL website, I think it is a total mistake to rely heavily on Flash. 99% of the sites I see that use Flash are perfect examples of style over substance, and usabilty gets tossed out in the process.
Hybrid sites always look the nicest. Flash integration is awesome and if you have a designer who knows how to use typography and a good concept you can end up with a site people will remember. Most sites are pretty grid oriented, and Flash helps remove that restriction.
Calling flash websites not real sites is idiotic.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
I'm actually with Shidoshi on this, and there's no reason why you can't have a non-grid-like site w/o flash. It's a matter of how well resolved your tables are and where you place things in those tables. Addressing the problems that shidoshi mentioned would help Flash along greatly but those are the reasons why Flash is nothing more than decoration or a means to communicate non-text information (i.e. animation and so on). I'd use it, but it wouldn't be involved in anything that is "mission critical."
If you design interfaces properly. The user will not have to press the back button because you provide them with a way to get back to where they were. Bad flash designers dont equal everyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
You can do this in Flash, I don't know what you were trying to copy.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
Although, it can be turned off.
See, this is the ignorant crap I'm talking about. You can do a lot in Flash and I doubt you even know the basics.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
Oh right, websites should be white backgrounds with 4 buttons on the left. These buttons must not have more than 3 colours and the fonts must be arial.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
Whatever. Good Flash sites exist. It all depends on the designer. There are a lot of crappy ones out there.
That's your opinion. It is not fact. Flash is a very useful tool that sadly a lot of 'programmers' are ignorant towards. Mostly I find they don't understand it and thus they don't want anything to do with it.Quote:
why Flash is nothing more than decoration
It's sad.
The hell are you talking about? Just because you don't use Flash doesn't mean that you can't have a site that is interesting and has a nice design.Quote:
Originally Posted by jonas
Take my forums for example. You calling that a site with a white background, four buttons on the left, and all of that other stuff?
The problem I have with Flash is exactly what you seem to be saying here - that if you want a nice looking site, you have to use Flash. That's utter BS.
Flash absolutely can be used to make great looking sites. The problem comes in when you have things like news sites saying, "Hey, let's make our site with Flash! It will be fun!" Flash, in my opinion, still has too many problems to be used for sites where the content is the most important element over everything else. (Which is where my "real sites" comment comes from, by the way.) If you've just got a fun little site where it isn't about large amounts of conent, fine - use Flash.
But you still have to think about all of the people that you might be turning off. Flash still isn't on every computer out there, and if you've got a slower computer, Flash can quickly kill your browser. Flash doesn't play nice with the basic elements of the browser, such as the back and forward button. I don't care what the site's desiger wants to do - I'm the visitor, and if I want to be able to use the back and forward buttons that are STANDARD on every browser, I should be able to. Flash elements, such as links, can't be changed according to the needs of people - people who are colorblind, require underlined links, require links and text to be bigger or smaller, etc.
Flash, at this point, is still about style over substance. I don't care what you say, that's simply the truth. Flash shouldn't be used because you can then make buttons click or make a wizz-bang into to your website... which, by the way, if you are making an INTRO MOVIE for your website, please kill yourself now. Flash should be used to improve the user experience and do things that HTML and CSS cannot do, when those things are NEEDED for the experience being presented.
I kind of brought this up in my reply to Jonas, but that's not at all what I was saying. I said, "But for any REAL website, I think it is a total mistake to rely heavily on Flash" - nowhere in that do I say that Flash websites aren't real sites. What I meant was sites that exist for a specific reason and purpose, and don't just exist to show off design.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew
If I was designing a videogame (I have a few ideas in my head from when I was a kid, they might come into fruition), Id probably use Flash, but no way in hell would I design a website with it. The second I realize a site Im at is coded completely in Flash I leave it. XHTML, CSS, etc. have all evolved so much and you can do really really cool stuff without touching Flash.
Visual Studio is actually pretty amazing and way ahead of whats out there. Generally their development tools are top-notch, because thats what they need, people coding for their platform... DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERSQuote:
Microsoft products are shit.
One of you coding gurus needs to redesign my web site.
I'd say thank you! Honest!
Im trying to work on my own site now.
But yea, you really need a redesign. Bad. And the thing is its gonna take forever, thanks to bad planning on your part - but hey, it was your first site, you didnt know. Your first site is a lot more successful than my... first 13 or so.
Combined.
Yeah, I was so eager to launch that I didn't plan ahead. I'm not worried about updating each page individually though. I just figure I need four good page designs to use as templates and I'm good to go.
Right, which is their purpose or reason. Or maybe it's for games like Newgrounds or entertainment like Homestar runner. Just because your html sites handle ASP and HTMLX and whatever else doesn't mean they're real. Sites that rely heavily on flash aren't a mistake, and certainly are just as real as corporate sites heavy on programming languages (I realize you didn't mean to say it like you did, but it still seems that way. Showing off design (which isn't all Flash design is for) is no better a reason or purpose than a commercial website offering something.Quote:
Originally Posted by shidoshi
As I said, hybrid sites are always the best.
When you ask a coder to redesign something you're just asking for a boring faceful of visuals. Shidoshi seems to be good with both, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
I also use Flash to design games and such.
I just hate when people label Flash as trash.
It all depends on who is using it. HTML and general website coding could be trash to if we take a visit to Geocities.
Flash was just used to make an Unreal Tournament clone. Although it was beta, it was amazing. It's offline right now until May when the real one launches. I'll post it then.
Flash is trash.
Macs can't run it for beans. :/
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Shockwave and Flash run fine on G4s and up and yes I work in web design on Macs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dunlap
I see where you're coming from (my sites always had spartan, plain but clean and functional designs, kinda like Next Generation magazine), but the thing is if you communicate the basic layout you want, and the coder writes the site properly, using CSS and PHP/ASP/whatever, there really is no problem, because changing the *design* is trivial. And the site would end up having more features, its easier to change, and easier to add new content.Quote:
When you ask a coder to redesign something you're just asking for a boring faceful of visuals. Shidoshi seems to be good with both, though.
Yeah, Flash can run in a Mac environment fine. It's actually better on a Mac, I believe.
But, you can't install the PC version on a Mac and expect it to work.
You're right but my point didn't dispute this. You want to get somebody with an eye for details and layout to do the design of your site. Some programmers aren't bad, but most are.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Most great sites have a designer (or design staff) and a development staff.
Developing in Flash on PC is supposed to be a bit easier, but it's nothing of note and certainly nothing to put PC ahead of Mac.Quote:
Originally Posted by jonas