Community Manager

Question

Feedback | Adobe Dreamweaver 2019 and Beyond

Forum|Forum|6 years ago
July 17, 2019
10 replies
2304 views

Hi all,

There has been much debate on the future of Dreamweaver on this forum. The product team has put together their vision for the product in this blog post Adobe Dreamweaver 2019 and Beyond | Adobe Blog

Feel free to discuss your observations here around the blog post. I will share this post with the team for them to chime in when necessary with their observations.

Thanks,

Preran

This topic has been closed for replies.

pziecina

Legend

O/K, I think we can assume that there will be no discussion or further feedback regarding Dw's future, from Adobe or the team except what we can read in the blog post.

Maybe we are also making the wrong assumptions, regarding Adobe and the Dw teams target users for Dw. Most of us have moved on from the static sites, with contact form, but is that actually the target user and not database driven sites/apps developers. Don't forget that most Adobe CC subscribers, (forget those who get it free) are only interested in creating sites for themselves or local to them clients as an 'added option' to the print/photo services they offer.

Even the questions posted in the forums, (all web products) are not for anything more than simple sites or apps created with Animate. Yes, there use to be a few db features for muse using BC, but everything more complexed has seen Adobe partner with 'other' providers, and even take-overs like Magento, has not been promoted as far as Dw is concerned.

Or to sum all that up, Adobe/dw-team are not interested in anything more than what can be done using a few open-source features, with the only Dw remaining selling point, being its file managment features.

B i r n o u

Legend

you're probably right

P

Paul-M

Legend

Go back to the old code editor and tweak/add some new features. The Brackets integration is still not right to this day. I'm assuming the idea behind it was to reduce the amount of development resources and time Adobe would commt to Dreamweaver? In actual fact Adobe have wasted about two years trying to correct, fix and add back in lost featrures as a result of the Brackets debacle.

I only wish somebody at Adobe would swallow their pride and admit the Brackets thing was a total waste of time. You might as well go back to CC 2015 and add in the GIT Panel as a starting point.

How many people requested Brackets to replace the native code editor? Who's idea was it? My point is does the opinion of Dreamweaver users matter because I don't believe some of the big decisions made have really taken into account their opinions.

Paul-M - Community Expert

pziecina

Legend

Paul-M wrote
How many people requested Brackets to replace the native code editor? Who's idea was it? My point is does the opinion of Dreamweaver users matter because I don't believe some of the big decisions made have really taken into account their opinions.

I'll answer that question, (the Dw team will not).

A couple of senior members from the Dw team, flew to Germany and attended a meeting of an Adobe user group, (nor a web designer/developer group). Then asked those attending what they thought was wrong with Dw, and guess what, they complained about the code editor, and compared it with the Brackets code editor, (which also had support for languages seldom used on the web).

They then asked a few select members of the CAB group, what they thought of the idea, (which at first glance, looked like a good one, I was not a member).

The problem everyone concerned forgot, was that Brackets was not built for web design/development together. Instead it was ment for designers working only by using the accepted idea of splitting html, css and js into seperate files, which could then be passed to a developer. Plus for those learning and using all those 'other' languages in 'other' Adobe products.

The fact that in web design the profession itself requirers that a web designer now must include the server side code in pages as required, was not known or maybe not thought of by the team. They also overlooked the way Dw works, which is why many of the features one used with Dw files and code view, stopped working.

They also overlooked the simple fact that Dw would then have two very different code bases, (3 if you count CEF) the old Dw code used for everything else except code view, with code view using modern js, with html and css, to work.

Edit - One other point I forgot, was that either the Dw team did not get, or Adobe forgot to send them. The reasons why Muse was being EOL'd, in that diy site builders where replacing the market for small sites. dw will be dead in a couple of years anyway, if it continues to think that market will continue.

B i r n o u

Legend

pziecina a écrit

I'll answer that question, (the Dw team will not).
A couple of senior members from the Dw team, flew to Germany and attended a meeting of an Adobe user group, (nor a web designer/developer group). Then asked those attending what they thought was wrong with Dw, and guess what, they complained about the code editor, and compared it with the Brackets code editor, (which also had support for languages seldom used on the web).

Very interesting. Do you have more details about what you are announcing? sources?

Do you remember when this happened, and which members of the CAB it was? For several years I was part of the CAB, we were then few to be present on this forum and I have no memories of such discussions, nor of the questions around Brackets. The only person I know who was invited to San Jose (not in Germany) was David and at that time the PM was still Scott

do you also remember where these meetings were held in Germany? I heard about a concentration of reflection in Austria, but not in Germany. But these concentrations were rather based on the promotion of the uses of the tools, not their conceptualization !!!

I would be sincerely interested in more details about what you are saying because it would help me to better understand what might have happened without some people's knowledge.

pziecina

Legend

O/K.

The general response to the blog post is at best underwhelming. Those who want a more visual approach get nothing, those who would like a more comprehensive IDE type of Dw are also getting nothing.

So can the Dw team tell me/us who they expect to use Dw, both now and in the future?

(please do NOT say, 'the designer who wishes to code' as that is a nonsensical phrase).

Even Dw supporters, who so often tell us that Dw fills their expectations, often go on in other discussions to say they use other programs along side Dw. From which I can only guess that their expectations of Dw are low.

So I also have to ask myself (and the team), what do people expect from Dw?

I can argue for a visual approach, but in doing so the current Dw would be better with the CS6 version being updated, (live view, new SB's, updated code hints and bootstrap replacing FGLs). Which would mean the Dw team is on the right track, except for SBs, and replacing css designer with the old css styles panel.

The IDE future, would mean abandoning the visual side, (but not completely) and dumping all those 'fringe' languages from the code editor, (which would probably make it faster) newsletter creation, the properties panel, css designer (could go back to css styles panel) moving git and pre/post-processors to extensions, moving bootstrap to an extension, (but include other frameworks as extensions) adding de-buggers, linting etc extensions or options.

Live view not really required, (have to test in all browsers anyway).

That's my thoughts for now. So what does a Dw team member think?

BTW - The visual side, requires the editable live view finishing, (been promised since it was introduced) so it can really replace design view.

pziecina

Legend

Just in case anyone is thinking that by saying applications we are talking about what the old server behaviours could create, we are not. The SB's whilst usefull in their time, would even if updated only be a very small part of both client side, and server side.

A simple application is discussed in this discussion -

https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2631360

What is required in 2019 has very little to do with what SB's, coupled with a traditional website creation in the past.

B i r n o u

Legend

prerank28948274 a écrit
Feel free to discuss your observations here around the blog post. I will share this post with the team for them to chime in when necessary with their observations.

Hello prerank28948274,

it is true that the discussion split in two, Paula having opened one on another branch - Dreamweaver into the 2020's. on a similar subject. plus the very old one https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2605211 starting from comment #10

it may be time for a colleague from Adobe to come in and take a seat, on each one of them (thread) what do you think?

if no one from Adobe intervenes, it will only be yet another sterile discussion we have between us broken up.

have a pleasant day

birnou

pziecina

Legend

prerank28948274

Sorry you are getting involved in this, I don't want to shoot the messenger .

What I, and possibly others wanted to know, was what is the thinking for Dw's future?

Is it to remain on the same track, or is there any plans to make it into a product for professional web designers/developers?

If it is to remain on the same track, (used mainly by beginners and casual users) then there is no point in us hoping for anything more. If on the other hand it is to make it into a professional product, then are the resources and backing from Adobe available, because if not, it is a no go for the future.

O

osgood_

Legend

pziecina wrote
If it is to remain on the same track, (used mainly by beginners and casual users) then there is no point in us hoping for anything more. If on the other hand it is to make it into a professional product, then are the resources and backing from Adobe available, because if not, it is a no go for the future.

Hi Paula,

I honestly don't think Adobe are interseted in this kind of market any longer as there are too many other players and its conceeded defeat. They don't have good market share like their other products do. What I guess we need to kmow is why they are persisting with a dead product, is there actually some logic to it, that we are overlooking.

Take brackets for instance, another Adobe web-app, its barely changed since its release, left to 3rd party sources to produce useful plugins, which is not so bad but its UI is woefully behind the time now, you can't change the file tree to your prefered color scheme or your liking. It's split window has a poor implementation, its live view is poor unless you like Adobe specific code injected into the browser. I mean what use is that when you need to use the browser tools to inspect an element. Adobe just seem totaly out of their depth or at the very least dis-interested in this particular market. Brackets has some very nice features but they are not being improved.

Back to DW, why bother when you could be concentrating on better options. It's not going to improve to a point which is going to satisfy you, me or others, its like one of these bits of software from yester-year which plods along, apealing to fewer and fewer, before disappearing into oblivion due to lack of support.

pziecina

Legend

Isn't that basically what we all decided in this discussion -

https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2638463

(are web dev forums part of the problem).

But there is an alternative view regarding Dw, that may explain why, and that is simply because they are getting the advice from the wrong people!

I'm not deriding acp's, or Dw staff here, but many acp's and Dw staff present themselves as so called experts, even though they have never worked in the field or have little practical experiance in the profession they proclame to be an expert in. Even if they create sites for family and friends, teach or write about a subject, that does not mean they know how to do something and earn a good living by doing so.

The phrase that always made me laugh when someone from the Dw team wrote it, was -

"we will do an analysis of the subject matter", (or similar). Which ment in lay terms - "we have no intentions of doing anything".

pziecina

Legend

A few other items, as we are not keeping this to just the blog post.

css designer -

So far behind what is required, that I cannot even see how it could be rescued. Remove it of fix it.

css transitions -

All browsers and devices now have excellent support for css transforms, transitions and animations. Even a number of api's are well established. So same a css designer. Remove it or fix it.

Starter pages -

Flexbox and css grid layouts are also well established, so there is no need to use bootstrap. Starter pages for those who do not want bootstrap should be provided. (Use my suggestion from the 2017 pre-release, get CAB members to create them, that way they can also prove their competance in web design/development).

O

osgood_

Legend

I cant understand this at all. All I can assume is these guys behind DW development are woefully inadequate...........or am I being too harsh on them? As much as I dont like Wappler, their engineers seem to be able to put out a significant update almost every week so respect where respect is due. They listen, don't fart and fanny about and get it done.

Geez you sometimes you lose the will to live dealing with zombies.

Brad Lawryk

Legend

No new features? Just basically bug fixes. By the end of 2020 it will just be another 18 months further behind than Dreamweaver is now. Looks like I moved on from Dreamweaver in time.

pziecina

Legend

I started a discussion regarding the blog post, but so the team does not miss my post in that discussion, here it is again -

I was pleased to read that code hinting would be for ALL html5, css and js, but I would be interested to know what is ment by 'ALL'. As html5 contains much more than most people think, and in my experiance, much more than the Dw team think. Plus css and the js api's, at what stage in the recomendation process will a spec be included in code hints, as many specs are WD's but stable and well supported by browsers.

Dw's code editor could use a lot of work, but the little information provided does not allow me to make any judgement. I see no mention of a stand alone css prefixer though, which as I have said previously makes Dw a 'do not use' for many.

As for the pre-release, and testing. As I have said previously 'why should I bother'.

I found some members of the CAB and prerelease insulting, and lacking in knowledge, (though not all). Anyone thinking they can influence anything, forget it. Replys or discussions with any Dw team member are now none existant. And lastly, whats in it for me?

I don't use CC, so any 'here is a years CC subscription' is worthless.

BenPleysier

Community Expert

Just one thing: SB's, where are they?

Wappler is the DMXzone-made Dreamweaver replacement and includes the best of their powerful extensions, as well as much more!

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded