Legend

Question

Will the demise of Muse change anything?

Forum|Forum|7 years ago
April 1, 2018
2 replies
1279 views

NO I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT DREAMWEAVER.

If a company as big as Adobe cannot make a visual web design tool work in the long term, then what chance do all the replacment options that people are talking about as replacments for Muse, have for the longer term.

Those who remember back to those dark days of software programming, will also probably remember all those programs that also attempted to make software programming easy. They also used a visual system with pre-written coding elements, (including drag and drop) and required very little actual code to be written by the user, with users saying that it should not be necessary to actually learn how to code.

Muse and its replacements are being sold as the equivalent solutions in evolution for the web, as dtp programs and laser printers were to typesetting and screen printing. The problem I see with that comparison, is that the workflow and requirerments of dtp when it came had already been established over hundreds of years, and were not a still evolving process.

Html, css , javascript and everything else to do with the web, everything from code to social networks, data to user expectations of using that data, are all still evolving, and are not established standards. We do not even know how anything on the web will be accessed, let alone presented to the user.

So I am asking if programs like Muse, and the demise of Muse, could even be a good thing. Allowing the restrictions set by designers on web pages to finally be abandoned, and the 'this is how we lay out a printed page, so the web must layout a page the same' to finally be left behind.

Complexed layouts, white space, colours and none static features, (used correctly) are almost free on the web, so will we now start to use them, will we want software to support us in there use, will we finally leave hundred year old ideas of how a page should look and feel behind. Or have the designers in their failure to understand the web, their unwillingness to code, even in the failure and restrictions of the tools they use to replace code won anyway?

This topic has been closed for replies.

pziecinaAuthor

Legend

Here's a thought.

With Muse and front end web site builders, (even Dw) the functionality and look of a page are mainly driven by what clients think end users will want or accept, and of course the designers/developers abilities, plus the widgets/plug-ins they have or can get.

Once one moves into the development of the back-end or browser based applications, the functionality and the look and feel are dictated 100% by the requirerments of the admin/app user. If the back-end/app cannot do what is required the client/user will not accept the limitation(s) and if the developer cannot do what is required the back-end/app is considered a failure.

How much of Muse's demise and the removal of Dw's SB's to Dw's decline, can be attributed to the requirerments of having a back-end/app designed and built to the end users requirerments. Wordpress and similar are cheap clunky alternatives when it comes to the back-end, and for browser based apps they do not even come into the running for most requirements.

O

osgood_

Legend

pziecina wrote
Once one moves into the development of the back-end or browser based applications, the functionality and the look and feel are dictated 100% by the requirerments of the admin/app user. If the back-end/app cannot do what is required the client/user will not accept the limitation(s) and if the developer cannot do what is required the back-end/app is considered a failure.

Absolutely right. I lose many websites because I cannot provide the back-end app that a client wants/needs. I dont have the necessary skill level beyond creating a simple bespoke CMS system. In these cases and in the particular sector in which I work then the client doesnt really care what the front end looks like, as long as its not a complete pigs ear. Very often functionality is more important than the visual aspect and where fuctionality is a necessity that will win every time. Of course if one can combine the 2 that's the best of both worlds.

pziecina wrote
How much of Muse's demise and the removal of Dw's SB's to Dw's decline, can be attributed to the requirerments of having a back-end/app designed and built to the end users requirerments. Wordpress and similar are cheap clunky alternatives when it comes to the back-end, and for browser based apps they do not even come into the running for most requirements.

I was quite disappointed to discover the other day that one of the website developers I follow and have great respect for, a small but innovative company, has move form building bespoke CMS's to Wordpress! I'm willing to acceot that maybe a bespoke CMS is just too costly to build from scratch when you are working for a medium sized company, sad but true, I think. Personally I'm not going there because if I'm not happy or comfortable with a workflow or I think its a case of 'a race to the bottom' I'd rather find aomething else to do than prossstitute my services. I realise I'm in a fortunate position to be able to do that but how many discontented web-developers must there be out there forced into using workflows that they dont really believe in but must follow them to survive.

pziecinaAuthor

Legend

osgood_ wrote
Absolutely right. I lose many websites because I cannot provide the back-end app that a client wants/needs. I dont have the necessary skill level beyond creating a simple bespoke CMS system. In these cases and in the particular sector in which I work then the client doesnt really care what the front end looks like, as long as its not a complete pigs ear. Very often functionality is more important than the visual aspect and where fuctionality is a necessity that will win every time. Of course if one can combine the 2 that's the best of both worlds.

What we found with back-end/apps, was that if one had not actually worked in the industry one was creating the app for, it was very difficult to know and appreciate the why something was required, and the how it should work.

That was why about 70% of the developers I worked with had chosen web development as a 2nd career, and were originally from the required engineering or speciality background.

It is only possible I think to create back-end/apps successfully with a full range of the requirements, if you have worked in the profession that you are creating for. Unless it is only for a very generalised back-end/app requirerment. A lot of the requirements can be generalised and the finer details specified by talking to a number people from that profession (talking to them often, as people will add to the list the more they think about it), but for a developer working within a limited budget, it is unlikely they will have the time allocated to do so.

O

osgood_

Legend

I absolutely agree with your analogy of the dtp workflow compared to the web workflow. I have first hand experience of both. Dtp in many respects has already reached its pinnacle, evolving very little in decades. Its a perfect environment for a box to be drawn, dragged around the screen, positioned and content added.

There is no consideration to be taken for what will happen if a user clicks this bit of text or that image, you have no necessity for slideshows, menu systems, modals, connections to a database, animation, etc - you dont even have to consider if the page is readable if it 'shrinks in the rain'.

Dtp is everything that a web workflow is most certainly not and as l still am involved in dtp lm going to stick my neck out again and say l now consider it to be a low skilled occupation compared to web development.

I said in a recent post web development is not the domain of a drag and drop environment because it has limited options and web software developers struggle to keep up with what is an increasingly complex and quick changing sector.

pziecinaAuthor

Legend

I know it's not nice to say, but the demise of Muse, and sites created by it, also held the development and incorporation of web specs back, so maybe a good thing for the web in the end, even if it was not for those who used it.

Browsers when they look at what is being used on the web, look at what features are being used across the web development spectrum in all browsers by sites. The lack of any feature(s) use by sites stagnates its incorporation into other browsers, after all if something is not being used they think it is not required.

It may be wishfull thinking, but if the demise of Muse and programs like it in future, proves the folly of using programs and one size fits all solutions, then maybe developers and browsers will start to use/incorporate features faster. Even the small developer could then use features that are simply not possible by those using the Muse type of programs and solutions, and offer clients and users a better user experiance.

O

osgood_

Legend

I think you'll always have software companies preying on the unskilled, promising the moon and making a quick buck before they shut up shop.

Look at how many web editors, from small independent developers, are still being offered for sale with the old web-kit browser installed that doesnt even support flex without the prefixes. Green horns are still parting with their money and will continue to do so in future.

What is happening today and has been hapening over the past few years is disturbing to me but at least l am at a point where l could turn my back on it tomorrow. We, l have no doubt are just lone voices in the wilderness.

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