Extremely Disappointed [Does the new version of Dreamweaver completely alienate people who don't code?]

[uxpulse]

I've been using Dreamweaver since it was introduced. While I can edit code, I am not a coder by trade and have absolutely no desire or need to be one.

Am I missing something or does the new version of Dreamweaver completely alienate people who don't code? It makes me do far too much in order to create content.

Thoughts? Direction?

[osgood_]

WolfShade  wrote

UPDATE:  While I do appreciate that marking an answer as correct does help future users with the same issue, when an answer that is NOT the best answer is marked as correct, this only confuses said users.  This is why I think it should be done only in certain situations.

Yes and a correct answer provided even just a year ago may well be outdated given the march of technology so is 'cataloging' posts for searching a hugley good idea. In my opinion to revive the forum it would be better for the same questions to be asked frequently - you can always be assured of current correct answers, not some museum piece you've just 'Googled'.

For the most part you could come into this forum and be forgiven for thinking it was dead or the product had been discontinued due to the lack of support and activity. Its quite pitiful nowdays.

[pziecina]

osgood_  wrote

For the most part you could come into this forum and be forgiven for thinking it was dead or the product had been discontinued due to the lack of support and activity. Its quite pitiful nowdays.

You mean it's not !!!

[osgood_]

pziecina  wrote

osgood_   wrote

For the most part you could come into this forum and be forgiven for thinking it was dead or the product had been discontinued due to the lack of support and activity. Its quite pitiful nowdays.

You mean it's not !!!

I do exagerate a lot of the time

[pziecina]

We could have a very good discussion on why the OP does not code, and how they have managed not to using Dw since 2008, (the start of the mobile web).

Since it became necessary to develop using rwd methods, I have not seen any product that has survived the test of time for none coders. I have also seen a complete decline in css(3) methods of handling modern rwd by most posters in forums. Instead the old css(2) methods, supplemented by javascript are still the prefered solutions to most problems.

Even the return of html tables for layout is also being promoted by some js frameworks to the unsuspecting user.

[WolfShade]

pziecina  wrote

Even the return of html tables for layout is also being promoted by some js frameworks to the unsuspecting user.

(shudder, cringe)

[anissa_thompson]

uxpulse Since this is more discussion and less question with definitive answer, I would wholeheartedly second pziecina​'s thoughts: if you have NO plans to code, Dreamweaver is pretty clearly not for you... and given the current fluxes in frameworks and "standards", you likely won't find anything close anytime soon. It is a shame that the tool is not as friendly to those at the learning stages of web design and development as it used to be, but considering how much has changed from the initial build, it's understandable that no tool can handle every aspect of development.

[Side note: ALsp​ - as a full-time web developer, instructor, and Dw user for over 25 years, I personally find your judgment of ACPs' skillsets is unnecessary, and your understanding of our roles here is lacking. We provide answers, resources, and understanding to the very best of our abilities, without compensation and on our own time, and work hard to extend our knowledge to the community to strengthen it and learn from it at the same time.]

[ALsp]

[Side note: ALsp - as a full-time web developer, instructor, and Dw user for over 25 years, I personally find your judgment of ACPs' skillsets is unnecessary, and your understanding of our roles here is lacking. We provide answers, resources, and understanding to the very best of our abilities, without compensation and on our own time, and work hard to extend our knowledge to the community to strengthen it and learn from it at the same time.]

Sorry Anissa, I just don't agree. Dreamweaver had an amazing run under Macromedia and actually, has not been around for 25 years. I know this because I was one of the first 3 Dreamweaver Evangelists. I also know that Dreamweaver had a vibrant community for years, and none of the current ACPs were around - at least not in the public newsgroup. Most came later. Stragglers from Drumbeat and GoLive.

So, on the subject of Dreamweaver's history, I think I'm pretty qualified 🙂 Dreamweaver's original purpose was not as an application for coders and Dreamweaver grew as a result of its extensibility. Back in 1999, more than half our extensions were free and there were many other free extensions. While we established the market for commercial extensions, they were always a luxury.

Please, let's not start rewriting history. There is enough misinformation on this forum.

[anissa_thompson]

ALsp  Sorry, I should clarify: I started out hand coding site content in 1992; started using UltraDev and Homesite under Macromedia in 1997, and started teaching Dreamweaver in late 1999. (Thanks for making me date myself!) I'm not new to this, but certainly not trying to make anything messier or rewrite history. Just don't want people (ACPs) to be disparaged without understanding who we are and where are interests lay. For the record, would've been cool to know you back then.

[Nancy OShea]

anissa_thompson  wrote

(Thanks for making me date myself!)

You and I have been doing this for approximately the same amount of time. 

[anissa_thompson]

... And I do miss the old plugins/extensibility, and by extension [pun intended], the community that built from it. But in this day and age, companies gonna do what they gonna do to make that $$$. *sigh*

[pziecina]

anissa_thompson  wrote

... And I do miss the old plugins/extensibility, and by extension [pun intended], the community that built from it.

I don't want to start a discussion on extensions, as that would bring nothing to this thread.

Even IF a user says they do NOT want to code purchases an extension, we normally find that some coding knowledge is generally required, and I have yet to see/hear-of an extension that has a pure 100% visual layout/functionality interface.

Maybe my definition of a visual site/page/component creation tool differs from others, but if no coding knowledge is required, then even on the interface nothing but a visual representation, (and a visual means of changing the individual components) should be shown. Maybe that is a 'tall order', but no coding to me, means no coding.

[ALsp]

I don't want to start a discussion on extensions, as that would bring nothing to this thread.

Even IF a user says they do NOT want to code purchases an extension, we normally find that some coding knowledge is generally required, and I have yet to see/hear-of an extension that has a pure 100% visual layout/functionality interface.

I don't know why you have such a negative perception of extensions, Paula. I'm sure you are successful in what you do, so this forum, and Dreamweaver, are probably extra-curricula for you -- but If not for extensions this forum would not exist, nor would Dreamweaver.

And I know you have never used our extensions, so generalizing about them is not very scientific.

The bottom line is this, and I can only speak for our extensions:

Working with the styling options in our UIs, a user can indeed create a page layout, a menu, a gallery, or a panel widget visually, without coding.

For those with coding skills, they can use out UI to set user classes and basically do any damn thing they want.

So, I really think you are doing my company, and others like us, a real disservice. And frankly, I don't know why. Were you done a dirty by an extension developer once? Did I offend you in some way?

And who the heck is the "we" you mention above, the one who has found that some coding knowledge is generally required?

Our extensions DO enable non-coders to make stuff. And from what I see of DMX Zone's extensions, so do theirs.

And, in conclusion, when we sell someone an extension, we support them - forever. If they need help, we provide it, whether on our forums, via email, or by telephone. And I assure you, our support staff do not work off scripts like most others seem to do these days. They are accomplished coders. We teach as much as anything else, and it rankles me to no end to see what we do so grievously misrepresented in this forum.

[osgood_]

ALsp  wrote

So, I really think you are doing my company, and others like us, a real disservice. And frankly, I don't know why. Were you done a dirty by an extension developer once? Did I offend you in some way?

I think the issue here is 'no coding' is a bit mis-leading. What kind of page are you getting for that price is the question. What are the expectations of those that use extensions. If you follow another forum I don't think anyone in that forum is completely satisfied as they ask questions on a daily basis about including workflows which are beyond the current extensions/programs ability.....so the developers are pumping out updates weekly and introducing bug after bug, just to tread water.

Will an extension or an application that professes to do it ALL without the necessity to code really fulfill the expecations of the user is the question OR will the user very quickly discover they need more than just an extension or a click and go application to really do exactly what they require/thinking. Are the users of click and go apps or extension just settling for whats on offer rather than what they want. What kind of user uses extensions and is it right of them to over-expect even.

Its all too vague to correlate into one size fits all in my opinion. It all depends on ones own expectations I think in the end.

[ALsp]

I think the issue here is 'no coding' is a bit mis-leading. What kind of page are you getting for that price is the question. What are the expectations of those that use extensions. If you follow another forum I don't think anyone in that forum is completely satisfied as they ask questions on a daily basis about including workflows which are beyond the current extensions/programs ability.....so the developers are pumping out updates weekly and introducing bug after bug, just to tread water.

I'm not sure what forum you're talking about, certainly not ours. A user can indeed create a wonderful page using our extensions and without coding. If they need more, that's when support come to bear. It's really simple and there should be no confusion. That there iis, is a little frustrating.

Will an extension or an application that professes to do it ALL without the necessity to code really fulfill the expecations of the user is the question OR will the user very quickly discover they need more than just an extension or a click and go application to really do exactly what they require/thinking. Are the users of click and go apps or extension just settling for whats on offer rather than what they want. What kind of user uses extensions and is it right of them to over-expect even.

Nothing on this planet can do all 🙂 But you can make some pretty good looking stuff with our tools, without coding. If a user wants something more, or different, they ask and we teach. It's that simple.

I think you are looking at this from the perspective of a coder. You're good at what you do so it's hard for you to relate. It's our job to relate and we've learned to do it well.

That said, we have some pretty advanced coders that use our products as a means to do quick prototypes, and by quick, I mean minutes. Those prototypes act as a baseline for a project and can lead in various directions. The bottom line is the tool has value for them.

[osgood_]

ALsp  wrote

I think you are looking at this from the perspective of a coder. You're good at what you do so it's hard for you to relate. It's our job to relate and we've learned to do it well.

We'll of course I'm looking at it from a coding point of view. That means if I have the skill I can virtually build anything I can imagine (not that I have an enormous amount, but some). I also think non-coders have an equal amount of imagination and requirements but just maybe are held back from realising their optimum objectives due to the restricted options a drag/drop/extension approach can deliver. I'm not saying the approach is beyond delivering some smart looking solutions, all I'm questioning is if the solutions provided are  in the end what the user really wants or do they settle for 'second best', realising it's the best option on offer within their skill level, albeit not quite what was required.

A typical example was someone posted in this forum yesterday who knows nothing about code yet really wanted a specific navigation, which was slightly more problematically than usual. I doubt they will find a drag/drop/extension to produce it for them, without having to tweak the code.

[ALsp]

I'm not saying the approach is beyond delivering some smart looking solutions, all I'm questioning is if the solutions provided are  in the end what the user really wants or do they settle for 'second best', realising it's the best option on offer within their skill level, albeit not quite what was required.

It depends on if the extension developer can fill in the gaps between what is and what can be with solid support and enough individual instruction to get the job done. When situations like this come up, we have a good success rate, historically, of getting the customer what he or she wants/needs.

A typical example was someone posted in this forum yesterday who knows nothing about code yet really wanted a specific navigation, which was slightly more problematically than usual. I doubt they will find a drag/drop/extension to produce it for them.

I can't find the post, but one of the ways we decide on new tools to develop is based on customers asking such questions as you encountered, on our forum, or through emails. But, of course, we can't be all things to all people, but we do evolve the line based on customer requests and trends that seem to stick. For instance, we are working on a drill-down menu system at the moment that will solve a few problems inherent in such widgets made with Bootstrap or WP plugins. Hey, we love what we do, our customers seem to like us, and it's a decent living. We have no aspirations of making Project Seven a huge company... just a comfortable one. It's a good position to be in, as we don't need to meet unwieldy payrolls and such 🙂

My wife is a successful academic, and I'm looking at tidying up and getting out my second novel. Project Seven is a labor of love.

[pziecina]

Osgood comes close to the reason I suggest that 'some coding' is required, but my thought on a 'pure visual' method are not anything against extensions.

No matter what I have seen/read/watched regarding extensions, (and even so called programs for none coders like Muse) that say no coding knowledge is required, do require some knowledge of coding, even if it is just the terminology used in the UI to indicate what a selection does.

The moment a UI uses terms like padding, margins, borders, (go down the entire html, css terminology) or relys on a user understanding a designers program terminology, (such as inDesign) then some coding/terminology knowledge is required in order to convey the meaning to the user.

A visual UI, (my ideal, but not realistic view) would be for a visual UI that the user interacts with, with no technical or specific terminology used to convey the function.

A UI that requires and gives a purely Visual understanding with a visual feedback to the user. No technical terms. No understanding of what something is for that requires anything beyond what a layperson with no web development of graphic design knowledge, would have.

[ALsp]

A UI that requires and gives a purely Visual understanding with a visual feedback to the user. No technical terms. No understanding of what something is for that requires anything beyond what a layperson with no web development of graphic design knowledge, would have.

I think Macromedia tried that once 🙂 Look, the subject is typically micro-analyzed here. The same points are made over and over again. Here's an evidenced-based point, and I make it because I've tried it myself. I can make a really pretty page using our Harmony page builder with absolutely no coding and no need to understand what padding is. All I need is a decent command of the English language, and to commit 45 minutes to reading the user guide.

Fancy UIs that I think you are talking about are possible We can do one tomorrow. The problem is that we would need to toss all of our customers who use CS6 and under... which is a significant number.

Beyond that, I respect your opinion, but disagree with a lot of your thoughts. Thank goodness this forum is not a barometer anymore of the Dreamweaver market base. If it were, I would be quite a bit more concerned about the extension-negativity. But then again, there would likely be more positive opinions expressed. So, I guess it's just a matter of two old ducks shooting the breeze and hopefully not pissing each other off... too much 🙂

[pziecina]

ALsp  wrote

So, I guess it's just a matter of two old ducks shooting the breeze and hopefully not pissing each other off... too much 🙂

Agreed

[osgood_]

anissa_thompson  wrote

without compensation

Well apart from the free software, don't forget to mention that. I probably spend more time here answering more questions and providing more indepth coding solutions than most ACPs and I dont even get that, not that I would want it as I hav eno use for DW, but they could send a packet of chocolate biscuits once in a while

[pziecina]

osgood_  wrote

... I hav eno use for DW, but they could send a packet of chocolate biscuits once in a while

I got a free epub from an author last year, asking my opinion on the flexbox/grid and css(3) examples and explanations (not from Adobe).

Returning to the OP's question though, and in the light of all the suggestions for a Muse replacement in that forum. I don't think the OP will find anything to help in building websites that does not require at least an understanding of code.

We have had the discussion about visual site creation tools many times, and whilst I do think it can be done, I also think that doing so would have to be so restrictive without coding that at some point it would have to be completely rewritten using newer methods, (making legacy sites incompatable).

[osgood_]

pziecina  wrote

osgood_   wrote

... I hav eno use for DW, but they could send a packet of chocolate biscuits once in a while

I got a free epub from an author last year

Nice........ what kind of beer were they serving

pziecina  wrote

We have had the discussion about visual site creation tools many times, and whilst I do think it can be done, I also think that doing so would have to be so restrictive without coding that at some point it would have to be completely rewritten using newer methods, (making legacy sites incompatable).

Well I think its well known by at least those that can code  all visual tools are at some stage going to lead you down a dead-end alley, just enjoy it while the short journey lasts and while the perpetrators of such workflows make a mint out of your ingnorance or laziness

[ALsp]

I respectfully disagree.  If Joe Smith asks for advice, and John Dough has had a similar issue in the past and gives advice on how to fix it, then Joe can and _should_ mark the answer as correct, if it does indeed fix Joe's issue.  But, if I am having the same problem, I can say "Hey, this really helped me out.. thanks," by marking the answer as helpful.

You would have a valid point except when you consider who actually tagged Nancy's response as helpful. I won't give you name, but will say it is another ACP, whose motives are clear to me 😉

[BenPleysier]

ALsp  wrote

You would have a valid point except when you consider who actually tagged Nancy's response as helpful. I won't give you name, but will say it is another ACP, whose motives are clear to me 😉

This is exactly what is wrong with this forum, the irrelevant bickering that goes on. Keep it up mate and watch the usage of Dreamweaver do a nose dive.

Seeing we have already gone down this track, please let me clarify why I marked Nancy's answer as helpful. When I stumbled upon this topic, I saw that Nancy's answer had been marked as 'correct' - not by me. The OP continued asking questions and I decided to un-mark the 'correct' answer, giving it a 'helpful' answer instead.

ALsp​, please explain what my motives are, especially those that are so clear to you.

[osgood_]

BenPleysier  wrote

ALsp   wrote

You would have a valid point except when you consider who actually tagged Nancy's response as helpful. I won't give you name, but will say it is another ACP, whose motives are clear to me 😉

This is exactly what is wrong with this forum, the irrelevant bickering that goes on. Keep it up mate and watch the usage of Dreamweaver do a nose dive

I find that remark quite offensive. That really needs reporting and deleting given the appaling timing of it. Maybe you could relook at that one and liken DW to something less painful.