Is Dreamweaver the next to go?

[BenPleysier]

Adobe Muse Product Announcement

[W_J_T]

pziecina  wrote

The Muse user who has created sites for profit, probably did so bidding against someone who wanted to create the site using code. Many even created sites that run into 100's of pages, and charge for updating, even those Muse users probably bid on a cost bases. Did they feel any sympathy for the coder that lost out to the drag and drop site creator. Unlikely.

The internet is made up of a plethora of ways to get there and operate. You seem to be looking at it from such a narrow purist view and discarding everything else as folly.

[SankofaTafari]

I am a Muse user who has been thinking of learning code to be able to use Dreamweaver. If a Muse site is converted to Html couldnt that site then be edited in Dreamweaver? Even though I am a Muse user I always thought it would be wise to learn code.

[BenPleysier]

Yes it can be edited in Dreamweaver. The consequence is that you cannot return to the Muse environment.

Once you have learned to code properly and looking at the following code

<p id="u22207-5"> </p>

<h3 id="u22207-7">Some people want to take care of all planning aspects for their big day, but want to entrust the &quot;Day Of&quot; coordination to someone else. One Red Event offers &quot;Day Of&quot; services for these exact instances. We are there to ensure your events run smoothly, while the hosts and guests enjoy their event to the fullest.</h3>

<p id="u22207-8"> </p>

you will soon realise that in Muse there is a misuse of the id selector. The first and last lines of code have the same function, namely to space out the h3 element, Yet each of those two lines have a different selector value (id's may only be used once per document). In this case, rather than use an id, we as coders would use a class selector (class' are allowed multiple times in a document). Even better, we would style the h3 element so that the p elements are not required.

Welcome to our world!

[Nancy OShea]

Sankofa216  wrote

Even though I am a Muse user I always thought it would be wise to learn code.

An excellent long-term decision.   You can't go wrong knowing how to use core technologies (HTML5, CSS, JavaScript, etc...). 

[ALsp]

You may repair an electrical issue, but would you completely re-wire your home?

Not without a lot of sparks. But as far as making a web site, some people cannot afford, or perhaps not want to pay out the tens of thousands of dollars it would take to hire the team of true coders it would take to do a really professional piece of work. In addition to believing the folks ho frequent this forum do not understand the typical Dreamweaver user, I am not convinced they fully understand the level of expertise it would require to truly code an entire web site. Quality and talent are such evasive things sometimes. Some people install and edit WordPress and consider themselves professional web developers, but you cannot really argue the point, because to them, they are, so who is really to say?

That's what I mean by someone being a professional. A professional can do whatever is necessary, not just tinker and then think they can offer others a complete professional service, complete with a full re-wire of a home service.

Very true, and I thinks, perhaps unknowingly, you are in agreement with me, because in my metaphor, my entire house is the web site, and the electricity is merely a part of the whole. Think about it. There are precious few "professionals" that are capable of being expert in all the disciplines that comprise a modern web site.

[osgood_]

Not really being able to code means you are not dependent on someone elses ideas and when that someone else decides to pull the plug. I think that is good sense really. Ok not everyone wants to code l accept that but then those who rely on others skills shouldnt really bleak when it all goes t×ts up.

[john_stephanites]

I was upset at first but BC is outdated as much as DW.

[pziecina]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/john+stephanites  wrote

I was upset at first but BC is outdated as much as DW.

No one has ever said that Adobe knows what it is doing when it comes to web development, and Dw is simply following in Adobes footsteps.

[john_stephanites]

The real reason I was upset because it was a good offer. 5 free simple sites but there are other options now for that. I’m ok I have no reason now to stay with my subscription and save the money.

[pziecina]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/john+stephanites  wrote

The real reason I was upset because it was a good offer. 5 free simple sites ...

I think that for many Muse users, the use of BC servers for hosting was a major reason for its use.

Lets be honest, if you can offer clients hosting and a 'sort of' domain name that costs you nothing, it is a major advantage. For Adobe though, with BC itself being almost obsolete and getting very little in return for the hosting of sites, it probably made sense for them to discontinue both Muse and BC at the same time.

[ALsp]

Lets be honest, if you can offer clients hosting and a 'sort of' domain name that costs you nothing, it is a major advantage. For Adobe though, with BC itself being almost obsolete and getting very little in return for the hosting of sites, it probably made sense for them to discontinue both Muse and BC at the same time.

Which is why I suggested to Adobe that they leverage Muse and the BC team to roll out a little competition for WordPress.com, which is slooooooooooooowly monetizing. Adobe had the pieces in play for a CMS/Blogging solution with a twist that WordPress could never have touched: a desktop editor. In my opinion, this was the worst of many horrible decisions that Adobe has made in recent years.

[pziecina]

Let's be honest BC and Muse would have still not have been part of Adobes latest 'big' idea, (the experience cloud) and would still not have competed with the likes of Wordpress.

Wordpress became so popular because for many users it is so easy to install, (most hosting providers have a 'one click' install) and creating a theme or using a template makes it easy for anyone to customise what the site visitor sees, (no harder than customizing bootstrap, probably easier for most). Add to that all the plug-ins, and the promotion it gets even in this forum, (or used to get in this forum) and it is no surprise many web design shops use it.

[ALsp]

Wordpress became so popular because for many users it is so easy to install, (most hosting providers have a 'one click' install) and creating a theme or using a template makes it easy for anyone to customize

You totally missed my point. WordPress.com is what I'm talking about. It is a hosted solution, which used to be free, but no longer is. You do not install it. You are thinking of WordPress.org. Different beast, and counter to what many web designers believe, is neither the heart of WP nor its volume leader. You're talking apples to my oranges .

[W_J_T]

ALsp  wrote

a twist that WordPress could never have touched: a desktop editor.

I seems like they are still moving forward with their own app though, what it might become is still in question. Given what every one else has accomplished and the community around it, I am sure Wordpress itself is fully capable to fulfill any features and workflow they set out to make, improve or emulate that already exists.

WordPress.com Apps - Desktop Apps​

GitHub - Automattic/wp-desktop: WordPress.com for Desktop

They must have some plan given they are simultaneously making mobile versions also. I suspect there apps are a huge aspect of the continued push for monetization and adaptation of new users to their platform going forward.

[ALsp]

They must have some plan given they are simultaneously making mobile versions also. I suspect there apps are a huge aspect of the continued push for monetization and adaptation of new users to their platform going forward

Agreed... mostly. But it would have been cool to see Adobe enter the fray in a serious way. The infrastructure was there. Opportunities like that do not come often.

[W_J_T]

I guess somehow Spark may be that dream with what looks like desktop and mobile cloud based apps, along with hosted sites. Might be their idea and experiment towards executing such a plan. I am sure eventually that and other things Adobe is working towards will be clear as mud as they converge together. Stand back, marketing innovation in progress. ;--)

[john_stephanites]

I think that they are going about it wrong. Very hard to edit on a phone or design I would think. That leaves tablets and desktops. I would have thought that a browser based app would be the smart move for all there apps. What do I know though? I am sitting here trolling the forums.

[ALsp]

Muse is/was free. It has little or no bearing on Dreamweaver because of that reason. It also is a very badly designed application. We explored it with a mind to doing extensions, and had a few good laughs. If Dreamweaver has retained anything from its Macromedia days it is that of a really good file/site management tool. It is also a container for powerful extensions that can make Dreamweaver, much better than what Adobe delivers. CS6 will be usable, at least on Windows, for a very long time, so the fact that Adobe has no clue how to evolve Dreamweaver is of little consequence... for now. The folks that regularly post on this forum are not typical Dreamweaver users and probably should be using other editors, if they are not already. But Muse, and the other free apps that Adobe has produced are nothing more than an institutional advertisement to show Adobe's altruistic side. Perhaps the people who run Adobe have not yet gotten the memo that free always comes with a cost... sometimes unexpectedly high.

[mbk28]

Muse is not free

[osgood_]

Fireworks was an exeptionally good simple, web editing tool, that didnt stop Adobe killing that.

I started to explore Brackets, which l personally thought could have been a very good code editor but l decided not to invest time in it because currently it requires expanding upon and l don't think that will ever  happen, as Al says these kinds of programs are pet projects for bored Adobe engineerrs that almost certainly have no legs.

Abobe is building a reputation for being very unreliable.

[ALsp]

Technically not... but unlike Dreamweaver I do not think you could buy a subscription just for Muse. At least I don't think so. I only use Dreamweaver so I haven't poked around to see whatever apps are available with my subscription, but I think there are several. I'd look now, but the CC Desktop APP is now updating itself, and we know how long that can take

[John Waller]

You can get a Single App subscription to Muse from US$15/month.

[ALsp]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/John+Waller  wrote

You can get a Single App subscription to Muse from US15/month.

Thank you, John, I humbly apologize for my mistake. I must have downloaded it on our company subscription and mistakenly thought it was gratis.

[John Waller]

Don't think Adobe will sell any more of those Muse plans though.

The question remains though, per Ben's original question: is the writing on the wall for DW?

I used to believe Adobe when they said it was unthinkable. I've stopped believing that.

[pziecina]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/John+Waller  wrote

The question remains though, per Ben's original question: is the writing on the wall for DW?

I used to believe Adobe when they said it was unthinkable. I've stopped believing that.

I've always found that when a company says something is unthinkable, they have thought about it, or are in the process of doing so.

If they did drop Dw though, would it make any difference providing they still allowed access to 'old' versions?