muse vs dreameaver

[inquestflash]

greetings dreamweavers.

i recently went to the adobe roadshow and was introduced to a new application of muse.

they instructors were going on about how cool it is,that you can do your website with no what so ever coding etc etc.

so if you can then do websites in muse,what is dreamwevaer then needed for?is it an applicaiton of adobe soon to be extinct?

thank you.

[Peter Villevoye]

Why ? And to answer your question, I don't.

I've just been around in these industries for three decades, so you see stuff repeating history, making the same strategical moves like earlier media and tools. And for what it's worth: Dreamweaver behaves like the Linotype 2000, and Muse is like the renegade Pagemaker. Of course, both phenomena in the comparison deal with totally different media and formats (print vs web), but the marketing of the tools and the attitude of its users are largely the same.

[arose4yu2]

I agree.  I provide consulting to small businesses and non profits so I'm not necessarily always designing. My business isn't a full design agency. I help them find solutions to their marketing and business support needs. I primarily work with WordPress for my clients but learning Muse because my clients are getting too confused even with WP's interface (even when I remove all admin features). I could move them to Squarespace of Shopify, but most of them don't want to do the work and will still come to me anyway. Plus once you build something with them you're stuck. Although I do think Shopify is great for e-commerce. You can even be a developer for them.

So I think Muse is great in that you can export the file and host on your own provider. If they need me to build them a ROR website I will. If they need me to build them a customized Python or PHP site I will. If they want a CMS: WP, Concrete 5, Joomla or Drupal, I'll do it  or hire out. It's about them ALWAYS, not me and what I like. Time is money. These apps save time. Do a project on your time lol, why re-invent the wheel? And don't give me this garbage about SEO. You can optimize a website yourself. Have them write organic content with appropriate keywords. Fix the tags. Can it be a pain in the rear? Yeah, but hey that's more money in your pocket. There's also this thing called social media that can drive traffic to your site.

I think Muse is great for brochure styled websites that aren't going to be updated constantly, or at least updated easily (i.e. content). The problem I see in this forum is that some of the designers/developers think like developers, not clients. This is a problem that Google seems to  have had in the past when they shoot themselves in the feet with some of the projects they've come out with (and failed). You have to think as the client. What's best for them?

You should get this all out of the way in the beginning when you're gathering requirements. If your client thinks that they will eventually want to build a store, or have all kinds of interactive elements and web apps ,etc...obviously Muse isn't the solution. But to say that Muse is for hobbyists or for non-business use is ignorant. All a client wants is something that works and if you provide them with the right solution for their needs you've done your job. They could care less about what tools you use unless they have specific needs. I'm also a photographer and I hear this same nonsense about those cheap photographers or what kind of camera people use smh. There's a market for each. Some businesses will never need to grow past a brochure style website, why give them something they don't need?

[Maria1987]

I've been using Muse for over a year now. And all I can say is that it's platform where non-coders with strong graphic design background can also shine or begin their journey to full-time web coding and design.

Some resist Muse because it's like the same issue about Photoshop - That if someone knows Photoshop, they're already designers. So when some non-coding graphics professional uses Muse, they can say that they are a web designer.

Our industry changes, folks. It's not the same as it was back in the 90's and 80's. Tools are introduced every year that aims to give the output our clients want from us.

Think about how the combination of Muse widgets can simulate the same effects of a hand-written CSS or code. I can drop anchors in Muse and make buttons and effects with slideshows and with a really good image and good color combinations and style. Muse is now responsive too - I can do different designs per screen size.

I won't rule out Dreamweaver because it's the pioneer platform of Web Designing. I am still getting around it as of typing this. It challenges me to go beyond Muse and overcome that barrier of not coding.

Our imagination and design intellect is the only thing that separates us from the beginners and non-pros.

It's all going to boil down with output in this industry. I just hope we all stop feeling the indifference and support each Adobe User here who wants to develop themselves in Web Design. Muse is a good start and it can also stay and provide great results for those who are skilled enough to use it.

[LA_Dalton]

I have a very basic question to do with both these programs. I would like to purchase Muse and I have one last question I must ask; does the program work off 32bit operating system. I have to upgrade to 64bit on this substandard machine which gets me by for now. I was thinking of changing to Linux of upgrading my system. It costs the same in changing the motherboard et al to get get a whole new laptop or desktop. Can both these programs or either be run on basic pc 32bit processor? Thanks, Liam

[Jon Fritz]

You've posted to a thread in the Dreamweaver forum, most DW users have little experience with Muse.

According to the Adobe rep in this post: adobe muse 32 and 64bit​ after a quick search of the Muse forumHelp with using Adobe Muse CC , it appears more recent versions of Muse (after version 7.4) are 64 bit only.

[Nancy OShea]

Review the minimum system requirements below.

Keep in mind these are minimum recommendations only.  You will need more to support your OS and other software.

• System requirements for Dreamweaver
• Muse system requirements

Nancy

[stitch0852]

I have read all the comments posted here, to date. 

I am not a great code person.  Although, I have written code, back in the 90s using MS Word, to make websites.  It was training for Microsoft certification.  I have many coding books, but have not been able to grasp it.  My talents lie elsewhere.

I have owned several versions of Dreamweaver, but I just need a basic website.  The website will not be for purchasing, it is to show a portfolio of work.  It will list services available and a contact form for questions.  It will include samples of work.

I have a question, if you save your Muse website, then send it to HTML, don't you still have the original Muse files to work with to make changes, assuming you are a subscriber?  I see many saying once you publish you cannot edit.  Why can't you go back to the original files and make your changes (especially if new widgets are available to do what you wish that may not have been previously available)?  Or is this just for when one entity makes it and publishes that another does not have access to those files to change the site?  Just looking for clarification here.  Although, I believe it is the lack of Muse files because they didn't do the original creation.

I just found Muse this past weekend when I restarted my CC subscription after having it off for 10 months because the cost was not worth the minimal usage I was getting from the products.  I had reverted to my Adobe Master Suite CS5.

Something else that sticks out, is the lambasting of Muse because newbies find they can create decent websites and then sell them to others who, as they grow, cannot get more functionality from them.

Consider this, those who purchased those services from a Muse user, most likely was looking for cheap.  They got cheap.  Maybe they were informed, at the time of purchase (maybe) that the site would be limited in growth and functionality.  Maybe the $$$$ dictated their decision.  It is possible a very talented designer made the site to the client's needs and budget.  The client never believing it would be expensive to make changes in the future, should they be warranted.  Maybe....

Just saying that not every situation was a "developer" selling a service because they can, but a client wanting as much as they can get, as quick as they can, for as little as possible.  I see that everyday.  Then when they need the growth, they seem shocked to find out their page is inadequate.

[Jon Fritz]

As far as I know, the discussion about "once it's published you can't edit" is talking specifically about the output itself. You can continue to edit away on the Muse files, and republish as much as you like, for as long as you have Muse, but editing the actual html is not something you can do directly in Muse. So relatively simple things, like changing a color or font need to be done in Muse, re-output to html and re-uploaded.

The html code itself is also generally considered to be a bit more difficult to work with for a third party making changes to an existing site, but it's certainly not impossible by any stretch of the imagination.

The nice thing about the internet is nothing has to be permanent. If a Muse site is too limited (at some point in the future), there are plenty of programs out there that can be used to expand the site's functionality. It won't continue to be a Muse site from that point on, but there aren't many sites out there that are "software -x- sites" and stay that way forever.

[Peter Villevoye]

Dear Stitch, you're exactly the right kind of person, with the right kind of purpose, to put Muse to your use. You described correctly the advantages and limitations of Muse. And rest assured, as Jon already explained, editing your Muse file and publishing it again is a breeze...

[Nancy OShea]

One hiccup scenario is if the site is changed by another editor.  Muse won't detect changes introduced outside of Muse.  Thus republishing the site from Muse would overwrite those changes.

I see this as a potential problem only if the Muse user hands off projects to advanced coders.  Once you do that, you can say bye, bye to Muse.

Nancy

[pziecina]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Nancy+OShea  wrote

I see this as a potential problem only if the Muse user hands off projects to advanced coders.  Once you do that, you can say bye, bye to Muse.

The problem with that is that i do not see any advanced coders not re-writing the entire Muse site, as the code generated by Muse reminds me of the worst days of using AP divs, with badly written javascript dhtml.

[Nancy OShea]

Yes, that may be true.  But I have seen actual use cases where a Muse site was handed off to Dreamweaver for the purposes of adding advanced web features that are only possible with server-side & client side code.   In other words, they didn't re-build the Muse code, they simply amended what was there and then put it on the server. 

Nancy

[Peter Villevoye]

Okay, to clear up some stuff:

• If a Muse website is published on any decently fitted PHP-supporting webserver, then "In Browser Editing" is available to clients and others who know the credentials to log in on the host. Any such online edit will be reported to Muse the next time the native file is opened, to verify, accept, or even roll back any changes made online !
• Muse's code works, but it's not elegant. In stead of using humanly logical naming conventions for IDs and such, Muse simply whips up some numbers. After all, a browser won't care about associating id="u1153-26" to the proper style. But for coders, it's a nightmare to untangle this way of addressing elements. Nevertheless, it's code, just like anyone else's. And a developer will always utter that someone else's code is "terrible"...
• A developer would probably prefer to rebuild the layout of a Muse website in his own framework, than to try to manipulate Muse's output. As said repeatedly: Muse certainly has a roof, and going beyond that roof requires reproducing the whole enchilada.

BTW: There are several initiatives to hook Muse to WordPress ! Check out MuseXPress and Muse to Wordpress.

[Ussnorway]

stitch0852  wrote

Consider this, those who purchased those services from a Muse user, most likely was looking for cheap.  They got cheap.  Maybe they were informed, at the time of purchase (maybe) that the site would be limited in growth and functionality.  Maybe the $$$$ dictated their decision.  It is possible a very talented designer made the site to the client's needs and budget.  The client never believing it would be expensive to make changes in the future, should they be warranted.  Maybe....

A cheapest bidder web designer will sell this client a Template or WordPress plugin that only does the immediate job and locks them into having that system… its just as common with Dreamweaver or Animate CC as it is in Muse

The big mistake new people post to the forums is; can [insert Adobe software like Muse] make “this”? and the answer to that question is 95% yes but the problem is these people should ask; is Muse | Dreamweaver | Edge Animate or Animate CC the best tool to make “This”?

In browser editing is a stop gap solution for people that need to collaborate between different designers and (like all compromise options) is unpopular with almost everyone. Imo if you find yourself using it more than once in a blue moon then you have missed the point of Muse.

Adobe made changes to the ibe-ui last year in order to make the system simple for non-coders and I had two big arguments because I refuse to use it… if you have a scenario where two or more Muse users (say one in the US and one in Australia) need to edit the same site then ime you are best to save the .muse file and cc library on Adobe cloud and ‘collaborate’

[Peter Villevoye]

In browser editing is a stop gap solution for people that need to collaborate between different designers...

Well of course ! That's not what IBE is intended for. Just like Acrobat is not the best solution for editing a brochure. But in many scenarios in which the client just needs to edit some texts, swap an image, and create a new or different link, it saves their day and a dollar.

[stitch0852]

I agree with what you say, but many look at the dollar more than the future. It is true the "designer" may not have made all their choices clear, but far too many today want cheap and do not listen to "growth" or other terms that may cost more, in the long run.

I do not sell templates, websites, etc. I do work in brick and mortar retail and see daily (auto parts) where a customer wants cheap and does not care the warranty....until it breaks.

Sent from my iPhone

[mark34872689u1z4]

Muse and Dreamweaver serve different purposes in web design. Muse is for code-free website creation, while Dreamweaver is a more advanced tool that allows both visual design and manual coding. Muse is simpler but limited, whereas Dreamweaver offers greater flexibility for professionals who prefer coding or intricate design. Adobe has officially discontinued Muse, so for the latest features and support, Dreamweaver might be a more future-proof choice.

[L e n a]

Dreamweaver might be a more future-proof choice.

By @mark34872689u1z4

Please note that DW is no longer maintained, but only supported in its OS compatibility.

By the way, this thread was launched almost 12 years ago!!!!