124
Replies
We're splitting hairs here and kind of micro-analyzing, no? This is a Dreamweaver forum. Why do I keep hearing myself explaining that?
This is how threads that become good debates get thrown off the tracks and I'm going to try really hard not to get salty 
First some backstory:
We actually have colleges where instructors have purchased class licenses enabling them to install extensions on their student machines. We also donate products to students and teachers (as well as non-profits).
Dreamweaver, despite all that has been taken out, still has many features that your attitude would construe as wrong, based on your previous comments. Insert > Image. Shouldn't a student be forced to write the img tag manually?
You're basing your entire knockdown of extensions on the basis of a small sample of Dreamweaver users: Web Design Students. I wholeheartedly agree with you that a student should never learn to make a web page using Bootstrap or our page building extensions. When that student successfully masters the concepts of coding and graduates, he should, however, be free to select tools that augment his skills or that save time by automating things he is capable of doing manually.
Not valid. The debate moderator throws out your response. Let's start again, please
Reply again.
If someone is learning to code, in order to find/increase their employment chances, with a future unknown employer. There is no guarantee that the future employer will even have Dw for them to use.
The only guarantee is that a code editor will be available.
Your reply edited 
If someone is learning to code, in order to find/increase their employment chances, with a future unknown employer. There is no guarantee that the future employer will even have Dw for them to use.
The only guarantee is that a code editor will be available.
I'm not disputing that. We've created a tangent that goes beyond the scope of a Dreamweaver forum and into the realm of something bigger. So, should the illuminati of this forum simply proclaim "Thou shalt not use Dreamweaver except if you promise to code everything manually?"
I'm speaking to Dreamweaver users and I know who they are. In fact, they call us every single day - so I actually do speak to them. It's not theoretical to me.
You do realize that many web designers work from home, either part of the time, or all of the time. And because of that, they actually own and use their own computers? And that whether or not their employers have Dreamweaver, they are free to install and use their own tools? And that all that matters is the code that shows up in their final work?
In terms of being absolute, this is a completely unnecessary and pretty-much indefensible scenario we have embarked upon. For me, though, I am simply following your lead .
The sky is not falling. We will probably not be struck by a meteor tomorrow afternoon, and a lot of web designers love tools.
pziecina wrote
osgood_ wrote
Bloated html that's bad! Bootstrap is knee deep in uneccesary <divs> and css classes. The extra weight carried by the attached css files isnt nice either but I can at least 'ignore' that as its tucked away in the background, much as I do with the bloated jquery library. I just hate stuff 'in my face' so to speak.
What amazes me is that Ben says he is in agreement with Jon Fritz, (calling a truce) then posts the first personal remarks in this entire discussion.
To be fair Paula I dont think it was too much of a 'personal' attack, Ben is just saying how it is. We do, or I do particularly , diss Bootstrap when I get the opportunity but forgood enough reasons, I think. Its just plain ugly!
Jon F doesnt use Bootstrap either to my knowledege.
Im also not sure what the connection between using Bootstrap and Dreamweaver is <confused>. Bootstrap is Bootstrap, I don't need to use Dreamweaver to make an assessment of Bootstrap
pziecina wrote
osgood_ wrote
To be fair Paula I dont think it was too much of a 'personal' attack, ...
It wasn't, but it annoys me when he misrepresents the facts.
I have always said Dw required some form of rwd framework, and that Dw had no choice but to include bootstrap. That does not meen I have to agree to its use, over that of a self coded solution.
I'm not sure Dreamweaver requires a framework. My twelve year-old neighbor, who is fascinated with web design, and who I have tutored, can lay out a responsive CSS page in no time. I've always maintained that Dreamweaver should contain a basic page layout tool... a real tool. If they had one today, and say it was Flexbox based, they could add a second tool to Dreamweaver 2021 based on CSS Grid. Gosh, it would be so easy. Um, a twelve year old could do it 
The means to deliver page layout templates (starter pages) could then be made easier, enabling users to share or sell designs. But that kind of sounds too much like a community. Darn.
Enabling Bootstrap by evangelizing it on the forum is tantamount to enabling Dreamweaver to continue on a path of mediocrity.
one is enticed to use a built-in framework called Bootstrap
Exactly!
When helping a peer with a problem, there is a possibility that it can very easily be solved by using Bootstrap.
Whose peer? And in my humble opinion, based on whatever experience I have with code, I would not agree that anything can be easily solved with Bootstrap. You speak as if there is a Bootstrap page layout interface in Dreamweaver. There is not. Most of what forum users are pushed to do (the same people who've been enticed already) involves writing markup or writing CSS.
And this is where I become personal. pziecina, ALsp and osgood_, none of you use the latest version of Dreamweaver in a production environment, yet you have the loudest voices regarding the use of Bootstrap using a cliche phrase, 'it is bloated'.
Bootstrap is bloated. We have Dreamweaver 19 installed. We use it for testing. If it were worthy of replacing CS6 as our production environment, it would become our go-to. But it's not. And there is nothing wrong with that. The heading top this page doe not read "Dreamweaver 19 Forum". My love for Dreamweaver is a tough love. Not an enabling one. I want to see it fixed and I want to see it innovate.
The irony is that the extra KB's that the framework carries in it's 'bloated' version is no more than adding a small image. Yet none of you place the same emphasis on images or have explored HTTP/2 or nginx, all of which have a far greater effect than a little 'bloated' framework.
With all due respect, that is baloney. First of all, the CSS and script required can run up close to, or slightly over 1MB. Secondly, no matter what kind of compression or delivery system is used (and this is outside the scope of Dreamweaver), the many thousands of lines still need to be read and processed. When I call Bootstrap bloated, however, it is not so much because of its file size (which is still humongous) but because of the number of lines a user must pour over to understand it.
And, I don't know what kind of images you make, but if you use small images that are several hundred K, you've got a lot to learn abut optimization. I'm assuming your statement was confused.
Ben, you can win this debate politically, but never in real life. Sorry 
Grand total 285 KB This would be added if the full bundle is included and assumes that without Bootstrap, no CSS or JS would be required. Where is the slightly over 1MB?
We're debating a war and you're worried about what color shoes the generals are wearing . The grand total, by the way, of files added to my Dreamweaver site, when using Bootstrap to create a page is 404KB. Many of our customers, however, show us pages they are trying to convert to a sensible model and those pages have a combination of multiple scripts and additional CSS required by various plugins or added by Dreamweaver that can make that total considerably higher. But let's not use a minor discrepancy to deflect from the main crux of the discussion, which is what it seems as if you are doing
I'm really not able to follow the point in your closing paragraph. Sorry, but this discussion is not about me finding more business. It's about things that Dreamweaver could do for improvement and how these very discussions seem to devolve into unreasonable tirades or unsubstantiated points that make what could be productive discussions into dead ends that are locked before concluding.
Not sure where the war thingy came from, this is what my file manager reports:
Looks like I cannot add up any more, the grand total is 282 KB and not 285 KB. My apologies for that, I should have used a calculator to start off with.
Don't worry too much about missing the point of the last paragraph, it will dawn on you soon enough, hopefully before it is too late.
AdChoices