Adobe is the worst thing to ever happen to Dreamweaver

[wwwebconcepts]

When I began using Dreamweaver it was called UltraDev. I had previously installed Drumbeat trial but only looked around and did not like it. It was a kind of code generator with had no code view and no way to know what you had built until you completed the project and generated the site, From this inferior product came Macromedia's UltraDev which became one of the best IDEs on the market. Then Adobe bought it because their IDE effort was a floundering train wreck. I remember having a sinking feeling about Dreamweaver's future and the thought: "I'm going to have to learn Visual Studio." At the time I was actively creating and selling extensions for the Dreamweaver MX ASP.NET implementation and was heavily invested in the Dreamweaver ecosystem.

My bad feeling about the future of Dreamweaver as an Adobe product has born bitter fruit. The last version of Dreamweaver I will ever purchase was CC 2014. And I regretted it almost immediately. And the CC SAAS is a supreme rip-off. As a Microsoft Partner and Action Pack subscriber, I get the most recent versions of Visual Studio, Windows, Windows Servers, Office, MS SQL Server, and a host of other products to run my on premise operations with for $475.00 a year.

Adobe is the worst thing to ever happen to Dreamweaver. it is now no more powerful an IDE than front page was 20 years ago. In fact front Page was better as it DID have data tools and support server side language in it's native install. At this point you're as well off using any number of free IDEs from VS Express to Webmatrix to Netbeans to Eclipse to Notepad++.. Adobe's Dreamweaver is on overpriced shadow of itself. I miss Macromedia.

[pziecina]

I was not going to bother with replying to this, but then I thought why not.

It was not Adobe that ruined Dw, but some of its users. Dw tried to do everything and has ended up doing nothing, if you read many of the posts complaining about Dw 50% of them are email newsletter complaints, 30% are lack of knowledge about how the internet works, and only the remaining 20% are actually interesting ang genuine questions, but often complaints about Dw.

Dw was never and never will be an ide, it never had and never will have many of the features required for front or back end development. Even your complaint about .net is not valid, as it was Microsofts inability to supply the updated code for inclussion in Dw that forced Dw to drop support, as it was decided that no support was better than outdated support.

I will agree that Dw is not as good as it use to be, but that it because many users want point and click, or 'quick fix' web sites. It may be trying to catch up, but until those who think web development should only be done how they think, (only use frameworks and pre/post-processors) are no longer the ones making the decisions it will remain stuck in the, 'only for none coder' category. It is a program that could be resonable, (never good) but not until its users and decision makers learn how to code to modern standards...

It's not going to happen.

Muse, will take over at some point, and Adobe is right to concentrate its efforts on that program. Why would anyone use Dw if all it can do is copy Muse?

[wwwebconcepts]

The term "hard core coder" tends to leave out many who don't fit easily into that or the designer category. I do not write code for the main part of my living, but I do rely on code I've written, e.g. my business websites, for it. So in that interpretation I am not a hard core coder. However, many would still say I'm a hard core coder given my knowledge and the way I work. The first languages I learned were Turbo Pascal and Basic, no Visual Basic yet. So I have been doing it a long time albeit not full time. I work mostly or almost exclusively in code view. I use the server behaviors and extensions to speed development, not because I cannot write the code myself. Typically, I customize server behavior code extensively, but being able to quickly create the basic code I need then customize really works for me. 

So I may not be a hard core coder, but I can code hardcore. And Dreamweaver has left consideration for my workflow out of their equation.

[pziecina]

wwwebconcepts  wrote

So I may not be a hard core coder, but I can code hardcore. And Dreamweaver has left consideration for my workflow out of their equation.

You, me and many others.

It would be helpful to know just who and what proficiency in coding Dw is now targeting. But I suspect that is something no-one knows. Dw does not aim at the 'hard-core' coder, that we can be certain as it does not include the essential tools such as a de-bugger, (front or back-end).

Maybe if you listed your requirement, (to modern standards) then more users could say yes or no, depending on what they agree and disagree with. There is no point in saying you want updated server behaviours that use MySQLi, when many users use PDO.

[Impressive_play01AC]

wwwebconcepts  ha scritto

Adobe is the worst thing to ever happen to Dreamweaver. it is now no more powerful an IDE than front page was 20 years ago.

+1

[osgood_]

wwwebconcepts  wrote

At this point you're as well off using any number of free IDEs from VS Express to Webmatrix to Netbeans to Eclipse to Notepad++.. Adobe's Dreamweaver is on overpriced shadow of itself. I miss Macromedia.

Or even use a cheaper one. I use Web Storm, it costs me about £70 a year for the first year of use and is far advanced of where Dreamweaver is right now, has nice mysql database management integration so you dont even have to leave the coding environment. Is second to none at alerting you to code errors which will improve your coding skills within a few days of using it, brilliant find and replace features and refactoring coding features. The price drops if I continue to use it for the second and 3 years and then stabilises at the 3rd year price.

I used Dreamweaver for more years than I care to remember but I think I outgrew it as it kind of either paddled in the water or even went backwards.

Ultimateley Dreamweaver in my opinion is for non-coders given its high dependency on 3rd party extensions and in that respect its still  a good product but has you by the short and curlies because of the fact you can't code Adobe can charge what it likes, take it or leave it. There is no other editor out there which can compete with  its visual design representation, even I admit that can be useful, not for doing any deisgn or construction work, but hell it makes it lightening fast when trying to get around the code of your page as its much easier to see where elements are visually, click into them and switch to code view and youre at the point you need to be, meanwhile in other IDE's youre left either traversing the dom structure or scrolling mentally up and down the code to find where you need to be. To make things worse all color coding in every single IDE that I have tried is basically useless as the code ends up all looking the same. The <script></script> tags look the same as The <form></form> tags and the sql queries look the same as ever thing else, etc etc you get the picture. DW did have an excellent color coding enviromment up until CC2017, now its much the same as any other IDE, useless on that front. It's essential to fast coding that you can designate specific colors to specifc tags, can't be done beyond a certain point.

I havent ruled out a return to DW simply for the visual environment angle. If it wasnt for that it would be dead in the water by now. Even though not having that visual environment availble in the current IDE Im using the other nice features at the moment keep me away from coming back to DW. It's trying to integrate things like git into it now which for the people its aimed at is a waste of time. It should be concentrating on getting the basics right first, build a solid platform again, then move on . At the moment its all over the shop in my opinion.

[pziecina]

osgood_  wrote

It's trying to integrate things like git into it now which for the people its aimed at is a waste of time. It should be concentrating on getting the basics right first, build a solid platform again, then move on . At the moment its all over the shop in my opinion.

I've nothing against the git integration, but including it when so many badly implemented features still require fixing, is like fitting a new engine to a scrap car, (car = auto, for those who do not know).

Dw is end of life, time to either retire it or start again with a new product.

[osgood_]

pziecina  wrote

osgood_   wrote

It's trying to integrate things like git into it now which for the people its aimed at is a waste of time. It should be concentrating on getting the basics right first, build a solid platform again, then move on . At the moment its all over the shop in my opinion.

I've nothing against the git integration, but including it when so many badly implemented features still require fixing, is like fitting a new engine to a scrap car, (car = auto, for those who do not know).

Meanwhile on another planet far far away.....................life gets better.

Theres a serious lack of coding questions any longer in this forum, is that telling? it all seems to be Find and Replace dont work, Color Coding don't work, This is worst version ever released, where can I find the Server Behaviours and the packet of chocolate burbons which used to come with DW.

[Test Screen Name]

CC is not SaaS. Many people think it is: that's Adobe's fault for using "Cloud" in the name because it seemed hip and trendy. Has put so many potential customers off.

[haleyt88803336]

I think the first thing that needs to be understood is the space in which Dreamweaver was meant to be in, the mid level designer/developer. It was never a tool that hard core professional developers would use nor should it have been. With that being said I agree that Dreamweaver has gone backwards in quality, features and functions, a space that they once owned. To me at least it seems as the product managers for dreamweaver are just designers at heart. They appear to not really understand what the product needs really are,  and only listen in terms of features and functionality when there is an uproar (Date Binding. Server Behaviors etc) .

I understand that I am not a professional coder per say but with the proper tools that older versions of Dreamweaver had I could reduce development cost of sites by handling basic list and form needs in php and pull in the professional coder when required for more complicated coding.

Heres what I want Adobe to do - LISTEN to those that use it and have for years, stop trying to TELL us what we need. Yes design is important and responsiveness is where its at in terms of design. But a pretty layout means nothing if the backside is not truly functional.

I want to be able to create a 25 field form that can insert, update and delete in less than 10 minutes, I want to create  lists that are sortable, and searchable that total columns in the same amount of time like I was able to do before. I go back to DW 8 now still  because it can do all that, WHY ? Because it saves me time. I can make it look pretty afterwards.

Before everyone jumps down my back here keep in mind while using DW 8 I was able to create a site that now produces over a million in sales annually. And I am NOT a coder. I do consider myself smart enough to develop the right workflow and understand what coding I can and can not do. My point is DW was an important tool in this, but right now it is an encumberance.

So Adobe please start to LISTEN again.

[pziecina]

Adobe is not listening, and will not listen.

Yes, they say they are listening, but only when we say what they want to hear. No one from the Dw product team that is a product manager or above, has replied to any discussion both here, or in the open pre-release.

[Nancy OShea]

haleyt88803336  wrote

I want to be able to create a 25 field form that can insert, update and delete in less than 10 minutes, I want to create  lists that are sortable, and searchable that total columns in the same amount of time like I was able to do before. I go back to DW 8 now still  because it can do all that, WHY ? Because it saves me time. I can make it look pretty afterwards.

Your points are all well taken.  BUT and this is a really big but, your DW8 generated  PHP & MySQL code is outdated and not secure.  You should not keep using those deprecated server behavior panels to create PHP CRUD page code.   You're not doing yourself or your clients any favors by using outdated code.

The modern replacements are now being made by 3rd party commercial extension developers like Web Assist and DMX Zone.  If you have a desire to keep building dynamic web sites with PHP & MySQL, you need to purchase the newer extensions or learn to code manually.

Using DW8 or any other Creative Suite product to build dynamic code is not really an option anymore.  At least not a safe one.

Nancy

[BenPleysier]

I want to be able to create a 25 field form that can insert, update and delete in less than 10 minutes, I want to create  lists that are sortable, and searchable that total columns in the same amount of time like I was able to do before.

Exactly! I can do that now with

• DMXzone Server Connect and
• DMXzone App Connect

[pziecina]

I think you are miss-understanding what users are complaining about Ben.

The replacements for the old SB's are all extensions that used to part of the Dw package, and as such included in the price. Now anyone who cannot code to a resonable standard must pay for them.

If you look at what Dw now offers users, it is all free open source items, that admitedly are packed in a nice UI, but are nothing exclusive to just Dw users. I will agree that for the none coder having them packaged all in one program,  must be a plus, but not at the current cost of a stand alone Dw subscription, and certainly not when one starts to add the cost of extensions to add back features that were part of Dw in the past.

For the professional coder Dw is only a program of curiosity, but for the avarage Dw user it is becomming more limited with each version, and for those users interested in using modern html, css and javascript to improve their knowledge and work prospects, it does not include anything required. Even features like css designer i think will be dropped in the future, as they have not kept up with requirements.

No program will ever please everyone, but Dw now pleases almost no one.

Many say that the Dw team is listening, but it looks like they are simply listening to music, not users, or at least not users who question if what is and has happened to Dw. is any good for the modern web.

[BenPleysier]

[pziecina]

And to actually create the code, are those extensions free also?

Can they do everything the old SB's did for free?

[BenPleysier]

For Server Connect see https://www.dmxzone.com/go/23300/introducing-dmxzone-server-connect-next-generation-server-behaviors....

Unfortunately, this is an old version where HTML5 Data Bindings are mentioned. The Bindings panel has been superseded by the much better DMXzone App Connect Panel

For App Connect see https://www.dmxzone.com/go/32759/dmxzone-app-connect-basics

Yes it does that and more

Why not give it a try?

Edit:

Forgot to say that it uses your favourite PDO

[pziecina]

The trouble is, it only does what my pdo extension does, but it is nice to see that at least users are not paying for the basics.

Does not show stored procedures though, mine did, (+1 for me ).

[BenPleysier]

+10

[wwwebconcepts]

No, You need to spend another 1k to do what Dw did out of the box before Adobe. Learn Visual Studio.

[pziecina]

wwwebconcepts  wrote

No, You need to spend another 1k to do what Dw did out of the box before Adobe. Learn Visual Studio.

?

I use visual Studio Pro, and there are no database extensions that create the code for you. Plus why use Dw when you are using VS?

[wwwebconcepts]

I still have classic asp sites to maintain. And I still prefer to work with Classic ASP in Dreamweaver. I like the Dreamweaver UI far better than VS. I use VS because I have to since Adobe ruined Dw.

[pziecina]

wwwebconcepts  wrote

I still have classic asp sites to maintain. And I still prefer to work with Classic ASP in Dreamweaver. I like the Dreamweaver UI far better than VS. I use VS because I have to since Adobe ruined Dw.

No one is going to support that, unless they use classic asp, and I would object to anyone asking the team to waste development time on something that is being used less and less.

[pziecina]

pziecina  wrote

wwwebconcepts   wrote

I still have classic asp sites to maintain. And I still prefer to work with Classic ASP in Dreamweaver. I like the Dreamweaver UI far better than VS. I use VS because I have to since Adobe ruined Dw.

No one is going to support that, unless they use classic asp, and I would object to anyone asking the team to waste development time on something that is being used less and less.

Just a thought, but if you suggest it, and I object to it, it is almost certainly going to be implemented by the Dw team. As they never do what I want, and often the exact opposite  .

[wwwebconcepts]

And you miss the point completely. Tell me are you being intentionally obtuse or is this a normal state of being?

1) According to Google there are still roughly 1 billion pages using the asp extension. This of course does not include those hiding their asp extension using mod rewrite, Isapi rewrite, or the dreadful server.transfer hack. In fact if you subtract all the crappy WordPress -- the 21st century's Geo City Home Pages atrocity -- from php, it's no more prevalent. And my friend George Petrov of DynamicZones just introduced several new Classic ASP extensions and it working on more. They are very excited about a Classic ASP renaissance fueled JavaScript developers who want to run it server side which only Classic ASP can do. The only place Classic ASP is dead in the minds of coders who use php because .NET's too hard.

2) When Oracle's new database engine requires some changes to the Dreamweaver Server Behaviors, they deprecate the lot rather than updating? They may as well have taken out an ad giving developers the finger.

Stop calling Dw CC an IDE because it's not. Adobe deprecated that feature.

Oh, and php is just another scripting language. It is no way superior to Classic ASP. It just has more features dumbed down so developers don't have to write as much code. OOP is superior.