Adobe Muse EOL announcement - Alternatives to Adobe Muse?

[Preran]

Hi all,

For those of you that haven't received the email around the Adobe Muse EOL, see the FAQ Product Announcement that tries to answer some the common questions around the announcement including the reasons behind the decision.

Before we proceed with discussing alternatives, the Muse application will continue to open on your computer. You will be able to continue to edit existing or create new websites with the application. Adobe Muse will continue to be supported until May 20, 2019 and will deliver compatibility updates with the Mac and Windows OS or fix any bugs that might crop up when publishing Muse sites to the web. However, it is quite possible that web standards and browsers will continue to change after Adobe stops support for the application.

While there is no 1:1 replacement for Adobe Muse at this stage, the FAQ link above provides some alternatives. Also, Adobe is making our own investment in DIY website creation and welcomes all Muse customers to join our upcoming pre-release program for a new format that will be introduced this year as part of Adobe Spark. Build a beautiful website—in minutes | Adobe Spark

That being said, I would like to open up this discussion for discussing other solutions and migration paths. It would be ideal if we could focus our efforts on the topic at hand.

Thanks,

Preran

[mik05]

Hi Preran & designers out there. I have been reading everyones comments and had added a few of my own. However, now that the shock is over I am trying to get organized with my clients to make the transition from BC & Muse. Even though I just launched a site on BC right before this all came out. So here are my new questions:

Can you point me in a direction of a hosting platforms that allows simillar BC options like adding a serachbox to webiste, blog capibility and Browser Editing for my clients?

Any comments in regard to this would be much apprecite.

Thanks!

[work_at_it]

Hi mik05,
I said I was leaving this discussion, but still getting notifications and so saw your comment, and thought I would share some thoughts since you sound like one of the smaller number of people with a sizable investment in Muse sites all connected to BC.... ie. in the same boat as me.
I took the plunge into Webflow and so far not regretting it.
Haven't explored all the options yet, but have seen the features you mention: searchbox, blog, and real browser editing for clients.
I had one client with a simple site and I rebuilt it quickly a couple of days ago. First thing I've done in Weblow. I think that in the end Weblow is going to be faster than Muse. Haven't even had time to repoint the domain and email, so just exported the code in Webflow and ftp-ed onto the existing hosting in BC.... and it's working just fine!
Really looking forward to their shopping cart which is in beta. Looking way less templatey than any shopping cart I've seen out there, like Shopify.... and totally integrated. As you know, Muse to BC integration was simply never developed out far enough.
Also looking forward to getting customers to pay for their own hosting and make a small margin on that. I was thinking this passive income might have been lost for me with the demise of BC.
I'm over the fear of getting locked into another system where the platform might cease to exist. Don't really have a choice anyway unless you want to learn code and build slow.
Something that has not been mentioned in this thread---at least that I've seen---is that with Webflow and some of these other offerings at least the company is focused on the market. That picture Peter Villonoye posted a while back, with a guy on the MAX stage standing in front of cloud this and cloud that, was powerful. It's like Adobe wants to be a player in corporate services like IBM and the like. They really think Wix and Weebly will replace all us small suppliers. I think they are wrong. If it were true, all clients would be designing their own brochures and sending Microsoft Word documents to the printer. ORRRR.... Adobe doesn't think that and wanted to keep us all building websites, but just programmed themselves into a corner with Muse and BC and so are cutting their losses, for now.
Could be wrong, but I don't see Webflow going anywhere soon. They have some momentum on their side, and quite a decent feature set already. Even little stuff, like adding a webclip, not just a favicon... Muse didn't have that.
Finally, some people have complained about it all being through a browser and subscription based. Yes, I wish it wasn't subscription based, but oh well. The browser thing though.... that rocks. Not eating up my RAM for one thing. And secondly, when in a pinch, I won't have to trek into the office to make a site change for a client. It also automatically keeps copies of your stie project going back in time, so you can revert. Internet goes down? I might as well go home anyway LOL.
Peace

Nick

[juchis2009]

I‘m throwing this question out there, i don’t code nor develop etc so it might be a dumb question but valid I think. Many of the 3rd party widget developers that have created incredible widgets that add functions to muse, could they not develop widgets that would address future bugs muse might develop and adobe will no longer address and browser apecific iodtste widgets that would keep muse sites up to date with future browser updates. Is any of this possible?

[HawkeEye]

I don't think the question is out of the park, but it is difficult.  If one of the existing platforms (webflow, wordpress, etc) would take up the challenge it might go easier because they have an existing customer base and some cashflow.  But widget makers probably don't have deep enough pockets to deal with the core product.

A twist on that same thought would be a group coming together with Adobe and making Muse open source with others contributing function and a central governance to control releases.  It is keeping the core functionality going that is key in my opinion.  From a reputational standpoint this would help Adobe a lot, but maybe they have already explored it.

One thing for sure is that in the next two years Muse and associated costs are a complete writeoff for Adobe, so there should be incentive to get it off the books.

But I like your thinking

[W_J_T]

HawkeEye  wrote

a group coming together with Adobe and making Muse open source with others contributing function and a central governance to control releases.

Given that the Muse code base interacts with other Adobe software and services, there is little too no chance it would ever become open source for proprietary reasons alone. Plus historically various other Adobe EOL applications were pushed by customers to be open sourced and it yielded nothing, for instance Freehand users wanted it to be open sourced.

Adobe has made the decision and is now moving in new directions. So they will not want to fragment users moving towards these new eventual offerings or services. This is probably also the true reason for the date extension, to keep more users tethered to Adobe for when the new offering is ready for consumption (Spark, or whatever that new offering may be). Hoping Muse will become open source and continue is far from realistic, Adobe is moving forward towards other approaches.

[Cy233]

To produce great widgets, you need Muse to continually develop the API's (the part of Muse the widgets work with). If API development stops, then what the widgets can do is very limited. It's like producing great computer components but nobody's upgrading the dial-up internet service or sloppy networks.

The fact is, Muse was built around a free-form concept (absolute positioning) whereas everyone else built web tools around the box/grid model that browsers use. That's why it was fun to design with and why the code was so awful. The more development that took place in the web world, the more complex Muse's code got and it seems Adobe could see that it would just get worse as the web world changed.

It's a pity someone couldn't work out how to process absolute positioning into semantic HTML and CSS. If anyone could do that, then they'd have the best of both worlds: a free-form design tool and code that would work on all browsers and devices for years to come.

[Duncan Wilcox]

Cy233  wrote

It's a pity someone couldn't work out how to process absolute positioning into semantic HTML and CSS. If anyone could do that, then they'd have the best of both worlds: a free-form design tool and code that would work on all browsers and devices for years to come.

That is in fact what we do in Sparkle (I'm one of the developers).

However I don't think absolute positioning is necessarily non-semantic, or the reason it is brushed off by coders. Coders think of the web as an entirely code-based workflow, and absolutely positioned content is harder to modify in code. If you fill the content of a page from a database it makes sense to have other kinds of layout. In others cases it isn't necessary, say when you visually design web content.

"semantic" is also a bit of a capricious term. It's really only job security for coders because its like saying "only someone who's in the know can produce something acceptable to browsers" (clearly BS) or "it's not future proof unless it's semantic" (also BS because every single redesign I've seen is a complete reconstruction of everything).

Ultimately hand coding gives you the most flexibility but, unlike 1997, it needs to be your full time job. You can not be coding a browser compatible, high performance, optimized, frequently updated site if you have a real job, in your spare time.

Which brings us back to visual tools like Sparkle.

By the way someone contests that other tools are less visual than Muse or Sparkle. There's a simple test for that. Can you draw a box anywhere on the page? That's the measure of a truly visual website builder.

Duncan

[BenPleysier]

By the way someone contests that other tools are less visual than Muse or Sparkle. There's a simple test for that. Can you draw a box anywhere on the page? That's the measure of a truly visual website builder.

What happens to that box when the browser has run out of real estate as in the case of hand held devices?

What I am trying to say is that a web page must be fluid in contrast to fixed dimensioned objects.

[Duncan Wilcox]

BenPleysier  wrote

By the way someone contests that other tools are less visual than Muse or Sparkle. There's a simple test for that. Can you draw a box anywhere on the page? That's the measure of a truly visual website builder.

What happens to that box when the browser has run out of real estate as in the case of hand held devices?

What I am trying to say is that a web page must be fluid in contrast to fixed dimensioned objects.

There's nothing magic about that, or about the word "fluid". When you hand code a site you recognize that the layout won't fit or work on the page anymore, or in other words the layout breaks, and add a so called "breakpoint", where you ultimately create a different layout for mobile.

There are many pre-build frameworks and templates that have the rules in place to do that for you, makes your life simpler while taking away a bit of creative freedom. An acceptable tradeoff as long as you know that's what's going on (in all bootstrap-based builders for example).

In the current version of Sparkle you do the equivalent of adding a breakpoint, so you add a device layout and visually adapt the layout.

Duncan

[W_J_T]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Duncan+Wilcox  wrote

That is in fact what we do in Sparkle (I'm one of the developers).

Hi Duncan,

Now that you came back can you answer these questions? Again posted below:

W_J_T  wrote

As the developer of Sparkle I would still really like to hear your response on this, you never responded.

Re: Adobe Muse EOL announcement - Alternatives to Adobe Muse?

As well as these aspects:

• How do you plan to handle the convergence to Sparkle of Muse sites that use Business Catalyst, CMS and many Widgets for features?
• Do you plan to develop various popular Widget features that Muse users commonly use and desire directly in your app, or do you have an API entry point for 3rd party developers to add these features from existing Muse Widgets into Sparkle?
• Does Sparkle support easy implementation of CMS and backend features like Muse and Business Catalyst, what are the options or your plans there?
• How will all the new converts to Sparkle receive help and assistance, is there a user to user Forum? If not will all questions and answers be just direct email contact with users and yourself? If so how will this information be shared to help other users?

You've stated you feel Sparkle is a good solution and alternative. So speaking regarding uncertainty and doubt please clear up those aspects with any misconceptions Muse users may have in moving to your product in regards those areas. I think its a really great opportunity here to speak directly with the developer of an app and find out how it is you plan to handle these facets and transition to your product for Muse users. It should be really beneficial for them to hear these things directly from you and help them with their decisions greatly.

Sparkle is nice for code-less free form visual design, but what about CMS features, or implementing all the missing features that people used Muse widgets for, users getting support via a Sparkle based user forum, or easier responsive design than Sparkle currently offers, etc., Again I think it would be really beneficial for people to hear from you, how past the visual aspects of your app those things will be addressed by the Sparkle team for Muse users going forward.

Thanks

[Illostraight]

One thing I'll say about Sparkle, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles, CMS, that Muse had, but it has some easier methods than some of the Muse widgets and they have import for muse pages, which isn't perfect, but ez to update. It wouldn't be worth it if I had a lot of sites and clients or if it was my career, but for a few sites, it's a wysiwyg relief. At least for me.

[Duncan Wilcox]

I personally respond to all support email, as several people from this forum can attest, and am happy to help in the transition or advise how to get comparable features, if possible.

Sparkle isn't full replacement for Muse's featureset. I don't think I've over represented what Sparkle can do, and never claimed it has all the features Muse had. We're small and nimble, and not arbitrarily retiring functional products. We do have a roadmap for adding features, but do not discuss it publicly.

[W_J_T]

W_J_T  wrote

W_J_T   wrote

As the developer of Sparkle I would still really like to hear your response on this, you never responded.

Re: Adobe Muse EOL announcement - Alternatives to Adobe Muse?

As well as these aspects:

• How do you plan to handle the convergence to Sparkle of Muse sites that use Business Catalyst, CMS and many Widgets for features?
• Do you plan to develop various popular Widget features that Muse users commonly use and desire directly in your app, or do you have an API entry point for 3rd party developers to add these features from existing Muse Widgets into Sparkle?
• Does Sparkle support easy implementation of CMS and backend features like Muse and Business Catalyst, what are the options or your plans there?
• How will all the new converts to Sparkle receive help and assistance, is there a user to user Forum? If not will all questions and answers be just direct email contact with users and yourself? If so how will this information be shared to help other users?

You've stated you feel Sparkle is a good solution and alternative. So speaking regarding uncertainty and doubt please clear up those aspects with any misconceptions Muse users may have in moving to your product in regards those areas. I think its a really great opportunity here to speak directly with the developer of an app and find out how it is you plan to handle these facets and transition to your product for Muse users. It should be really beneficial for them to hear these things directly from you and help them with their decisions greatly.

Sparkle is nice for code-less free form visual design, but what about CMS features, or implementing all the missing features that people used Muse widgets for, users getting support via a Sparkle based user forum, or easier responsive design than Sparkle currently offers, etc., Again I think it would be really beneficial for people to hear from you, how past the visual aspects of your app those things will be addressed by the Sparkle team for Muse users going forward.

Thanks for the response Duncan.

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Duncan+Wilcox  wrote

• Sparkle isn't full replacement for Muse's featureset. ( ... ) never claimed it has all the features Muse had.
• I personally respond to all support email ( ... ) happy to help in the transition or advise how to get comparable features, if possible.

Sounds like a potentially daunting task via email, but fair enough then.

It's clear you have a potentially viable visual based product (for Mac users of course) if that is the top feature people are seeking in an alternative. I think it would benefit Muse users if it had an improved responsive workflow, CMS support, and possibly various added features for whatever widely used Widgets that come into play for most Muse users (or users in general). However with all the code-less visual based tools that can easily become and endless road of requested features and wants by users.

Otherwise the visual freeform design aspect of SparkleApp is seemingly the highest desired feature for most users looking for Muse replacements, or the top complaint regarding other alternatives they may look at or struggle with.

I am not sure they should choose to so easily forgo other aspects they may require for this one singular feature (freeform), as I think most peoples Muse designs can however be replicated without complete freeform ability with a slight mindset adjustment regarding workflow in other visual tools. But that importance is up to each user to decide upon moving forward, among many other criteria they may decide upon as being important when looking for alternatives. Yours certainly being one of those for some users.

[Duncan Wilcox]

W_J_T  wrote

Sounds like a potentially daunting task via email, but fair enough then.

I appreciate the concern, we are managing, and additionally we're very much in touch with our customer needs. We feel the pain, where there are pain points.

It's clear you have a potentially viable visual based product (for Mac users of course) if that is the top feature people are seeking in an alternative. I think it would benefit Muse users if it had an improved responsive workflow, CMS support, and possibly various added features for whatever widely used Widgets that come into play for most Muse users (or users in general). However with all the code-less visual based tools that can easily become and endless road of requested features and wants by users.

I think you would be mistaken to think we are oblivious to what people want. I also think you give to much credit to the availability of widgets. One one hand they create an asymmetric ecosystem, for example $80 one time for Blocs but $300/year for Pulse CMS -- if the app vendor doesn't monetize, what use is the widget in 3 years when the app has to shut down?

Again I appreciate your concern about the volume of requests we get. I do not believe widgets fix that.

Otherwise the visual freeform design aspect of SparkleApp is seemingly the highest desired feature for most users looking for Muse replacements, or the top complaint regarding other alternatives they may look at or struggle with.

"seemingly". Many many, *many* people chose Muse because it freed them from thinking about code. Sparkle is the same.

I am not sure they should choose to so easily forgo other aspects they may require for this one singular feature (freeform), as I think most peoples Muse designs can however be replicated without complete freeform ability with a slight mindset adjustment regarding workflow in other visual tools. But that importance is up to each user to decide upon moving forward, among many other criteria they may decide upon as being important when looking for alternatives. Yours certainly being one of those for some users.

I appreciate your concern, but there's no need to suggest that other people should share your concern. I get your priority.

Sparkle isn't just freeform, it's jargon free. You don't need to know what a class name is, or what a box model is, or how to encode text, or how percentage height is actually a percentage of the horizontal size, or a million other dumb details about this android browser or that hosting platform.

For you maybe that is a singular feature. More power to you.

I tell you the number of people who don't do websites as their main occupation absolutely dwarves people who do it full time.

Sparkle is not for you? Fine. Sparkle is for just about everybody else, just like Muse was.

Duncan

[Studio96]

I’ve reached out on twitter a couple of times and found helpful responses. Sparkle could nearly  be it for me but some of my existing sites rely on  some elements such as an accordion panel for content so I can’t match like for like what I have already delivered. Other than that it has been the easiest software to replicate sites from scratch or import HTML and achieves free form positioning which I cannot get to grips with using blocs or pinegrow via a more coded approac.

Part of the issue with product comparison is not merely choosing horses for courses but retrospectively applying that to clients existing sites, which is what is making ‘direct replacement‘ so difficult for some.

[W_J_T]

Studio96  wrote

Part of the issue with product comparison is not merely choosing horses for courses but retrospectively applying that to clients existing sites, which is what is making ‘direct replacement‘ so difficult for some.

Yes, virtually impossible.

With any other tools, there will be missing features, different workflows and thinking required, etc., So this is no easy task for Muse users as there is no - 1:1 - tool out there compared with Muse. It becomes even harder when you factor in Widget features people may have used. Time will tell but Adobe themselves may not be able to fill this void either with their own new ventures (Spark, etc.,) moving forward.

[W_J_T]

It's interesting the tone you always take, even when I compliment Sparkle. 😉

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Duncan+Wilcox  wrote

I appreciate the concern, we are managing, and additionally we're very much in touch with our customer needs. We feel the pain, where there are pain points.

I think Muse users have had enough "pain", maybe you should let them know what "pain points" they might be getting into regarding SparkleApp. 😉

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Duncan+Wilcox  wrote

I think you would be mistaken to think we are oblivious to what people want.

Where did I say or imply that?

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Duncan+Wilcox  wrote

I also think you give to much credit to the availability of widgets.

Given every Muse site uses a Widget or many in most cases, thats probably not statistically accurate on your part regarding their importance to Muse users.

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Duncan+Wilcox  wrote

for example $80 one time for Blocs but $300/year for Pulse CMS

Poor representation as Blocs also offers open source CMS options, does Sparkle offer any CMS options ?

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Duncan+Wilcox  wrote

Again I appreciate your concern about the volume of requests we get. I do not believe widgets fix that.

In the code-less visual environment of Muse, it's users certainly thought Widgets mattered, fixed and offered a lot of features they themselves had no other means of implementing otherwise. So they and their purpose seem to have an importance to Muse users. 😉

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Duncan+Wilcox  wrote

"seemingly". Many many, *many* people chose Muse because it freed them from thinking about code. Sparkle is the same.

Minus - "Many man, many*" features Muse users desire and rely upon. So how do they implement them without code in SparkleApp ? Since its the same.

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Duncan+Wilcox  wrote

Sparkle is not for you? Fine. Sparkle is for just about everybody else, just like Muse was.

This "my ball" "go home" attitude sounds prevalent in your responses. Oh and I wonder how many Muse users were on PC, I guess Sparkle is not for them.

[Duncan Wilcox]

It's interesting the tone you always take, even when I compliment Sparkle. 😉

Ah you got me there. Seriously though, your tone is constantly outlining the flaws of anything that's not Pinegrow or Blocs. I think everybody gets your bias here. Also answering you is increasingly useless, you don't really care about Sparkle, only about shining a bad light on it. I am 47, I have been through flamewars on all mediums, this is going nowhere.

I think Muse users have had enough "pain", maybe you should let them know what "pain points" they might be getting into regarding SparkleApp. 😉

People who pick Sparkle are able to try for an unlimited amount of time (unlike say the 7 days for Blocs) and either love it or hate it. Once they do opt to use Sparkle, sometimes issues do come up. Believe it or not it's generally not the lack of a CMS. Sparkle is a content management system in its own right.

I think you would be mistaken to think we are oblivious to what people want.

Where did I say or imply that?

You wrote "I think it would benefit Muse users if it had an improved responsive workflow, CMS support, and possibly various added features for whatever widely used Widgets that come into play for most Muse users".

With that I read that you think we don't get feature requests that inform us about what our users want, and that includes former Muse users and users who are planning on switching.

Is this back and forth helping anybody? I don't think so.

Duncan Wilcox

I also think you give to much credit to the availability of widgets.

Given every Muse site uses a Widget or many in most cases, thats probably not statistically accurate on your part regarding their importance to Muse users.

That's one way of seeing it. Another is offering an "all in one". Widgets are 1) a cost for users, and 2) a fragile integration point. Our goal is for users to know that when they buy Sparkle, it contains everything the need to build a website. Clearly this is limited to what is available in the app, but it's all pretty plain to see.

for example $80 one time for Blocs but $300/year for Pulse CMS

Poor representation as Blocs also offers open source CMS options, does Sparkle offer any CMS options ?

By definition the existing of a plugin API or third party integrations implies that they'll be paid. This creates a tension between the developer of the main app and the third party ecosystem. It implies competition and in a way limits what the main app will do. It also slows down development as the API needs backwards compatibility, testing, etc. We have many examples of this (rapidweaver, everweb), and aren't currently planning on going down that route.

This was about widget, but you switch the topic to CMS because?

As mentioned above, Sparkle is (very good) static CMS. We do not currently have a solution for high volumes of data entry/database content, or for client access to the published site (and the Muse in-browser editing is a massive hack by the way).

Again I appreciate your concern about the volume of requests we get. I do not believe widgets fix that.

In the code-less visual environment of Muse, it's users certainly thought Widgets mattered, fixed and offered a lot of features they themselves had no other means of implementing otherwise. So they and their purpose seem to have an importance to Muse users. 😉

Muse users want features or widgets?

"seemingly". Many many, *many* people chose Muse because it freed them from thinking about code. Sparkle is the same.

Minus - "Many man, many*" features Muse users desire and rely upon. So how do they implement them without code in SparkleApp ? Since its the same.

Sparkle does allow for HTML embedding, it's just not the focus of the app. Some things will clearly not be possible. We do our best to support our customers (as in providing examples, some embeddable code or tweaking Sparkle itself) when something is possible.

Sparkle is not for you? Fine. Sparkle is for just about everybody else, just like Muse was.

This "my ball" "go home" attitude sounds prevalent in your responses. Oh and I wonder how many Muse users were on PC, I guess Sparkle is not for them.

Sorry that's a bad depiction. Your criticism of Sparkle is extremely vocal and polarized by your use case. I'm pretty happy to direct coders to pinegrow or webflow. Most people are not coders.

Duncan

[W_J_T]

As you stand to benefit directly from your responses as the developer of SparkleApp, I guess I can see why you are so touchy and aggressive in most your posts here.

Given SparkleApp is a closed file format, and has closed user feedback and support. I sincerely hope it works out for those whom choose you and your product. Or those whom dare to speak against the slightest aspect or feature of SparkleApp and get your ire, but I guess that is why support and feedback is not public, you don't seem to take criticism or feedback of your app so well.

[Duncan Wilcox]

As you stand to benefit directly from your responses as the developer of SparkleApp, I guess I can see why you are so touchy and aggressive in most your posts here.

Given SparkleApp is a closed file format, and has closed user feedback and support. I sincerely hope it works out for those whom choose you and your product. Or those whom dare to speak against the slightest aspect or feature of SparkleApp and get your ire, but I guess that is why support and feedback is not public, you don't seem to take criticism or feedback of your app so well.

And here you are again trying to paint me or Sparkle in negative light. Is there a reason you have given up answering to individual points?

My partner and I have poured four years of ourselves into Sparkle, and only want a fair shot. And yet you are not happy until you have buried anything that's not Pinegrow or Blocs.

Here again you are trying to install doubt that Sparkle, or Sparkle's support is any good. I call that FUD.

I'll repeat and confirm that we go out of our way to help customers, or in fact anybody trying Sparkle. Test me!

Duncan

[W_J_T]

Oh Duncan, LOL.

I stand to gain nothing from any post I make here, thus I am not biased in the comments I make. It is of little consequence to me what alternative a person chooses. I am only here sharing my time freely and thoughts to try to get Muse users to think of aspects they may not think of concerning alternatives or replacements in this time or anguish concerning Muse EOL. I have given various reasons to consider and some suggestions, thats all either is, no one is required to adhere to anything I say or agree.

In the end it's their decision, based upon their own needs and criteria. Almost every alternative available offers a trial or a free aspect of an online service. Thus users should try things themselves and come to their own conclusions regardless of anyones statements or opinions here or found elsewhere. It's a personal thing from user to user, not all are the same, or have the same skill-sets or requirements.

As stated there is no 1:1 Muse replacement, so its a struggle for each to fill the void the EOL has presented.

You ask 10 people you get 10 different criteria and 10 different reviews of anything. Replacing Muse is a personal experience to each user, one that none of them wish for or are wanting to do. So mine or yours or anyones comments or opinions should hold only little value in the equation for all these users, its entirely up to them how to move forward, what direction to go and what products and services to use.

No one is forcing anyone here to use product this or that. At least not us that don't have direct connection to products, I obviously can't relate to those here who stand to gain from this Adobe decision.

[Guest]

Do like the built in ftp of Sparkle...

think SEO ...get an expert as you go along developing ...don’t think of SEO as an after thought. I see you just added Google tag manager. That should have been there from the start. Same mistakes Muse made.

also like that the Google page speed shows you as being fast! Like really fast...that’s excellent.

[GARRogers]

I have been very interested in Sparkleapp.com

I've asked several questions and have received great support from Duncan Wilcox personally.

I understand this is a small company, but after all the mess due to a big company that threw many under the bus in spite of all the bells and whistles, maybe it is time to give a small one a chance to grow into itself. Maybe a forum will be in its future, maybe more of the bells and whistles.

As it is now, it is easy to use and the results are very attractive.

I wish Sparkleapp good luck. I've enjoyed what I've played with.

[eyetoeye-john]

I paid for a year with Webflow a week ago and just discovered that I have to go with their crazy expensive hosting to be able to have forms work and utilize CMS. What a ridiculous rippoff. Feels like the Adobe Must thing all over again. ARGGGGHHHHHH!!!!

Regardless, I just explored Blocsapp.com—looking like a real possible contender for sure. Going to explore them more thoroughly tomorrow but looking good for sure.

[W_J_T]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/whitby+rider  wrote

I paid for a year with Webflow a week ago and just discovered that I have to go with their crazy expensive hosting to be able to have forms work and utilize CMS. What a ridiculous rippoff. Feels like the Adobe Muse thing all over again. ARGGGGHHHHHH!!!!

I posed a related question to the Webflow people who were posting regarding forms and hosting earlier in this thread (so Muse people may understand that aspect and requirements), here was a response from a Webflow employee, maybe that will help you in your situation. However it seems according to some I am not allowed to provide advice or pose questions so people can think about possible considerations. So sorry I am trying to help, forgive me.