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

[W_J_T]

tafgraphicsdesign  wrote

their brand new web builder called Architect.

Like they say, what's old is new again. More specifically they are using Duda Builder, so they didn't really architect or build anything new. ;--)

[tafgraphicsdesign]

Yes, they have been open about that they have built on top of it....I have been using now for three weeks and as a from the start Muse User who has coding background, this has been a joy to use!

[KStumpf]

I felt I also needed to add my anger at this decision so that I am at least counted in this.  If the "Team" were smart they would integrate the WYSIWYG functions of Muse into Dreamweaver to allow coders and designers functionality in one program.

That being said if Adobe does not come up with a similar product to Muse I will go to another product all together outside of Adobe.

[Duncan Wilcox]

KStumpf  wrote

I felt I also needed to add my anger at this decision so that I am at least counted in this.  If the "Team" were smart they would integrate the WYSIWYG functions of Muse into Dreamweaver to allow coders and designers functionality in one program.

For some reason the myth that this sort of software might exists continues to spread. It sounds like the obvious thing that should exist.

The problem is given a random web page, the code in it (and specifically javascript) can't be interpreted by software to understand what purpose or intent it has (this is a computer science theorem that dates back to Turing, 1936). Arguably the same is true for HTML/CSS, due to their quasi infinite flexibility.

This means you can't build a WYWISYG editor that doesn't expose the code. And once you expose code the abstraction is broken, it's a slippery slope to having to learn about selectors and box models and layout techniques.

Duncan

[Ussnorway]

people argue that HTML is a WYSIWYG {what you see is what you get} editor because it was made in English {US} and as a direct result the internet has become mostly English {US} based and children all over the world have been forced to learn English {US} in order to have employment options that their non-English {US} parents don't have access to

WYSIWUG is only possible when there is one language option that everyone agrees to use and then we all join hands singing kumbaya

[ALsp]

HTML is a WYSIWYG editor. I do not understand what that means. HTML is a markup language, not an editor. As for why most programming languages are based in English, it is simple. To prevent a tower-of-Babel effect, a single language must be used. English was the logical choice. While the web's standards were created, in large part, by and for English speakers, English is also a language regularly taught to European and (to a lesser extent) Asian children, whereas English-speaking nations do not ordinarily require children to learn other languages. Europeans are better equipped to understand English than Americans, Brits, Australians, et al, are equipped to understand other languages.

It would be nice to speak "Earth", but I'm afraid that's not going to happen for a while

[W_J_T]

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

• For some reason the myth that this sort of software might exists continues to spread.
• it's a slippery slope to having to learn about selectors and box models and layout techniques.

It could likewise be said that you continue to propagate the myth that learning basic concepts is hard and that those using freeform tools yield more creative results, yet that just simply is not the case. So if the majority of designers using freeform tools don't seem to leverage them towards greater creative results they are better off learning the basic things (box model, etc.) that you continually try to instill fear towards. These things are found in the majority of web tools and builders which designers have proven to use successfully for creative results.

By changing this simple mindset designers instead have access to the majority of the web related tools and builders on the market, plus the basic understanding of every web page. So going forward logically whats better, tunnel vision for a singular feature, or an open mind to a vast array of web tools and a world of possibilities for designers into the future. So it might be said that in the end it's a slippery slope to try to hold on to old mindsets.

[Duncan Wilcox]

I have said multiple times that if you want to code, more power to you. And if you don't want to code, more power to you. In either case there are plenty tools.

What does not exist, and can not exist for the reasons stated above, is a tool that is at the same time a coding tool and a true WYSIWYG tool that insulates you completely from code. Believe me, if such a tool was possible I'd be writing it.

You are consistently misinterpreting what I say, one would say intentionally, to the point of having lost credibility. Please tell everybody who you actually are and what your agenda is.

[W_J_T]

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

intentionally, to the point of having lost credibility.

That's beyond amusing. Instead by you intentionally and continually avoiding to back up your own statements and claims, is the true lose of credibility. Nice attempt at deflection, not gonna work however.

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

Believe me, if such a tool was possible I'd be writing it.

If "complete" freeform was as important as you wish to make it appear, all the while as you try to instill fear in the ability for designers to use other wide-ranging choices. Then vastly larger companies with enormously greater amounts of users, funding and revenue would be concerned about implementing it. They are not, that itself speaks volumes towards your ideal and the lack of its overall importance in regards to being present in web tools for designers. As stated above these tools without "complete" freeform allow designers to freely and successfully create and express themselves just the same and further.

[Duncan Wilcox]

You are beyond annoying. Who are you again? Hiding behind the WJT moniker because?

I do not try to instill any fear. I plainly state that if code is your cup of tea, that's totally what you should do. However if you don't want to code, there's no point in trying to convince you that you are wrong and code is better.

You fail to see that there's no "choice" in having to figure out obscure browser bugs and css grid flavor of the week. This is after all a forum of Muse users, an eminently visual tool, a tool you have admitted to never have been a user of. So what's your role here?

Trying to get users of a visual tool to give it up and learn to code? Perhaps if you reveal your affiliation it will be more clear why you want this so much.

[W_J_T]

Again poor attempts at deflection, amusing.

I'm not talking about Muse users coding sites from scratch, but rather using tools which allow visual manipulation but not complete freeform as you wish to champion due to your own app. I am referring to you inferring the basic "box model" etc., is beyond their grasp. Tools such as Webflow, W/O Codes new platform based upon Duda, along with many of the other desktop programs and web platforms allow users to be fully creative without having "complete" freeform control, while still being visual code-less based tools. If this singular feature was that important why did Adobe abandon it and why are other major industry leaders not pursuing it? The mindset of looking beyond the need for this singular feature of complete freeform, opens up a world of vastly greater possibilities for designers. Do you still fail to see what is being talked about?

I guess you can't back up your own claims, so now to try and save face you are responding and instead trying to provide deflections.

[Duncan Wilcox]

I have no interest in proving anything to you. You seem to be hellbent on proving your view of the world is correct, and that people who chose a different route are wrong. Your view of the world seems so obvious to you, you don't see or you trivialize alternatives.

I fully recognize that coding is a superpower that gives you full control. It's my job to code. Duh. What you fail to recognize is coding is not for everybody. Even something seemingly simple and trivial for you, is a huge task to wrap their head around for someone who has a full time job in a completely different field, maybe non technical. There are slews of "web programmers" using stack overflow for every single step forward. What kind of life is that? What sort of site will they build?

The first thing you do when building a site in Webflow is pick a selector! The first thing! Pinegrow can't even open Sparkle's home page properly! That's understandable, and supports my earlier statements about a tool being either code based or visual.

Forget about freeform, that's not what distinguishes a visual website builder, it's not dealing with code or coding jargon.

I'm sure the market will decide which tool is better, but thanks for caring.

[W_J_T]

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

• You seem to be hellbent on proving your view of the world is correct, and that people who chose a different route are wrong.
• I'm sure the market will decide which tool is better, but thanks for caring.

Sounds 100% like you Duncan, since you already decided what the entire web industry will be and do. Seems like you are the one with a "your own view of the world".

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

I have no interest in proving anything to you.

So you are not willing to back up even just these two claims you made ? Don't prove anything to me, simply back up your own words and "Sparkleapp".

[Duncan Wilcox]

You love making this personal, playing it dirty, don't you. Taking a tongue in cheek tweet out of context? That does sound 100% you. Trying to sling mud at my product? Classy.

Fine. The context is the app of which I am a co-developer, Sparkle.

• differentiation of aesthetics or design originality

You are conflating the tool with the website creator. The question isn't whether a freeform layout tool automatically makes you create a more interesting site or not, the question is how hard it is to have that freedom. If you are an awesome coder you might know all the tricks to achieve the visual effects you want quickly, otherwise a proper user interface makes it that much faster. The difference is you need to be an expert coder, but a visual tool is generally simpler to figure out. Just like not everybody is a coder, not everybody is a designer. We try hard to not have a "sparkle look" to websites, which often brings out the true voice of the site creator, it's fascinating.

• 1000+ page Sparkle site

This is something I probably shouldn't have bragged about, a Sparkle user mentioned that he had built a 1200 page site, but since it's support email which I tread confidentially, I am not at liberty to share. I fully expect you won't trust me on this. Regardless I definitely wouldn't advise Sparkle users to build sites of that size currently. We are growing and will get there eventually, in fact if a customer is having a hard time we work with them to figure out the issue. Unlike faceless corporations that are following industry standards, we care about our customers succeeding.

Many thanks for being my marketing platform WJT.

Now reveal your identity and affiliation or leave.

[Nancy OShea]

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

...if a customer is having a hard time we work with them to figure out the issue. Unlike faceless corporations that are following industry standards, we care about our customers succeeding.

I don't know which faceless corporations you're referring to but such things are not mutually exclusive.  As an example,  Project Seven's commercial extensions for Dreamweaver enable people with little or no coding skills to build great looking, standards based websites in native HTML, CSS and JavaScript code.   What's more, PVII's  customer service is A++.   So you can have ease of use, web standards and terrific customer service if you ever need it.

Just saying....

[W_J_T]

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

We try hard to not have a "sparkle look" to websites, which often brings out the true voice of the site creator, it's fascinating.

What's fascinating is they mostly look the same as framework built sites or in some cases outdated altogether. That was the point. Even your recent former site before the update looked like it was built using a framework (the new one could be also), should that be fascinating coming from the apps developer to showcase this visual only app? Also as stated here, most the 100 sites I found were not responsive, so concerning "ease of use" with visual apps, there seems to be a glaring omission for these designers in that regard when using your app.

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

• 1000+ page Sparkle site

This is something I probably shouldn't have bragged about, a Sparkle user mentioned that he had built a 1200 page site, but since it's support email which I tread confidentially, I am not at liberty to share. I fully expect you won't trust me on this. Regardless I definitely wouldn't advise Sparkle users to build sites of that size currently.

Like mentioned here no sites I found come even remotely close to that. But also as mentioned there, going from landing and portfolio pages, to 1000+ page sites based upon your own intention of the app, is hard to imagine. Since you wouldn't advise people to do so, and since its beyond the apps current intentions, its quite interesting you did chose to brag about it as a feature to these Muse users.

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

Unlike faceless corporations

Users can't post responses on your blog, there is no user forum, etc., you're probably not the right person to speak on faceless, limiting public persona or open involvement with communications or business.

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

Now reveal your identity and affiliation or leave.

There is nothing personal Duncan as you are falsely trying to imply.

I just take a bit of exception, the way you try to paint a dire picture to designers, here and largely with your posts and comments online. Because the future, alternatives and possibilities are more wide open for these Muse users and designers in general than what you wish to express. That is my only reason in challenging your comments and points of view. There are no motives otherwise, I stand to gain nothing personally from my time spent here or my conversations with you. Here is my view of the app all people should chose.

If the Mods have an issue with things they are free to say, but you are certainly not the one to dictate me participating or leaving.

[Illostraight]

If you don't agree with WJT about coding, he is never going to agree with anyone who prefers wysiwyg and instead becomes argumentative. I don't even know why he is on this forum as that's what Muse was all about, Wysiwyg.

He will not show webpages he's done as he's stated the people on this list won't understand them. So the assumption is he is smarter than everyone else. I believe he has an interest in bootstrap or another type of coding and trying to lead wysiwyg people to that. Or he wants to show everyone how 'smart' he is. I have never known anyone who makes webpages who wouldn't be proud to show their portfolio. We have no idea who he is. Nancy already mentioned way back that she does bootstrap themes, so there's a bias there. I do not know the reason these people are on a Muse forum, but I'm sure they'll want to hear themselves tell everyone why.

Duncan is the only true wysiwyg person here that understands our plight and should be encouraged to help those of us that want to build sites in this manner instead of being challenged at every turn.

In trying to be helpful, here's a list of Muse Alternatives.

[W_J_T]

Another interesting lump of nonsense by you, but thanks for coming back to make it. You were perhaps missed by a few, trying to govern what could be discussed in this thread and trying to act like a moderator over everyone to solely promote Sparkle and everything related to Duncan. Glad to see you back on the payroll.

[GARRogers]

WJT:

Why do you call Illostrait's post 'Another interesting lump of nonsense etc.'?

All she is trying to do is post about wysiwyg formats. Yes, she likes SparkleApp, so do I. We are busy artists and craftspeople and we value the help that Sparkle will provide us.

It's just so sad that you are always leaning on Duncan.

[W_J_T]

Why? Because the post forgoes all the conversation, reasons and input that has taken place in this thread over 49 pages by many people and tries to trivialize it down into nonsense, which they have tried many times already​. Was I supposed to instead be impressed with the enlarged font size choice by Illostraight in the above post as something garnering greater importance concerning the content?

[Path11]

Geez folks, how about dropping all the egos and sticking to the topic. I spent twenty years consulting software for design and manufacture…I know a waste of time when I see one. So, the issue is “what would be a viable game plan moving forward, as Muse has been discontinued” That’s the issue.

1. Muse still works. It is the same program that ran your businesses successfully yesterday and today, nothing has changed there.

2. Everything else out there is either half-baked or too new to know where it is going.

3. Why is there even such a panicked discussion about having to change NOW, in 2018, when it is 2020 that the you throw in the towel on Muse.

4. Where is the company size break where an alternative is needed sooner rather than later? Fifty websites? 100? 500? What will be a viable path for those above that break point? Below?

5. As for below that point, I say keep doing what you are doing, keep an eye on where everything is going, then in about ten months start training yourselves to ween away from Muse, rebuild sites on your new choice of platform.

I sold, consulted on, and trained high end CAD/CAM systems for twenty years, I saw programs come to an end of their life, there are reasons internally, there are reasons technologically. We had a system that started out as DOS, adapted to windows for years till the foundation code just would not keep up, a newer system was developed ground up to be able to work today and tomorrow. It is obvious that Adobe is in the same situation, every software company gets there. For most of the systems I was part of ending, we ran down a three or four year wind down, with zero feature additions after the second year…and this was deep five figure systems that were the backbone of a major manufacturing sector worldwide.

You have a two-year window. If, as the smart business people you all are, you cannot shift your business when faced with an issue that gives you a two year heads up (certainly not the usual major problem time frame for businesses) maybe it is time to find something else to do. I get guilty of complaining at first but quickly come around to the common sense side and recognize that griping about Adobe, or sniping at each other, is an absolute waste of time. Pool your business knowledge and work on a solution or, if you are more techy than business person, then get your notepad out and take notes of the good solutions that match up to your business. I’m sixty three, been there done that, can make these statements with absolute certainty from experience most of you are too young to have attained yet, you’re spinning everyone’s wheels griping and arguing. So far all this reminds me of the utterly useless arguments of which was better, Mac or PC (by the way, it’s PC, you don’t see mac’s on a manufacturing floor, warehouse, construction site or hospital. There’s a reason.). There is no point to it. They are tools, only tools, only a hammer in your tool box it doesn’t matter if the handle is red or blue, quit arguing about it. First start with the problem of your business, then see if a software solution checks all the boxes. If it doesn’t, don’t bust the other guys chops for looking at it, it may check all his/her boxes.

So, If you have twenty employees, and a hundred websites to maintain, ask. Say, I’ve looked at X,Y, and Z where do you think they will be in two years or, is there something else out there I should put on the list to examine that matches the problems I’ve listed for everyone? Work to fill those needs. Go to shows and ask the companies or, ask the companies directly. You gotta keep in mind, there is a reason software salesman have a worse reputation than used car salesman, lawyers, and ploiticians so, make them show you with your issue being solved, not their well-rehearsed demo that skirts the bugs (yep, been there done that too, not too proud of that one)

Whatever you do, quit sniping each other and be professionals. Geez the bunch of you are making my ears bleed.

[Ussnorway]

Path11  wrote

1.       Muse still works. It is the same program that ran your businesses successfully yesterday and today, nothing has changed there.

you have (18th June) to make any temp sites on Adobe BC with Muse (or any other software)... after that is only paid sites that get saved until 2021

without the temp site option Muse is a bad idea, eol = stop using it guys

ref = https://businesscatalyst.com/#announcement-update

[Path11]

"...you have (18th June) to make any temp sites on Adobe BC with Muse (or any other software)... after that is only paid sites that get saved until 2021"

There's a good point, they kill BC temp sites but, the paid site is still an option till 2021, plenty of time to phase in an alternative.  So, can you, or your clients handle the price boost of the paid site, with full understanding that you'll need to phase to something new? Having them pay the extra now could be a blessing because it gets them used to paying so that you have more options when searching for that perfect alternative. If not then a new option has to be found, or a new client. Not always hard to sell a pass thru price increase but it all breaks down to a pretty clear option; Pay for the system or move on. Sitting down with a client and explaining "there is a technology change coming and here are the options" is really just part of being in the tech industry. Explaining unpleasant changes to clients is just part of any business, just have to roll with it. A construction contractor gets a material increase midway through negotiations, the new model car is four inches shorter than last year, the new cell phone doesn't have a 3.5mm jack like last year. It all just comes with the territory and explaining, and selling it, is as much a part of your tool set as a business person as laying out graphics. Most clients understand change, they are business people too and see it in everything from their other suppliers increasing price of their "raw material", to the paper towels in their breakroom going up. They are business people and recognize it is going to happen so, give them a little credit for being understanding. If they aren't, well, then maybe THEY need to be in another line of work because change is a part of business.

Another lesson is, always have a plan "B". Do you keep more than one development system in house in case something is discontinued, or changed in a way that doesn't serve you? Or, keep all your eggs in one basket and be ready to change if something happens?

[Ussnorway]

Ussnorway  wrote

Path11   wrote

1.       Muse still works. It is the same program that ran your businesses successfully yesterday and today, nothing has changed there.

you have (18th June) to make any temp sites on Adobe BC with Muse (or any other software)... after that is only paid sites that get saved until 2021

without the temp site option Muse is a bad idea, eol = stop using it guys

ref = https://businesscatalyst.com/#announcement-update

the end date for making new temp sites on Adobe BC IS 18th June

people that allowed Adobe Muse updates to 2018 buld have lost this option because the ui has been "fixed" to stop it... someone didn't get the memo that an extension had been given... opps

imo the best work around is to go back to a older build like 2017 and that still allows new temp sites... which you can then edit if you really need a 2018 Muse site, sorry for the muck around guys

[bernwa]

I have to say this is the best post I've seen on the issue.  This is pretty much how I feel.  Muse still works great for now and it'll work until I find the alternative for me.  I haven't seen one yet I feel measures up to Muse but I'm encouraged by WO, by Muse-themes.com.  They have a preview on their site and I like what I see so far.  It's supposed to be released soon.  I like Muse-themes a lot.  They've developed some great widgets for Muse over the last few years and really have embraced Muse.  I have a feeling they will be the one for me.

I so agree with the ego stuff on hear.  Anyone in the creative world should know there is no one way that is the right way.  That's the beauty of it.  Everyone has their own way.