Do you still hard-code using Dreamweaver?

[AnotherMe]

In 2017 using Dreamweaver do you still hard-code your web design?

[osgood_]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Teodor+K  wrote

Well, simple - we didn't shut up, because our plans have changed in the meantime

Exactly, so keep quiet until you know more, would be some simple advice.

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Teodor+K  wrote

I just love how everything is being judged in this forum by 4 people providing their valuable feedback for products they have no idea about

I think its being judged on what is being divulged on your blog and the snippets of information being output by your beta testers. Unfortunately having tried pretty much every single web application for 'web-developers' out there, for the Mac at least, I'm convinced this will just be another in a long line of applications. I hope I'm proved wrong and will have to eat my words but being so Bootstrap centric I'm not sure I'm going to be able to do that....

[pziecina]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Teodor+K  wrote

I just love how everything is being judged in this forum by 4 people providing their valuable feedback for products they have no idea about

Sorry Teodor, but I cannot see where anyone is providing any feedback regarding your product, asking questions about it, maybe, feedback, none.

So far the only feedback i have read has been positive, and often cautious.

The reason i think people are being cautious about it, is because we have all seen products announced in the past that aim to do what you are trying to achive. All those products, so far have never lived up to the advertised hype, and most have been quietly abandoned after a time.

[osgood_]

pziecina  wrote

So far the only feedback i have read has been positive, and often cautious.

The public beta will be the decisive factor. Not a few 'in-the-pocket' users. Although these can be initially helpful, they are not always 'honest 'about a product/company which they might be too 'close' too.

[B i r n o u]

so far from hard coding... anyway... as the thread only focus on Wappler... I re ask the same question, than in an other thread... please did anyone has tested Pinegrow, I just saw in the doc that it allowed to directly builf themes for WP https://pinegrow.com/wordpress-theme-builder.html and http://docs.pinegrow.com/v4/bootstrap-blocks/bootstrap-blocks-for-wordpress/  

I'm curious

[B i r n o u]

I hope that Teodor's post, as interesting and legitimate as it may be, will not come once again to obscure my last question posted in two different threads ...

so I ask it again, just in case

as the thread only focus on Wappler... please did anyone has tested Pinegrow, ?

I just saw in the doc that it allowed to directly build themes for WP https://pinegrow.com/wordpress-theme-builder.html and http://docs.pinegrow.com/v4/bootstrap-blocks/bootstrap-blocks-for-wordpress/  

I'm curious

[pziecina]

You would probably get better feedback on Pinegrow, in a wordpress forum Birnou.

[B i r n o u]

Thanks Paula, but Pinegrow doesn't seams to be only WP based... it can also be compared to Wappler ... don't you think ?

Pinegrow Web Editor | Website Builder for Professionals

[pziecina]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/B+i+r+n+o+u  wrote

Thanks Paula, but Pinegrow doesn't seams to be only WP based... it can also be compared to Wappler ... don't you think ?

Pinegrow Web Editor | Website Builder for Professionals

I don't know if one can compare it to Wappler, as Wappler is also going to include the ability for creating server side code, (so the blog says).

As i have said previously, I am very cautious about any product that says it is for 'visual' site creation, as over the years we have all seen such products announced, but never live up to the 'hype' assosiated with them. I personally think that 'visual' site creation will become the normal for smaller sites at some point, but I don't know when that will actually happen.

[B i r n o u]

yes... as I said, I'm also curious about it...

For information pinegrow can also use and edit PHP... at least not in the way wappler will probably do, but it does it... or it inform that it can handle it

Editing PHP, ASP and ERB templates - Pinegrow Web Editor - Documentation and Tutorials

[pziecina]

I'm always very cautious about any program that says, 'asp support' as it is often classic asp they are talking about, and not asp.net.

classic asp only has 0.5% usage now, (and falling every year). Microsoft has also said it will only be supported in the 'fully blown server' of its new program, and not supported in the 'cut down' version, which is the one intended for web hosting resellers. Which effectively means that outside of companies using their own server to provide internet access, classic asp is dead.

Many users will disagree with the above statement, but too me they are simply in denial, or trying to hang on to developing with something that is outdated.

[Nancy OShea]

I think this says what Pinegrow is and is not.  

PHP, ASP and ERB (Ruby on Rails) editing mode is designed for editing HTML code with server-side tags, not for general code editing.

[rayek.elfin]

pziecina  wrote

https://forums.adobe.com/people/B+i+r+n+o+u   wrote

Thanks Paula, but Pinegrow doesn't seams to be only WP based... it can also be compared to Wappler ... don't you think ?

Pinegrow Web Editor | Website Builder for Professionals

I don't know if one can compare it to Wappler, as Wappler is also going to include the ability for creating server side code, (so the blog says).

As i have said previously, I am very cautious about any product that says it is for 'visual' site creation, as over the years we have all seen such products announced, but never live up to the 'hype' assosiated with them. I personally think that 'visual' site creation will become the normal for smaller sites at some point, but I don't know when that will actually happen.

I worked with and tried pretty much all the visual editors in my life time as a front-end coder since the nineties, and I can state without a doubt that Pinegrow is the ONLY product so far that I have purchased and integrated in my workflow. It doesn't attempt to be a visual editor like Muse (yuk!) catering to beginners or designers who do not want to learn or cannot learn to code, but is aimed at front-end developers with good code sense to speed up development.

The only thing I can compare Pinegrow with is with a visual IDE GUI builder - such as Visual Studio has, or Netbeans: it's not meant for designers, but for coders who want to speed up visual component design and coding. Pinegrow integrates a bit like that in your existing workflow. With Atom it's a strong combo, since any edit you make in either app (Atom or Pinegrow) is instantly reflected in both (without saving!). But it works fine with other code editors as well.

It's also great for quick prototyping, and the latest version 4 (just released) supports plain html, Bootstrap 3 and 4, Foundation 5 and 6, Materialize, AngularJS, Bootstrap blocks for WP, and WP out of the box. Flex is integrated, and SASS and LESS can be edited live without the need for external tools.

Master pages, custom reusable components with editable areas are quite handy for quick static sites (like DW). It is also quick to do copy editing in the visual view, rather than in code.

But to me it is really the testing and prototyping where it really delivers. So easy to test stuff, and have multiple breakpoints open side by side, and target styles for a particular breakpoint. For prototyping it literally takes minutes to test concepts, and MOST IMPORTANTLY the code Pinegrow writes is actually USABLE and standard. It's like having a super-charged Inspect Element view on your side. It even offers an option to open any web page url for quick inspection and editing.

The visual editor is handy to quickly try out visual concepts and designs - much faster than doing it by hand in code (in this regard it is similar to DW, but support for modern CSS properties is already built-in). If you are working as a WP theme developer, the WP components make quick work of converting a static html design to a functional WP theme. Again, Pinegrow isn't a WP visual builder that requires no knowledge of theme development; instead, it assists the WP theme developer in their task, rather than restricting them.

In short, Pinegrow avoids patronizing the front-end developer, like most other visual editing tools.

I've been working with PineGrow since the first version: that version didn't quite make the cut for me, but by version 2 I began to use it more and more - and now it's a very useful addition in my toolbox. It's brilliant for prototyping and testing. I really don't understand why anyone familiar with html and css would EVER prefer to use a visual tool like Photoshop/illustrator or even Sketch for web page prototyping/mockups when Pinegrow is available.

The nice thing about Pinegrow is that it is quickly integrated in your pipeline, and just makes life easier for the front-end coder. In my opinion Pinegrow is what Dreamweaver would have been in a parallel universe.

My two cents. If you consider yourself a professional front-end developer and UX designer, you owe it to yourself to (at the very least) download the trial and give it a good whirl.

[pziecina]

It is interesting that you mention VS pro, and its companion program VS Blend for building UI's, (graphically).

This brings us back to the question of Dw having two seperate requirerments, one for coding and one for creating the UI, (not a seperate program for designers). As you probably know Blend can be used for the creation of UI's using both flexbox and grid layouts, plus it also has an easy to use css animation creation feature, but it does require the user to know how to code.

Maybe such an approach is what Adobe is missing, as everything it currently offers is certainly not aimed at the coder, or comes anywhere near meeting developers requirements. All are i think developed in such a fashion that they are adaptations of how pages where constructed 15 years ago, and what they think designers will understand.

Adobe has an aversion to the use of anything that it considers beyond the abilities of designers with only a basic understanding of coding. Examples of such are flexbox and css animations, as they would prefer to ignore such features, probably because even many of the people advising them cannot get past the theory of there use. css grid layouts will probably join that list, for exactly the same reasons.

Note - You can probably also add srcset/picture/image-set to the list, as Adobe does not agree with the use of them.

[B i r n o u]

Thanks so much Rayek, that is a real feedback. complete and precise... revealing the pros and cons of it... and what to expect for such a tool.

That is what I was feeling about pinegrow in the first read, but without any testing or feedback from someone that used it...  it is complicate to really percieve the bottom line of such a tool.

thanks you did it... so... I think that first I'm going to test the trial version, and second I probably, will run for it and it to the studio's tool set. thanks

[W_J_T]

@rayek.elfin , really nice summary regarding Pinegrow.

[osgood_]

rayek.elfin  wrote

The nice thing about Pinegrow is that it is quickly integrated in your pipeline, and just makes life easier for the front-end coder.

Unfortunaletly I had completely the opposite experience to what you describe. I found Pinegrow to be akward, bloated, the UI was far too busy, windows seemingly popping open here there and everywhere to be of any use to my own workflow.

I was going to revisit it and give it some more time but hey ho 8 day trials aren't hugley helpful for assessing software such as Pinegrow. I'm sure the experience wouldn't have gotten any better, once you are comfortble in the coding environment there is no quicker or cleaner way.

[pziecina]

osgood_  wrote

Unfortunaletly I had completely the opposite experience to what you describe. I found Pinegrow to be akward, bloated, the UI was far too busy, windows seemingly popping open here there and everywhere to be of any use to my own workflow.

You meen you will not like the new features of the next version of Dw?

Don't know if that is true, but it would not surprise me .

[osgood_]

pziecina  wrote

osgood_   wrote

Unfortunaletly I had completely the opposite experience to what you describe. I found Pinegrow to be akward, bloated, the UI was far too busy, windows seemingly popping open here there and everywhere to be of any use to my own workflow.

You meen you will not like the new features of the next version of Dw?

Don't know if that is true, but it would not surprise me .

If it came to a choice between DW, Pinegrow or Wappler, DW would win easily, not that I've tried it in a while but it still is a reasonable 'code' editor.

[Guest]

Yes, I have no shame in saying I have been true to Dreamweaver since the late 90's/early 2000's. I have always hand-coded my websites with it, but I take advantage of its assistance with coding speed and live previews. Just like any other program, it has SOME glitches/bugs from time to time, but Adobe gets around to fixing these as soon as they can. I have used Dreamweaver professionally now for over 10 years and I have always been able to complete my tasks. I have tried other editors, but I feel like Dreamweaver has everything you could really want as far as front end designing goes.

[Fa310tx]

I do the coding in Dreamweaver's code view, but I agree with others that CC2018's Brackets implementation is lacking.

The biggest annoyance, to me, is moving highlighted code around.

I used to be able to select anything and drag it.

Now, it seems like I can only move whole lines that I selected from the line number gutter.

JJ

[pziecina]

As this discussion has been re-activated, I would like to point out to everyone the biggest problem with answering such a general question.

It all depends on what one is developing.

There is a very big difference in a site/app that is for an individual or small company costing single or tens of thousands, and a site/app that is for an enterprise level company/organisation costing hundreds of thousands +.

The techs used are often the same, (contrary to what many may think) html, css, javascript, svg and php/c#, sql. It is what support that is required of those techs that changes. One may only require that of 10 years ago, the other may require cutting edge, and which type of site requires what, is not always what one may think.