Anyone have any thoughtson DREAMWEAVER

[natatbeach]

as a web design tool? I have an opportunity to work with it and learn it--- thoughts anyone?

[mjm]

it is a tool for people who dont understand what is going on (most of the time). learn the rules for (X)HTML & CSS and type it all by hand.

just my opinion.

[Sebastian]

It's pretty much the top authoring environment for web sites. Very powerful, even though the interface takes some getting used to. An understanding of HTMl and underlying code is still essential, it does nto replace that, but for serious work it can really streamline the workflow.

I suggest you leanr it if you're interested, it really is a handy thing to know.

[Asylum Steve]

Personally, I use Adobe GoLive, but have an older version of DW on disc somewhere...

We've discussed this before, and there's no doubt DW is a really good web design program. Most of us who use GL do so simply because it fits in better with other Adobe software such as Photoshop and Illustrator.

I did have DW on my pc for a while and made an effort to learn it, but this was when I had aspirations of being a rich and famous web designer (uh, never happened, sniff!). Now, I find I just can't dilute my time to learn both programs...

I say go for it. There will be lots of stuff you pick up that you'll be able to apply to web design in general and certainly other web programs if you choose to switch to them later...

[Peter_AUS]

Dreamweaver is probably the main program used around the world for website design. Yes it does have a learning curve, but once you have learnt it, you won't use most other programs. The thing I find hard to handle, is the cost involved in purchasing it. It is just too pricie compared to others around that can do the job, with a bit of nudgeing. You do have to learn HTML but there are very good help files within the program and if you have the opportunity to use and learn it, go for it.

I have several copies of website design programs, have been looking at different options, mainly from a cost option, but still fall back to Dreamweaver. It seems to have less overheads and doesn't put erronious coding in like Frontpage does, it loads up the website with all Microsoft coding that just isn't necessary. Yes it can be removed, but why do it in the first place.

VisicomMedias HTML Pro is fairly easy to work with, but you need to know a little French as thier Templates have French words in them, and they won't change them to English. It is a WYSIWYG (sort of) webdesign program, easy to use, but can get a little complicated at times.

One program that I think is good to have is NotePad Pro from Fookes Software. It is a Text editor, but you can select the HTML Tags and it prompts you in dialogue boxes to input data that you want. It is a good way to learn HTML on the fly if you want, you can see what happens with the pages as you go.

The thing with Web Design, is to make a Template of your page, especially in Dreamweaver and use that Template to base your pages on. You have to learn about making editable Regions this way and it makes changing the styles of your webpage easier, as when you update a change to the Template, say the menu you use, or the background, or colour, that is static to each page, it updates all the pages that are based on that Template.

One program I have been playing around with, it isn't difficult to use structurally, is NetObjects Fusion. It costs $200US, but you have to becareful when trying to edit the HTML tags info, it is quite difficult to do. I eneded up taking it into Dreamweaver afterwards and then editing the HTML there. But ran into difficulties with Banners etc, not formatting correctly in Dreamweaver. An inherant problem with programing in one program and taking the files into another program. Horses for Courses if you uderstand that.

I have looked at GoLive but it reminds me much like Hotdog Program. I haven't delved into it like Steve has, but might look at it again.

Hope this info helps in a small way.

[mtbbrian]

Sounds like you are getting REALLY serious about a website Nat!
Right On!

Don't mess with anything else but DreamWeaver. It is the best!
It was what I do my site with.

There will be a steep learning curve, but once you "get it", it will be easy from there.

You might want to invest in a book, like the "For Dummies" series, they do one for DreamWeaver. The author is very knowledgeable and personable.
I emailed her, telling her how mch I enjoyed the book and what not, and she replied back to me and even looked at my site.

Can't wait to see your site Nat!

Brian

[natatbeach]

thank you all for sharing your experiences and I am have just finished learning how to make columns and rows and how to individually color each--HA ! lol

my friend who i took product shots for her pharmacy (which by the way have been used in her brochure and have made it into the local newspaper-yeah) wants a website as well and since I've been "working" for her on several projects she has going on...she was willing to get the program so I cold use it to do her site as well as the benefit of doing mine.... no cost for me yeah woo hoo

so it's a win win situation. If I can wrap my brain around it will be the only challenge... but I find I'm more receptive to absorbing strange hoards(?) of info at night when my brain stops analyzing everything he he...so there's hope...we'll see what happens...

the tutorials are pretty simple and concise and I'll pick up that Dummy book that you suggested Brian...Thnaks again for all your input.... will keep you posted....

[ACArmstrong]

it is a tool for people who dont understand what is going on (most of the time). learn the rules for (X)HTML & CSS and type it all by hand.

MJM's exactly right - and next time you go to snap a picture in doors, just poor some black powder into a metal tray and fire it off, instead of using the speedlight on your camera. And when you wash your clothes - just get one of those funky boards and a big tub - don't bother using the state of the art Whirlpool in the basement [insert rolling eyes icon here]

Dreamweaver MX is one of the most powerful web design tools ever created. It keeps getting better and better.

Nat - you've seen my stuff - I use DW MX and other Macromedia Software along with Photoshop and Illustrator to do design work - learn DW - it's worth it, and you'll love it.

Of course, I think I'm talking myself out of a proposed job, but whatever.

[mjm]

LOL!

Mr. ACArmstrong, you are a perfect example of someone who doesnt know what is going on. Your page has 26 HTML errors. You have javascript within the page. Your URLs are not clean. You have "<%@LANGUAGE="VBSCRIPT" CODEPAGE="1252"%>" on the top of all pages. etc. etc. etc....

However, your site is pretty. If you are simply going after "pretty" webpages then listen to ACArmstrong. If you want something that is functional and will work for ALL browsers then you need to learn what you are doing.

[Asylum Steve]

mjm,

Personally, I think you're doing a disservice to Andy by suggesting he "doesn't know what's going on", or that his web site designs are simply "pretty".

Reaching these conclusions by simply noticing HTML or javascript errors on his pages is a sort of flawed logic. Few sites created with any editing program are perfect. Also, sites that show no errors in one browser may show a handful in another browser. It's almost unavoidable. Besides, the goal of dynamic and attractive web sites isn't just to be error free. Sometimes that's not even a big deal...

It only takes a glance at his web portfolio to realize he's a fairly talented site designer. From what I can see, his sites not only look good, but are very intuative and user friendly, too.

I'm pretty sure you misunderstood what Andy was trying to say in his post. I don't want to put words in his mouth, but IMO, he's NOT saying that using Dreamweaver or GoLive means you shouldn't learn coding...

Rather, he's inferring that buying such expensive and powerful web design software and using it ONLY for hand coded is rather silly, hugely ineffecient time-wise, and wastes maybe 80% of the program's capabilities. If so, I have to say I agree...

If one prefers to only hand code their entire web sites, IMO these programs are a complete waste of money. You can hand code for FREE on any text editor, and also download free FTP programs from the web.

As a fairly experienced web designer myself, I think it's safe to say the SMARTEST way to work with these programs is to take full advantage of the time saving "drag & drop" features, but also know coding and tweak and fine tune pages by hand. The two are not mutually exclusive...

BTW, in that sense I think his anologies were appropriate. Hand coding all the time in DW would indeed be like using a washboard and tub when you had a modern electric washer at your disposal...

[Peter_AUS]

I don't know what the problem is here MJM, but the topic is What are the Thoughts On Dreamweaver. Not Pick My Website Coding To Pieces.

If you look at all the websites on the Internet, I am sure that you could probably pick something wrong with each and everyone of the them.

People code differently, so by hand, some by pencil and paper, some by braille as well (althought that is hard to get the dots to join up).

The point is, DW is probably the most widely used program for website design and that was the point of the discussion and I would like to keep that topic as the main focal point. Not whether someone code is up to someone elses standards. If it gets the job done for that person, then leave it alone.

Natalie has asked the question and was greatful for the replies, what she does with that info is up to her.

Hand coding is fine for those that have the brain for the coding, yes I know it is just like setting up a newspaper (which is where it came from in the first place), but not everyone is that interlectually challanged are they.

I don't profess to be an expert in web design, far from it, but I do know a lot about hardware and software and what is popular and what isn't.

So lets all just move one please.

[Asylum Steve]

Peter, I feel guilty posting this right after your comment about staying on topic, but I just wanted to tell you that I picked up a BRAILLE pc font off the web last week. Seeing how you brought it up...

Anyway, I just thought it was too funny. I fully plan on using some on my site, as joke of course...

BTW, our local library has a small braille sign by one of the entrances, but they've covered it with a piece of acrylic to protect it from the weather. I kid you not, and this too I find hysterical...

[mjm]

ok, maybe i was a little harsh. how about this...

using dreamweaver is like using the fully automatic settings on your camera. sure it works, but the results aren't that great.

BTW, the HTML errors I was referring to are from the W3C.

[Peter_AUS]

Not off topic Steve, it was all a little tongue in cheeck about the braille. Interesting what one comes up with on the net isn't it. Hows the computer going having seen any comments lately, is it fixed now.

Can they still read the Braille under the Acrylic what I would be more interested in knowing, how do they know the sign would be there anyway.

[Peter_AUS]

Hey MJM, just because it doesn't meet W3C conventions doesn't always mean they are completely right. Remember that is a group of people that come together and decide on what the rest of the world should do with coding, do you think they actually all agree with each other as well, don't think so.

If someone has code errors, sure let them know and maybe example of how it is an error, let others learn instead of just stating something without maybe helping. That is the idea of this forum and why I for one pushed to have it included here in the Photography site and not on the Computer site as I thought it was more relevant to this site than the other.

Dreamweaver isn't like using your camera in auto mode,you still have full control over everything if you want it, I find it good to see what the coding is and have developed my skills more and more as I use it, that way. If Dreamweaver wasn't a good program do you think it would still be around, a bit like Adobe products, they do the job they were intended to do, website development program by them was just another way of trying to get an edge. Has it worked, maybe yes maybe no, there are many many Dreamweaver users around the world who are happy little customers.

[Asylum Steve]

I decided to simply replace the hard drive with two larger ones. The new motherboard/cpu as well as a host of other upgrades will have to wait until summer...

[Peter_AUS]

No the feeling although finances have eased off a little for me. I'm actually not panicking now. I hope it just gets better and better, might get our lives back a bit.

[ACArmstrong]

First, thank you Peter and Steve...

And Steve, you hit the nail on the head. That was my point completely.

MJM - we'll agree to disagree on this one. I've never cared much for W3C standards, because it doesn't mean anything to the average web user. I build sites that are aesthetically pleasing and are easy to use. I build them with one goal in mind - getting a companies message to its users. I test on two levels of web browsers to make sure the features work for about 90% of people playing on the web these days. I don't care whether or not it meets W3C standards as long as its useful to my clients and the people who browse the web sites I've built.

It always makes me laugh when someone has to run a W3C scan to find "errors" on a site. My question always is, "How many did you find BEFORE you ran the scan?"

[mjm]

Well, would you like to have a site that works for 90% of people or 99% of people (there is ALWAYS something that doesn't work quite right)? I am sure if you were managing a an ecommerce site and the owners made 90% of what they could possibly make that would be OK with them.

Sure the W3C doesn't mean anything to an average user. And if that is all you care about then that is great. However, as things change people will be accessing your site using different devices (ie. Cell Phones, PDAs, etc.). As this picks up, your customers will ask "why doesn't my site work on my cell phone?" and you will have a hell of a time explaining that to an average user.

To answer this, "How many did you find BEFORE you ran the scan?" You have "<%@LANGUAGE="VBSCRIPT" CODEPAGE="1252"%>" on top of all your pages. Even Google thinks so: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...2F&btnG=Search

[natatbeach]

I agree..I have no intentions of "learning" the easiest route and staying there. I need the fastest way to set up a basic product/info site and then try to to take a class.

[Judland]

In my opinion, the quickest and easiest way for someone to learn how to create a webpage and write simple HTML is to learn the way I did (with no prior knowledge of HTML or how webpages worked).

I bought a book called ''Teach Yourself HTML in 24 Hours'' by Sams Publishing.

All you need is a text editor (like Notepad, if you use Microsoft Windows, or Kate if you're a Linux user, like me), this book and 24 hours. You really can learn enough to do your own simple, yet effective webpages.

It really is worth learning the logic behind the code. Well, at least in my opinion.

[iKwak]

Dreamweaver is a time-saver!

[Todd Patten]

I had to reply to this thread even though it's almost dead. This thread motivated a lurker to become a poster

I am a software engineer by trade with 8 years experience. I dabble in web design and have for 5 or more years. Trust me, I know how to code. I currently have a dozen or so active clients and about 30% of my yearly income comes from web design. I'm a horrible graphic designer, yet people still come back to me

I have used Dreamweaver for a few years now. I laughed outloud at mjm's post. I have come across people of this mindset my entire career. Armstrong makes the point that his sites are asthetically pleasing and work on 90% of visitors. First, the point of the World Wide Web (not the internet -- two different things) is aesthetics. Graphically pleasing data delivery. Moreover, I'd be willing to bet that his sites work for 99% of users. I use Mozilla Firefox exclusively and the sites I went to were flawless. No visible errors and no JS pop-up errors. Have you viewed the latest browser statistics?!? MS, Mozilla and Opera have close to 100% of traffic stats. All handle these pages exceptionally.

mjm's comment regarding cell phone and wireless is somewhat valid, but disengenuos at best. The audience is miniscule at this point, but will be growing. Why program for the .01% of visitors?

I once worked with a man who argued for days that we should not use tables for web page layout, event though nearly every page on the web uses tables for basic layout. I asked why and he emphatically stated that the W3C explicitly recommends against using tables for page layout. Who the heck cares? It's a perfect tool.

The point is to make money while designing sites. Not to adhere strictly to a recommended set of instructions.

[ACArmstrong]

Thanks for the compliments, Todd. I appreciate them. I work really hard for the people who hire me. I want them to have the best response to their site that is possible. Dreamweaver is simply one of many extremely helpful tools in that proccess.

If you ever need a design partner on a bigger job, feel free to shoot me an email.

[Todd Patten]

AC -- I'd love to but I can't pick up your email from your profile

I'm at todd@ambiencemedia.com.