[derbs]

Well, it's arrived, and i can finally think about using OS X full time now!

I'm currently downloading the trial, i'll let you know what it's like

[Justin W. Williams]

I am excited as well. Now I just need some $$$

[zilmer]

Oh, baby, yeah

These two beauties - Fireworks & Dreamweaver MX - kick major *** . Major updates, major new features, major stability! Damn - Macromedia really keeps kicking!

[funkboy]

Ahhh, OS X Macromedia products, hooray! Macromedia has got to be kicking themselves for not releasing this on another day, though - if this were on ANY other day in like the past month, Macromedia would be at the top of the headlines instead of Apple with its new eMac and PowerBook... d'oh!

I stills loves ya, MM...

[zilmer]

BTW, haven't you guys noticed, that in webdesign it doesn't really matter if you have Photoshop version 5.5 or 7, but it sure as hell does make a difference if you use Fireworks 3 or MX

I think Macromedia kicks the crap out of every other company when it comes to web graphics apps or html editors. And I'm not gonna say a thing about Flash. Hehe.

No disrespect to others, but MM's every new release is really worth the wait. And others really just can't surprise me as much as they do with their updates and new releases. Or is it just me?

[funkboy]

Does it really matter about using Fireworks? I've been on DW 3 and FW 3, and the only reason I'll be upgrading is for native OS X support - the features don't seem to be that much different, really, tho it looks like fireworks may have gotten some somewhat significant changes since I last used it - installing it right now.

Reasons I'll buy the new Studio MX:
- Flash (never have had it, been dying to use it, and I guess this version is the easiest yet to use)
- native OS X support (read: no more taking down the whole system, or the whole system locking up, because Dreamweaver is disconnecting from an FTP server)
- wait, I didn't notice that before, Freehand comes with it
- good lord, this is pretty much Macromedia's entire product lineup for ... $399 for the upgrade? and can I move my license from my current educational one to commercial? Woo-hoo! Ten cheers to Macromedia for trumping Apple's announcement, at least in terms of value! A-mazing!

[Simon Mundy]

Don't want to start a flame war here...

But what's the major reason why everyone's so excited about Fireworks? What can it do that Imageready can't, or what does it do better?

I think I've only played with Fireworks 1.0, and that seemed a bit foreign to me at the time.

[zilmer]

Originally posted by funkboy:
<STRONG>- wait, I didn't notice that before, Freehand comes with it
- good lord, this is pretty much Macromedia's entire product lineup for ... $399 for the upgrade? and can I move my license from my current educational one to commercial? Woo-hoo! Ten cheers to Macromedia for trumping Apple's announcement, at least in terms of value! A-mazing!</STRONG>

Hehehe, I am telling you . Plus the features... the features. Check "What's new" and you'll be amazed by the Panels thing and what it can do with bitmaps. Plus the overall speed improvement (click Optimize tab and you'll see how fast it previews the pic in web format). Plus load of other things. They have really put an effort to make this thing. Respect.

[zilmer]

Originally posted by Simon Mundy:
<STRONG>Don't want to start a flame war here...

But what's the major reason why everyone's so excited about Fireworks? What can it do that Imageready can't, or what does it do better?

I think I've only played with Fireworks 1.0, and that seemed a bit foreign to me at the time.</STRONG>

You know.. I'd say it's like with Freehand. Some people love to use Quark + Illustrator. Make the EPS in one and layout in another. Some people love Freehand, where you can basically do the both in the same app. Sure, both ways have their wrongs and rights and I am not going to flame either...

But what I love about Fireworks is one really essential difference it has from others - you can layout fast. You don't need to look around in Layers palette for the components. Just select an element from canvas and move it around. Plus you can draw fast with Vector tools and it rasterizes it smoothly and quickly. No need to go back to some vector app and import something again etc etc etc.

Sure the optimization and several things are basically the same as in ImageReady, but when creating a layout from scratch - drawing and redrawing it, trying one color or another, trying 2-column layout vs. 3-column layout - the Fireworks is in my mind a much faster way to get work done.

Once again - use whatever you like, the outcome is what matters! But I do believe that Fireworks is the simplest and the quickest solution for web gfx.

[danrodney]

2 part reply:

#1: OK, this is a biggy for real web developers. I am newer to backend stuff and am getting into Coldfusion or PHP development. Which one should I choose? With PHP I'll be able to test in OS X, but Coldfusion is popular. Which one is better and why? And please don't just say PHP because it's on OS X. For websites, which is best? Any details as to what each one can and can't do it VERY much appreciated.

#2: Why is Fireworks better than ImageReady?
The biggest reason:
FW-vector and bitmap
IR-bitmap and hardly any vector

Vector drawing allows for no worries about size, etc. because you can later enlarge the graphics.
----
FW-better optimization, including better transparency options
----
FW-great interaction with Dreamweaver
IR-bad to no interact with Dreamweaver (and yes DW is better than GoLive)
----
FW-the only program that I know that can do oval imagemaps (not circles, but ovals... some of the tools in other programs are called ovals, but only produce circular hotspots.)
----
FW-better animation tools, including onion skinning (IR doesn't have onionskinning)
----
And the list goes on, but that's all I feel like typing

[Chris in Madison]

Originally posted by danrodney:
<STRONG>

#1: OK, this is a biggy for real web developers. I am newer to backend stuff and am getting into Coldfusion or PHP development. Which one should I choose? With PHP I'll be able to test in OS X, but Coldfusion is popular. Which one is better and why? And please don't just say PHP because it's on OS X. For websites, which is best? Any details as to what each one can and can't do it VERY much appreciated.

</STRONG>

Two things: personal preference and learning curve.

ColdFusion is a tag-based language and has an extremely easy syntax to pick up. You can do in a few lines of code what it would take dozens of lines to do in PHP, ASP, JSP, or any other script-based language. Downside is ColdFusion applications won't run on a Mac server. You'll need a separate Windows or *nix server with CF on it to develop and/or serve your applications.

PHP is a script-based language and has native implementations for MacOS X machines. You can develop and serve from the same machine. It has a Perl-like syntax and is pretty complex compared to CF. But if you want a Mac-based solution, then that's your baby right there. Also, JSP is available for MacOS X, which is similar in complexity.

Best regards,
Chris

[danrodney]

Thanks for the reply... that really explains things. I've seen some of what Cold Fusion can do and it's easy code... I guess the drawback is the PC server. Does anyone know if VPC works for local testing?

Thanks again.

[Chris in Madison]

Originally posted by danrodney:
<STRONG>Thanks for the reply... that really explains things. I've seen some of what Cold Fusion can do and it's easy code... I guess the drawback is the PC server. Does anyone know if VPC works for local testing?

Thanks again.</STRONG>

You could give it a try. You can download CF5 trial from Macromedia. After the trial expires, it becomes a single-user development license. It's certainly worth trying. I'd make sure I was using Win2K Pro at a minimum for VPC.

Best regards,
Chris