[funkboy]

Has anyone here used Dreamweaver 8 much? Macworld's 4.5-mouse review proclaims:

It is the best Dreamweaver version I’ve seen so far, and I highly recommend it.

I have not used it yet. What are the thoughts of Dreamweaver 8 users of the program?

[jay3ld]

used it.. and i like it allot better than version 7..

they seemed to step back a bit from the use of css like in version 7 everything you did in it went to a css sheet.

also theres something i call smart tags
so if you do

<table><td>Hi</td><td>bye</td></tr>

if you type </ it will auto add </table> for you.. thats a cool feature and great time saver.

still the same slow load time though.
Not much improvement for the GUI which i think needs real improvement.
A differnt looking Dock Icon if anyone cares

and for me and the big (1000 lines+) pages i do it takes forever to give me a Design view and slow moving.

thats all that i seem to notice different...

[funkboy]

Those big pages you're doing, does it take longer in version 8 to load them than version 7? Or about the same slow speed?

[jay3ld]

same speed i think i cant tell... i just hate that it takes about 45 secs to build the design view. it once crashed when it was doing it...
Have you downloaded the trial? give that a shoot and see for your self.

[skalie]

As I use php for layout ( I'll put the names of the menu items in an array and use css to weave the magic ) design view doesn't work for me, I need to ftp up to a server and then view the results?

Which means I can use any old text editor, which I do.

So can someone do a hard sell to make me want to spend the time to learn Dreamweaver? (I'm going to purchase Flash 8 anyway and Studio 8 is only a few dollars more)

[skalie]

Oops, double post

[jay3ld]

i dont think there is a way to view php live... just got to live with it. i only use it for my html which i do allot of on one site

[Phil Sherry]

Originally Posted by skalie

As I use php for layout ( I'll put the names of the menu items in an array and use css to weave the magic ) design view doesn't work for me, I need to ftp up to a server and then view the results?

It's called Apache and it lives on your machine. Just setup the remote host to be your local webserver and make sure PHP is enabled.

[skalie]

Originally Posted by Phil Sherry

It's called Apache and it lives on your machine. Just setup the remote host to be your local webserver and make sure PHP is enabled.

.................can Dreamweaver use the localhost/webserver in preview mode?

[nica]

No it cannot. You need to use a browser engine DW can only display layout. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[quiklee]

Does anyone get an error when creating a Photo Album . . . . i've entered everything correctly and I just keep getting an error with no explanation why . . . . anyone know what i can do? i've already done a reinstall, but it does nothing.

[selowitch]

I would get rid of DW entirely and learn how to hand-code if I were you. I bit more learning at the beginning, a lot less frustration and greater standards compliance for the rest of your web development career. You can use SubEthaEdit or TextWrangler for this purpose (free!) and be quite happy.

[madmacgames]

Originally Posted by skalie

.................can Dreamweaver use the localhost/webserver in preview mode?

it can in "live mode" but it looks terrible, at least DW 7 did. Much better off viewing & testing in a real browser

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by selowitch

I would get rid of DW entirely and learn how to hand-code if I were you. I bit more learning at the beginning, a lot less frustration and greater standards compliance for the rest of your web development career. You can use SubEthaEdit or TextWrangler for this purpose (free!) and be quite happy.

I'm a hand-coder myself (started coding in 95-96), but I'm also a designer. The last few years I've used mostly hand-coding to do pages. I've used Dreamweaver in the past (4, MX) and only recently tried it for a new site. It's still mostly handcoded, but the designview, it's site-organisation tools, extensibility, the built in code-dictionaries and manuals, and accesibility-reporting is really handy. Designview broke when I used an advanced php-script to determine which stylesheet to use, but the codeview is fast and direct saving to FTP is good too.

So I would say even for hand-coding Dreamweaver 8 is worthwhile.

[alex_kac]

Hand coding is the only way to go - except! There are some things that are just easier and nicer to do with a visual editor. CSS editing with preview. Just like when I develop my stuff in C++, I do mockups in .NET first or even Photoshop and then develop based off that.

[quiklee]

does anyone know of any night classes in Socal to learn this stuff? I'm more of a learn by watching kind of person than reading from a book kind of person . . . .

[besson3c]

I haven't used the latest version of Dreamweaver, but I'd suggest not buying it.

Google gives higher page ranks to pages that are properly coded, it is better to code to web standards and without pushing browsers into quirks mode, and WYSIWYG editors still have the potential to destroy pages and render them incompatible with some browsers.

It is better to learn the code. Take it piece by piece and start off small, it doesn't take too much effort to unravel XHTML/CSS code.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by besson3c

I haven't used the latest version of Dreamweaver, but I'd suggest not buying it.

Google gives higher page ranks to pages that are properly coded, it is better to code to web standards and without pushing browsers into quirks mode, and WYSIWYG editors still have the potential to destroy pages and render them incompatible with some browsers.

It is better to learn the code. Take it piece by piece and start off small, it doesn't take too much effort to unravel XHTML/CSS code.

I had no problems with my latest page at all. It validates as XHTML-strict 1.0 and I didn't have to do any manual tweaking. Once again, I give DW high marks for web standards. It even includes a built in validator.

WYSIWYG-editors are not where they were in 2000 dude.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

I had no problems with my latest page at all. It validates as XHTML-strict 1.0 and I didn't have to do any manual tweaking. Once again, I give DW high marks for web standards. It even includes a built in validator.

WYSIWYG-editors are not where they were in 2000 dude.

Okay, pages validate... I can see how an automated tool can be written to only create code that validates, but is it optimal? Does it produce garbage tags that aren't needed? Does it embrace the semantic web thing, or just throw a bunch of properties into tags?

I'm all about clean code. Google loves clean code. Web browsers love clean code. I've supported the next to latest Dreamweaver/Contribute extensively and Contribute (which is based on DW) produced plenty of garbage code. Unless Studio 8/Contribute 3 really overhauled this code, I don't have reason to believe things have changed. I'm constantly fixing CSS problems and tweaking pages that I hand code, I don't see how a WYSIWYG editor would make life easier, unless I was creating extremely simple, non-dynamic pages.

Can I see a page designed with the latest Dreamweaver - a page where the code wasn't altered from what DW created?

[jackibar]

Originally Posted by jay3ld

used it.. and i like it allot better than version 7..

they seemed to step back a bit from the use of css like in version 7 everything you did in it went to a css sheet.

also theres something i call smart tags
so if you do

<table><td>Hi</td><td>bye</td></tr>

if you type </ it will auto add </table> for you.. thats a cool feature and great time saver.

still the same slow load time though.
Not much improvement for the GUI which i think needs real improvement.
A differnt looking Dock Icon if anyone cares

and for me and the big (1000 lines+) pages i do it takes forever to give me a Design view and slow moving.

thats all that i seem to notice different...

Hi - I've tried the demos of DW for the past 2 versions and both have major problems in displaying pages that are about 1500 lines or more of code - do you find this happening too? What happens (and it's only in the Mac version) is the text and graphics just start disappearing from the screen as you scroll past the 1500 line mark... It's extremely annoying and makes it almost impossible to get any work done without switching into Code view - which negates the whole reason for using a WYSIWYG program! I'd love to buy DW 8 but sure wish they'd fix this problem. And I just wondered if others experience this, too - Jay, you said after 1000 lines it takes 45 seconds to display - but for you it does eventually display? For me it will display only if I click into the blank area, but then when I try to "select" by highlighting, the text all disappears again and I can't even see what I'm doing...

Go Live's demo does not have this problem - but I do like DW better! Anyone else have an opinion between the 2 programs?

Thanks a bunch!

[jay3ld]

yea sooner or later the page displays.
it even does this in a php page i have that is 10,000 lines! when im viewing it in code. yet. textedit displays it just fine...
i think dreamweaver just just putting to much junk on the program and slowing it down.

[CaptainHaddock]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

I had no problems with my latest page at all. It validates as XHTML-strict 1.0 and I didn't have to do any manual tweaking. Once again, I give DW high marks for web standards. It even includes a built in validator.

WYSIWYG-editors are not where they were in 2000 dude.

Two questions:

1. Is Dreamweaver producing standards-compliant xhtml pages using proper div layouts and semantic mark-up, or is it churning out table-tag soup?

2. Does Dreamweaver fix all the myriad IE bugs that crop up, like float margin bugs and box model problems? I spend 30% of my development time fixing those by hand.

[skalie]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaddock

2. Does Dreamweaver fix all the myriad IE bugs that crop up, like float margin bugs and box model problems? I spend 30% of my development time fixing those by hand.

the reason I'm still using tables for layout

[jackibar]

Originally Posted by jay3ld

yea sooner or later the page displays.
it even does this in a php page i have that is 10,000 lines! when im viewing it in code. yet. textedit displays it just fine...
i think dreamweaver just just putting to much junk on the program and slowing it down.

Hi again, Jay - Well, I just tried it and gave it over 15 minutes and nothing ever displayed! I'm referring to "Design" view - not Code view. Code view seems to work fine. Here's a link to a page that does this - if you scroll past about line 1500 everything starts disappearing. I'm curious if it does this for all of you other Mac users or just me?

http://www.overcomingovereating.com/groups.html

Thanks for any info...

[jay3ld]

your right it does do that. but mine goes all the way to 2359 before doing this

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaddock

Two questions:

1. Is Dreamweaver producing standards-compliant xhtml pages using proper div layouts and semantic mark-up, or is it churning out table-tag soup?

2. Does Dreamweaver fix all the myriad IE bugs that crop up, like float margin bugs and box model problems? I spend 30% of my development time fixing those by hand.

1. Standards-compliant xhtml pages using proper div layouts and semantic mark-up. I believe there is an option to churn out tablesoups as well, but it's not on by default.

2. No, but installing IE7 on your site does that for you without needing to hand-tweak your code.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Can I see a page designed with the latest Dreamweaver - a page where the code wasn't altered from what DW created?

http://selskapsspesialisten.no

[mania]

i have had to fix more dreamweaver pages that were total crap than i care to remember. tables height tags with nested tables with one pixel gifs in them - BURN IN HTMHELL macromedia!

[- - e r i k - -]

Dreamweaver 8 isn't Dreamweaver MX or Dreamweaver 4. Table-layouts are a thing of the distant past and the current generation of WYSIWYG-editors acknowledge that and work perfectly well with XHTML and CSS just like web designers do.

[mania]

show me. (meaning point out a site you or someone else did in dw8 and are proud of the source code)

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by mania

show me. (meaning point out a site you or someone else did in dw8 and are proud of the source code)

He just did, two or three posts up. http://selskapsspesialisten.no

[mania]

i guess i should add - in WYSYWIG view not by hand coding.

edit - oh that page - not bad source but fairly simple.

[besson3c]

Did DW automatically generate those external stylesheets and Javascript rollover over routine file?

[mania]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Did DW automatically generate those external stylesheets and Javascript rollover over routine file?

you know I hope that rollover images will go away - they are a waste - I understand that anti-aliased text is not as pretty - but if you ever want to generate links on the fly from a database like in a shopping cart for example you really need to use text links - and you might as well for other sites to make maintenance easier.

i apologize to -erik- for sounding like mr know it all - but when you have dealt with the horror that DW created in the past its hard to come around to liking it all the sudden (he will prolly be waking up soon in the land of oz). i am open tho... so thats why i really want to see good complex examples. perhaps someday programs will write programs and people will only be good for art and music.

[surferboy]

I am not even close to a real web developer, but I have used DW 8 and I like it a lot. I realize there are many arguments against its use, but one thing I've noticed is that it can actually help me learn to hand code.

I know a little about hand coding, so I will use the split view that shows both the code and the preview- and I will look at the relationship between the code and the end result. When you are learning, it really helps to have a WYSIWIG- if nothing else, to save time.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by surferboy

I am not even close to a real web developer, but I have used DW 8 and I like it a lot. I realize there are many arguments against its use, but one thing I've noticed is that it can actually help me learn to hand code.

I know a little about hand coding, so I will use the split view that shows both the code and the preview- and I will look at the relationship between the code and the end result. When you are learning, it really helps to have a WYSIWIG- if nothing else, to save time.

I understand what you're saying. DW and other WYSIWYG editors is analogous to have a language translator handy. They can help you learn the language (and sometimes serve as a crutch), and can be reasonably accurate.

However, a better way to actually learn the *language*, IMHO, is using BBEdit. BBEdit will help you construct the syntax you need, and help you put together HTML tags. It includes a preview mode too. The difference is, while DW will attempt to write code for you, BBEdit will merely help you learn the syntax.

I personally prefer this approach. CSSEdit takes this same approach.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Did DW automatically generate those external stylesheets and Javascript rollover over routine file?

There is no javascript-rollover at all. The only javascript used is the ALA-styleswitcher and a preload for the background-png to make it instantaneous when using CSS-rollovers. (People with JS turned off won't suffer, they might see a small lag the first time they hover over the menu).

And mania: Simple is bad? There are some fairly advanced PHP-code (the server switching of stylesheets by date, and the menu is an include) in there that you obviously don't see though. I don't find simplicity to be bad at all - fast loading and easy maintenance of code wherever it's needed. I haven't yet made a massive complicated site with it, but that's because such sights usually require fairly complicated backends and CMS-systems to deliver what ultimately shouldn't be much more complicated than the site I just showed you for usability reasons. You tend to break such sites into small blocks that you do separately anyway. Like my own blog which is a way more elaborate project: http://www.erikveland.com/

I really agree with surferboy that DW can be a tool to learn to hand-code, seeing the relationship between the code and the results instantly is pretty helpful. As well as the dictionaries and code-examples it provides.

I'm not promoting DW as the end-all be-all of webdesign tools. I just started using it again after years and years of hand-coding (I went from hand-coding (back in 95!) to WYSIWYG to hand-coding and now back to hand-coding with real site-managment and real-timepreviews). Whatever tool makes you more effective is the best for the job.

[- - e r i k - -]

Oh, and I've also set CSSEdit as my external editor for stylesheets in DW. Works great

[DeathMan]

Maybe I'm just a simpleton, but why are you coding 1500+ line pages? Google won't spider that far into a page, and neither will most people. Break it up.

Also, CSSEdit rocks my world, and I'm looking forward for real support for it Transmit.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by DeathMan

Maybe I'm just a simpleton, but why are you coding 1500+ line pages? Google won't spider that far into a page, and neither will most people. Break it up.

Also, CSSEdit rocks my world, and I'm looking forward for real support for it Transmit.

I used to use Transmit, until I discovered Netatalk for my FreeBSD server, and BBEdit's built in FTP/sFTP support. Just FYI, in case this is useful to know!

[MacMan4000]

Just curious, what makes BBEdit so much better than something like SubEthaEdit or code view in DW8?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by MacMan4000

Just curious, what makes BBEdit so much better than something like SubEthaEdit or code view in DW8?

I'm not intimately familiar with DW8 or SubEtha, but here are some cool BBEdit features, in no particular order

- built in validator, various scripts such as tidy, convert to XHTML, etc.
- built in FTP and sFTP
- customizable key mappings
- excellent OS X support
- global search and replace (will do a recursive search and replace of files in a directory)
- excellent search/pattern matching
- several useful text formatting tools (e.g. zap gremlin characters, etc.)
- change to upper/lower case
- syntax coloring of HTML, CSS, PHP, likely other languages (very useful)

In short, BBEdit is a swiss-army knife text editor for anybody writing code by hand. It rules!

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by MacMan4000

Just curious, what makes BBEdit so much better than something like SubEthaEdit or code view in DW8?

I'm not intimately familiar with DW8 or SubEtha, but here are some cool BBEdit features, in no particular order

- built in validator, various scripts such as tidy, convert to XHTML, etc.
- built in FTP and sFTP
- customizable key mappings
- excellent OS X support
- global search and replace (will do a recursive search and replace of files in a directory)
- excellent search/pattern matching
- several useful text formatting tools (e.g. zap gremlin characters, etc.)
- change to upper/lower case
- syntax coloring of HTML, CSS, PHP, likely other languages (very useful)

In short, BBEdit is a swiss-army knife text editor for anybody writing code by hand. It rules!

[- - e r i k - -]

Those are all features of Dreamweaver 8. Add to that excellent site management features and built in code reference and the code editor of DW8 would seem to trump even BBEdit.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

Those are all features of Dreamweaver 8. Add to that excellent site management features and built in code reference and the code editor of DW8 would seem to trump even BBEdit.

Wow.... DW8 must have REALLY come a long way since 7 then, or else I didn't give DW 7's code view a fair chance (I thought its WYSIWYG editor was crappy). I'm not crazy about Macromedia's products in general, so perhaps my built in bias has prevented me from paying attention to DW8's new features.

What I really want is better support for dynamic web content within Flash movies.

[- - e r i k - -]

Trust me man, I was biased against it too. I rarely touch the design view (although I do keep split view open for reference). DW8 is really good. I really missed site-managment when I started handcoding again. And the built in reference is really really handy too.

I don't want to diss BBEdit in any way though, it's a most excellent editor. It's just that for my needs and webwork, I actually appreciate DW8s features better now. (Mind you I have only tried it for my latest project, but that was enough to convince me to go back to it though).

As for Flash I wouldn't know, but I think flash has supported dynamic content since mx (how well, I have no idea though).

[iluvmymactoo]

Originally Posted by besson3c

.... What I really want is better support for dynamic web content within Flash movies.

You got it with Macromedia Studio 8

[skalie]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

As for Flash I wouldn't know, but I think flash has supported dynamic content since mx (how well, I have no idea though).

Was using Flash 5 and Php together, Flash MX introduced Flash remoting and components for harvesting data from xml documents etc, Flash 8 (which I've only breifly played with) seems to have focused more on graphical bells and whistles, text effects and improved video interfaces.

[techtrucker]

Digging this thread up...

Have till the end of the month to take advantage of upgrade pricing. Have DW MX 2004, so I can either upgrade to DW 8 for $199 or get the whole Studio for $399.
My concerns: I wasn't happy with DW MX's CSS handling and speed. Has this improved much? And secondly, is it believed that the Macromedia products will continue to live on, or will they ultimately be killed off by Adobe? I know that's trying to predict the future...

[jay3ld]

download the demo and see for yourself if you like it.

second. i lost a link but it had something on it about adobe and macromedia teaming up to create better programs.