[LTParis]

I have developed websites with Dreamweaver for nearly 6 years now, and of course I have grown very used to using the DW interface. I took a crack at using Adobe GL (CS) on a PC, but there were enough differences that I just didn't like it much (strange, I love all the other Adobe suite products).

Now when I used a 733 Quicksilver in 2002, I noticed tha DW was dog slow. Has this changed recently. Should I just abandone MM when I switch platforms?

[Big Mac]

If you take a look at various user comments, you'll see that there's no great consensus over which product is superior. Opinions vary widely: Many swear by Dreamweaver in opposition to Golive, but that seems to have changed in the last iteration of both programs. I have seen more negative comments about Dreamweaver and more positive ones about Golive. On the other hand, some have cast doubt on the future of Golive.

I also have to upgrade web authoring apps, and although I am a Golive 4 user (still in Classic, blech), user discussion has caused me to doubt the purchase. If you're really comfortable with Dreamweaver, I would likely stick with it. Both applications are serviceable and probably quite similar in capability, but both are far from ideal. I yearn for an Apple web production suite.

[madmacgames]

When I switched, I stuck with Dreamweaver because that is what I was used to. One thing is the Mac version does not have tabs, like the PC version does. **shakes fist at Macromedia**

Out of the box Dreamweaver MX 2004 is dogg slow. However, if you download & install the 7.0.1 update, it will fix that, and it will run pretty good then.

And also with Apple's advent of Expos�, I don't find the no tabs quite as annoying anymore.

PS. I am on a 1Ghz 12" powerbook and use Dreamweaver for all my web coding (XHTML, HTML, CSS, PHP, and SQL statements).

[geraldartman]

GL CS is not very good for dynamic content development. Version 6 has an excellent php library with palletized routines for query/display list/edit and delete. It even allowed for list editing and updates instead of only single record editing. Includes the routines for pagination and list record to detail page links. They also had JSP and ASP libraries that I believe provided the same functionality although I have not used them.

With all of that, they tossed it out the window and completely dropped all dynamic content in CS.

[Big Mac]

Originally posted by geraldartman:
GL CS is not very good for dynamic content development. Version 6 has an excellent php library with palletized routines for query/display list/edit and delete. It even allowed for list editing and updates instead of only single record editing. Includes the routines for pagination and list record to detail page links. They also had JSP and ASP libraries that I believe provided the same functionality although I have not used them.

With all of that, they tossed it out the window and completely dropped all dynamic content in CS.

Why in the word did Adobe do that? They threw out perfectly good functionality? I could really use some graphical tools for dynamic web content, too. Aargh. Thank you for the information, gerald.

[Phil Sherry]

i never understood why they dropped that, either. strange.