OSS Substitute for Dreamweaver?

[Thelasko]

I was looking at a Brainstorm idea (http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/18134/) about a creative suite for Ubuntu, similar to Adobe's. In the discussion it was mentioned that there is no substitute for Dreamweaver. What do you think?

I started a Brainstorm idea (http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/18433/) about it and was rejected by the moderators.

P.S. Web development != Web design. We aren't talking code here (Thanks Rokurosv!)

P.P.S. If I repost my idea on Brainstorm, how should I rephrase it to get my point across?

P.P.P.S. After some root cause analysis, I've rewritten my Brainstorm Idea. (http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/18455/)

[Rokurosv]

I don't think there's a substitute for DW. There's Kompozer, NVU and Quanta but as far as WYSIWYG editors I think DW is the best. That said I hate WYISWYG editors and there are better open source options for web development, like Aptana.

[Tibuda]

There's a option missing: forget about WYSIWYG.

[Vadi]

I think there is some online things that's being made (280atlas?) that would be similar.

[Thelasko]

That said I hate WYISWYG editors and there are better open source options for web development, like Aptana.

Most web designers I know don't do code. They just know how to make things look pretty. I think there is a major misunderstanding about that. Current WYSIWYG developers think the user should know how to code. As a friend of mine once said (she is a web designer):

I just make it look pretty, I have a staff of code monkeys to make sure everything is correct.

[Thelasko]

There's a option missing: forget about WYSIWYG.

Nope, not an option

[mihai.ile]

What about Aptana?

[Thelasko]

What about Aptana?

This is the first I've heard of it. Please, tell me more about it. Is knowledge of coding required?

[Rokurosv]

Most web designers I know don't do code. They just know how to make things look pretty. I think there is a major misunderstanding about that. Current WYSIWYG developers think the user should know how to code. As a friend of mine once said (she is a web designer):

Wev development != Web design. I was referring to web development. I have a friend that design websites, and he can't live without DW.
DW has a good editor too, but a lot of people just stay with the visual editor.

[Thelasko]

Wev development != Web design. I was referring to web development. I have a friend that design websites, and he can't live without DW.
DW has a good editor too, but a lot of people just stay with the visual editor.

You just hit the nail square on the head. That's exactly what I'm talking about!

[Redache]

Wev development != Web design. I was referring to web development. I have a friend that design websites, and he can't live without DW.
DW has a good editor too, but a lot of people just stay with the visual editor.

Saying that Dreamweaver also creates the most inefficient, messy and hard to read(code wise) websites known to man. I guess it's all relative to the user though.

Amaya's quite a good WYSIWIG editor, although I personally prefer to code as HTML is not hard to learn.

[Tibuda]

Most web designers I know don't do code. They just know how to make things look pretty. I think there is a major misunderstanding about that. Current WYSIWYG developers think the user should know how to code. As a friend of mine once said (she is a web designer):Those guys don't know how to make a webpage look pretty. They only know how to make Dreamweaver do it. And writing HTML+CSS is not really "code" as PHP is.

[cmat]

Bluefish? I can't remember but I'm not sure if it's WYSIWYG. Maybe this could be an interesting project for FOSS devs to pick up on. Could help people make the switch since dreamweaver is a killer app. Go with Amaya I guess.

[Thelasko]

...since dreamweaver is a killer app.

Is that a vote for "there's no substitute?"

[MasterNetra]

I personally use Notetab Light, which works just as well under wine as it does natively in windows...but then again its not a complex program like DW. Granted its simply a glorified notepad that provides html/CSS/etc codes snippets as well as wizard to help setup a new page. But meh it works for me.

[Paqman]

DW has a good editor too, but a lot of people just stay with the visual editor.

Indeed. I use Dreamweaver in split screen mode when i'm bashing out html/css. Even if you code totally by hand it's still a really useful package. It bundles a visual check of your code with an ftp client, code validator, etc, etc. I'd hate to have to maintain a large complicated site without a suite like Dreamweaver. It's got a ton of automated features that save a huge amount of time compared to hand-coding (such as the awesome "check links sitewide" feature)

Some hand-coding nazis constantly babble that using a tool like Dreamweaver is only for people who don't know html. That's a load of rubbish, IMO. Dreamweaver isn't designed to be a substitute for skills, it's designed to help professionals get stuff done quickly.

[cmat]

Is that a vote for "there's no substitute?"

Dreamwaver is a very heavy duty app and practically a standard for site designers. Amaya is the closest thing I can think of. Never used it, I'm more of a coding guy. As a substitute, pretty close from what I gather from the site. You have to open yourself to new options and make compromises or try to get the thing to work on WINE.

[Tibuda]

P.P.S. If I repost my idea on Brainstorm, how should I rephrase it to get my point across?Don't do it. This is not something to be posted in the Ubuntu Brainstorm. You better post something in the mail list of those editors you suggested.

P.S. I'm still against WYSIWYG for both web design and web development.

[theApokalypsis]

Bluefish? I can't remember but I'm not sure if it's WYSIWYG. Maybe this could be an interesting project for FOSS devs to pick up on. Could help people make the switch since dreamweaver is a killer app. Go with Amaya I guess.

Im using Bluefish (SVN) and its definitly my favourite so far out of a number I have tried. Aptana Studio is a great alternative to Dreamweaver and in fact better and without the sloppy code creation as well as full php and ruby on rails plugins, svn, ftp etc. Although it is based on Eclipse and Java. Bluefish is very lightweight and they are starting to have integrated intellisense for css, html, php (i believe).



This is the first I've heard of it. Please, tell me more about it. Is knowledge of coding required?

edit: sorry i didnt see Mihai's post about Aptana, but to elaborate for you Thelasko, Aptana does have some visual editor aspects, but more so html element insertion etc. here is the site...

http://www.aptana.com/

[MikeTheC]

Wev development != Web design. I was referring to web development. I have a friend that design websites, and he can't live without DW.
DW has a good editor too, but a lot of people just stay with the visual editor.

To the limited extent that I build web pages, that's what I do. Frankly, I don't see why I should have to be a coder to build a web page. I don't have to know PostScript to build a page layout.

[theApokalypsis]

To the limited extent that I build web pages, that's what I do. Frankly, I don't see why I should have to be a coder to build a web page. I don't have to know PostScript to build a page layout.

Lately I am seeing a lot of push towards having the actual Designers have to code their pages (xhtml/css3). I have a designer friend who is constantly learning on the go at his firm lol, but mostly in the markup aspect of web development which then again is a markup, and not a language used by developers.

got myself back to square 1 right there...

[WatchingThePain]

Good point.

I wish there was a Dreamweaver substitute ..tried Aptana..hated it.
I just count my blessings for having Gimp.

[MikeTheC]

Alright, allow me to sort of answer my own question here, since nobody else is likely to do it.

Regardless of whether you're building the layout for a business card or a broadsheet newspaper, you're not trying to make interactive, "operationally functional" content. You're creating a layout and hanging content from it. It's strictly visual.

By comparison, building a web site (that is, a web site that's not just a bunch of static, basic web pages) is really, in truth, equivalent in a lot of respects to writing an application. The thing for me, though, is that I've never had any interest in writing software. I didn't back when I was in high school in the late 80s, and I don't today. Writing code (in any sense) is not how my mind functions. I may be analytical and technical in nature, but I'm a creative type. I'd rather be the one writing the editorial content, or composing and shooting the photos, or (obviously) building the page layout. That's what I do, and what I do best. Trying to learn how to code is, for me, fundamentally a waste of time.

Until or unless this dynamic is bridged and addressed (if that's even possible) I don't see myself ever doing anything other than relatively simplistic static web pages, and doing such web pages on a strictly personal basis, and only on a very infrequent one.

[Thelasko]

Writing code (in any sense) is not how my mind functions. I may be analytical and technical in nature, but I'm a creative type. I'd rather be the one writing the editorial content, or composing and shooting the photos, or (obviously) building the page layout. That's what I do, and what I do best. Trying to learn how to code is, for me, fundamentally a waste of time.

Despite what others have said, there are many companies who will hire a person to only do page layout and not write any code. Don't underestimate the value of someone who is talented in graphic design. There is a lot of demand for people with those skills.

[Linuturk]

Saying that Dreamweaver also creates the most inefficient, messy and hard to read(code wise) websites known to man. I guess it's all relative to the user though.

Amaya's quite a good WYSIWIG editor, although I personally prefer to code as HTML is not hard to learn.

You obviously have never used Frontpage.

[Swagman]

(Amiga) Notepad FTW

:D

[Tibuda]

Despite what others have said, there are many companies who will hire a person to only do page layout and not write any code. Don't underestimate the value of someone who is talented in graphic design. There is a lot of demand for people with those skills.

Yeah. And there are a lot of people that do it (only the page layout) without WYSIWYG!

[Vadi]

Saying that someone should change their ways of designing isn't a proper solution.

There is no substitute for Dreamweaver, and partly because nobody can realize that it's needed. Adobe realized, made a good program, and now they hold a good share of designers.

[Tibuda]

There is no substitute for Dreamweaver, and partly because nobody can realize that it's needed. Adobe realized, made a good program, and now they hold a good share of designers.If someone writes an open source and cross-platform Dreamweaver substitute, all those lazy Dreamweaver users won't use it anyway. They will just start to complain, just like all those stupid GIMP < Photoshop comments.

[dspari1]

Saying that someone should change their ways of designing isn't a proper solution.

There is no substitute for Dreamweaver, and partly because nobody can realize that it's needed. Adobe realized, made a good program, and now they hold a good share of designers.

Someone finally said it. We can't just have an elitist attitude and expect to expand our user base. Dreamweaver is a killer app, and a OSS alternative would be good to have.


If someone writes an open source and cross-platform Dreamweaver substitute, all those lazy Dreamweaver users won't use it anyway. They will just start to complain, just like all those stupid GIMP < Photoshop comments.

Same could be said with Office 2007 and OpenOffice.

[geoken]

If someone writes an open source and cross-platform Dreamweaver substitute, all those lazy Dreamweaver users won't use it anyway.

So using an IDE makes someone lazy? I like dreamweaver because navigating through markup by actually clicking the area of the page you want to edit (split mode) is a lot faster than scrolling back and forth through the document. I also like that I can double click on an element and have a little box pop-up that lets me edit the CSS rule governing said element, for me it's a lot faster that way.

[MikeTheC]

Gimp is not the equal of Photoshop. If it were, there would be no such discussion taking place.

The fact that Gimp might be, let's say, 70-80% of what Photoshop is is not the same thing as being equal.

If you take a look at Firefox, for example, there's a reason that lots of people on lots of different OS platforms choose to use it either instead of or in addition to whatever the browser is that's supplied by the OS vendor. Likewise, take a look at the adoption rate for VLC, or Pidgin/Adium X, etc. These apps are used widely because they're at least "as good as" other -- perhaps even bundled -- commercial apps. I've been using Firefox and VLC nearly since each one appeared, and I happen to regard each of them highly. However, the exception doesn't prove the rule, and so it is simply sloppy reasoning to say that, since some F/OSS apps are better, all F/OSS apps are better. They may be more philosophically or ethically better, but they aren't necessarily technologically and functionally better.

[Tibuda]

Same could be said with Office 2007 and OpenOffice.Sure. OpenOffice is such a bloated software with many useless features because all of the MS Office users never stop complaining about it. (I said that on the OpenOffice user survey) The same would happen with a Dreamweaver clone.


Gimp is not the equal of Photoshop. If it were, there would be no such discussion taking place.

The fact that Gimp might be, let's say, 70-80% of what Photoshop is is not the same thing as being equal.That 20-30% is probably garbage.


If you take a look at Firefox, for example, there's a reason that lots of people on lots of different OS platforms choose to use it either instead of or in addition to whatever the browser is that's supplied by the OS vendor. Likewise, take a look at the adoption rate for VLC, or Pidgin/Adium X, etc. These apps are used widely because they're at least "as good as" other -- perhaps even bundled -- commercial apps. I've been using Firefox and VLC nearly since each one appeared, and I happen to regard each of them highly. However, the exception doesn't prove the rule, and so it is simply sloppy reasoning to say that, since some F/OSS apps are better, all F/OSS apps are better. They may be more philosophically or ethically better, but they aren't necessarily technologically and functionally better.I'm not saying F/OSS is better than proprietary, but WYSIWYG is for lazy people. And if you really learn webdesign (XHTML+CSS), you won't need any bloated IDE, although you are able to use it.

[Thelasko]

I'm not saying F/OSS is better than proprietary, but WYSIWYG is for lazy people. And if you really learn webdesign (XHTML+CSS), you won't need any bloated IDE, although you are able to use it.

I think we have struck upon the root cause. It's the same root cause that has plagued Linux for years.

It's DEVELOPERS!

Developers who say:

Why can't users think more like developers?

and wind up with users that say:

Who wrote this piece of crap? It's unusable! Why can't developers think more like users?

If Ubuntu is really "Linux for Humans" this attitude needs to stop. This is how we end up with stuff like Script-Fu, that only someone with a knowledge of programing can understand.

Developers: Asking a user to write even the simplest code is like asking you to write in machine code. Remember that!

[Tibuda]

I think we have struck upon the root cause. It's the same root cause that has plagued Linux for years.

It's DEVELOPERS!
Web design = (X)HTML + CSS
Web development = (X)HTML + PHP or ASP or Rails or anything else + database (no CSS here)



If Ubuntu is really "Linux for Humans" this attitude needs to stop. This is how we end up with stuff like Script-Fu, that only someone with a knowledge of programing can understand.
This has nothing to do with Ubuntu, and that's why your brainstorm idea was rejected.

[dragos240]

I like KompoZer, sadly the current version is not compatible with 8.10, though i found a version on a german website that is.

[Vadi]

I think this question has served it's purpose.

There are several OSS projects looking to take Dreamweavers spot - look into using & contributing to them if you'd like. If you need something now, Virtualbox is your only option I'm afraid.

[Grant A.]

I don't like HTML/CSS editors at all. Personally, Vim/Emacs is fine for me.

[mathyou]

I find that it is hard to make a very accessible site with dreamweaver for people with disabilities or people accessing with their phone. Gedit works fine.

[geoken]

I'm not saying F/OSS is better than proprietary, but WYSIWYG is for lazy people. And if you really learn webdesign (XHTML+CSS), you won't need any bloated IDE, although you are able to use it.

It's not about needing it, it's about the benefits of using the WYSIWYG method. Using a color picker directly on an element is about 100x faster than tediously inputting different hex values and running through the save/refresh cycle.

[Vadi]

Btw, might want to check out Firebug for that. It allows real-time changes to web-pages for drafting.

[aktiwers]

We need a TextMate Clone!!

[Northsider]

No substitute. Some windows programs just have no good substitutes.

[Rokurosv]

We need a TextMate Clone!!

Gedit + plugins = Close enough.

There's also Komodo Edit which I find better than Textmate

[MikeTheC]

No substitute. Some windows programs just have no good substitutes.

Or Mac OS programs, either... ;)

[MikeTheC]

Before beginning this post, I wanted to warn everyone that the content you are about to read may, if you're only into skimming and not "going deep" will make it seem like I'm a Microsoft fanboy, which I most certainly am not. Just bear that in mind as you keep reading...




Same could be said with Office 2007 and OpenOffice.
Sure. OpenOffice is such a bloated software with many useless features because all of the MS Office users never stop complaining about it. (I said that on the OpenOffice user survey) The same would happen with a Dreamweaver clone.
No, OpenOffice is largely an extension of the original StarOffice project from Sun. It's a fine product to be sure, and clearly has made some serious headway in its time. That being said, MS Office (not 2007 and its damnable "ribbon UI") has always seemed to be the better, more polished and refined product. That's part UI, part execution, and, quite frankly, largely its feature set. It does more and makes getting at those functions relatively standard and straight-forward.



Gimp is not the equal of Photoshop. If it were, there would be no such discussion taking place.

The fact that Gimp might be, let's say, 70-80% of what Photoshop is is not the same thing as being equal.
That 20-30% is probably garbage.
You know, that attitude isn't really going to win you any friends or converts to your side. It's ****-poor, in fact. And, to the extent that it is shared by F/OSS developers, it's inexcusable. However, I'd like to think at least the project leaders in F/OSS are a bit more mature and professional enough not to think that way or treat their users like that.




If you take a look at Firefox, for example, there's a reason that lots of people on lots of different OS platforms choose to use it either instead of or in addition to whatever the browser is that's supplied by the OS vendor. Likewise, take a look at the adoption rate for VLC, or Pidgin/Adium X, etc. These apps are used widely because they're at least "as good as" other -- perhaps even bundled -- commercial apps. I've been using Firefox and VLC nearly since each one appeared, and I happen to regard each of them highly. However, the exception doesn't prove the rule, and so it is simply sloppy reasoning to say that, since some F/OSS apps are better, all F/OSS apps are better. They may be more philosophically or ethically better, but they aren't necessarily technologically and functionally better.
I'm not saying F/OSS is better than proprietary, but WYSIWYG is for lazy people. And if you really learn webdesign (XHTML+CSS), you won't need any bloated IDE, although you are able to use it.

You really don't like to listen to or accept other people's points of view, do you, Daniel? I'm not a coder. Your insistence on me working against how I work best so I can accommodate how a program works, instead of having the program rise to the level of letting me, the user, work in the way I work best, is completely antithetical to good software development practices. So, if I'm not a coder because that's not how my brain most efficiently operates, then I should force myself to operate in a wholly inefficient fashion and consider that to somehow be acceptable? I'm sorry, but I have to ask... did you even read what I have written in this thread?

Thelasko: +1

[Paqman]

If you need something now, Virtualbox is your only option I'm afraid.

Dreamweaver actually runs flawlessly in Wine.

[Thelasko]

...instead of having the program rise to the level of letting me, the user, work in the way I work best, is completely antithetical to good software development practices. So, if I'm not a coder because that's not how my brain most efficiently operates, then I should force myself to operate in a wholly inefficient fashion and consider that to somehow be acceptable?

I've rewritten my Brainstorm idea. (http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/18455/) I think my original idea never really identified the root cause. Thanks to everyone's help, I think this new idea is much better than the old one.

As my boss would say, you have to ask "why?" 5 times (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_Whys)to get to the root cause.

[S0VERE1GN]

Text editor is a good substitute for dream weaver ^_^

[Paqman]

I've rewritten my Brainstorm idea. (http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/18455/)

Have you heard of popularity-contest? It's an option you can tick during installation that passes information on what packages you have installed and how often you use them to Ubuntu. It shows up in Add/Remove as those little stars.

So there already is a feedback system. Maybe not as in-depth as what you're suggesting, but on the plus side it's automated.

[Thelasko]

Have you heard of popularity-contest? It's an option you can tick during installation that passes information on what packages you have installed and how often you use them to Ubuntu. It shows up in Add/Remove as those little stars.

So there already is a feedback system. Maybe not as in-depth as what you're suggesting, but on the plus side it's automated.

Yes, I've heard of it, but I don't think it goes far enough. It doesn't give the developers any reason why one program is preferred over another. I would say the results of popularity-contest is the equivalent of sales numbers in the proprietary world. I think there needs to be something more in line with market research.

Besides, popularity-contest can't compare proprietary software with open source. Therefore the developers may have no idea that the users prefer the proprietary offering.

P.S. If you have any other ideas about solving this problem, please add them.

[Tibuda]

Btw, might want to check out Firebug for that. It allows real-time changes to web-pages for drafting.Yes, it's perfect to fix spacing and colors in CSS.


You know, that attitude isn't really going to win you any friends or converts to your side. It's ****-poor, in fact. And, to the extent that it is shared by F/OSS developers, it's inexcusable. However, I'd like to think at least the project leaders in F/OSS are a bit more mature and professional enough not to think that way or treat their users like that.Sorry, I was really rude. First remember I'm a user too. No developer, no leader. The same I said about OpenOffice goes here. If Gimp is only 80% of what Photoshop is, maybe that is a good feature (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principle). If you can do the same you can do with Photoshop in Gimp, then you are using 20% less software.


You really don't like to listen to or accept other people's points of view, do you, Daniel? I'm not a coder. Your insistence on me working against how I work best so I can accommodate how a program works, instead of having the program rise to the level of letting me, the user, work in the way I work best, is completely antithetical to good software development practices. So, if I'm not a coder because that's not how my brain most efficiently operates, then I should force myself to operate in a wholly inefficient fashion and consider that to somehow be acceptable? I'm sorry, but I have to ask... did you even read what I have written in this thread?I was rude too with the "lazy" word, sorry again. You have a good point that you are more efficient with WYSIWYG now, but my point is that learning HTML and CSS (which are not programming languages) is the best Dreamweaver substitute in the long run. Your brain can learn it, don't underestimate yourself. If someone starts to write a cross-platform/Linux Dreamweaver clone, I don't want to stop him. I accept it. But I'm sure most Dreamweaver users will complain about it, and will not use it.

[Thelasko]

You have a good point that you are more efficient with WYSIWYG now, but my point is that learning HTML and CSS (which are not programming languages) is the best Dreamweaver substitute in the long run.

I think we can all agree that no WYSIWYG software will ever be a substitute for someone skilled in coding HTML and CSS. The issue is that there are few tools that enable someone not skilled in coding HTML and CSS (or with a very basic knowledge) to create content.

[Vadi]

Dreamweaver actually runs flawlessly in Wine.

Well there you go ;)

[MikeTheC]

i've rewritten my brainstorm idea. (http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/18455/) i think my original idea never really identified the root cause. Thanks to everyone's help, i think this new idea is much better than the old one.

As my boss would say, you have to ask "why?" 5 times (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_whys)to get to the root cause.

+2

[Paqman]

my point is that learning HTML and CSS (which are not programming languages) is the best Dreamweaver substitute in the long run.

And several people have made the point that the two aren't mutually exclusive. Dreamweaver is useful to people that can code from scratch. Some people prefer their tools minimal and separate, some prefer them all united into one app. That's all it is, there's no need to become a snob about what environment you build your sites in.

HTML/CSS is hardly difficult, after all. It's not like you've climbed some massive learning curve and become a different human being once you've learnt it.

[Tibuda]

I've rewritten my Brainstorm idea. (http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/18455/) I think my original idea never really identified the root cause. Thanks to everyone's help, I think this new idea is much better than the old one.

As my boss would say, you have to ask "why?" 5 times (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_Whys)to get to the root cause.

Your idea makes no sense, and has nothing to do with Ubuntu. Ubuntu is only a OS and is already focused on the end user. It is not perfect, but it gets better each release. If you really have suggestions to applications developers, tell this upstream. That's why your idea got rejected: it has nothing to do with Ubuntu.

Now, how Gimp can't compete with Photoshop? I would say Photoshop can't compete with Gimp due to the cost. Gimp is better than Photoshop for many users. Just because they have different interfaces, and you got used to PS, it doesn't mean Gimp is not focused on the users. All you can say is Gimp is not focused on Photoshop users.


@Paqman: replace Dreamweaver with WYSIWYG in my posts

[Thelasko]

Your idea makes no sense, and has nothing to do with Ubuntu. Ubuntu is only a OS and is already focused on the end user. It is not perfect, but it gets better each release. If you really have suggestions to applications developers, tell this upstream. That's why your idea got rejected: it has nothing to do with Ubuntu.
The mod didn't say that.


Now, how Gimp can't compete with Photoshop? I would say Photoshop can't compete with Gimp due to the cost. Gimp is better than Photoshop for many users. Just because they have different interfaces, and you got used to PS, it doesn't mean Gimp is not focused on the users. All you can say is Gimp is not focused on Photoshop users.


I'm actually starting to think that The GIMP should be forked. One project to focus on casual users, and one project to focus on professionals. I don't think it's simply an interface problem, because GIMPShop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimpshop) has been around a while and isn't successful.

[Tibuda]

I'm actually starting to think that The GIMP should be forked. One project to focus on casual users, and one project to focus on professionals. I don't think it's simply an interface problem, because GIMPShop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimpshop) has been around a while and isn't successful.Agreed. Let's fork Gimp for the casual users.

[Paqman]

@Paqman: replace Dreamweaver with WYSIWYG in my posts

OK, but this thread is actually about Dreamweaver. And WYSIWYG is only a small part of what Dreamweaver does. In fact one of the options you get when you first run it is whether you want to disable the "designer" interface altogether. The WYSIWYG interface is entirely optional.

[Tibuda]

I don't think it's simply an interface problem, because GIMPShop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimpshop) has been around a while and isn't successful.Why? Because Photoshop users will never be happy unless Adobe releases Photoshop for Linux.
Why? Don't know.
Why? I'm not a Photoshop user.
Why? I got used to Gimp, which fits all my needs, and is free (as beer and as speech)


About your idea, many upstream developers already have surveys like you propose (Pidgin did (http://pidgin.im/survey/results/) and OpenOffice is doing (http://surveys.services.openoffice.org/)).

[Thelasko]

About your idea, many upstream developers already have surveys like you propose (Pidgin did (http://pidgin.im/survey/results/) and OpenOffice is doing (http://surveys.services.openoffice.org/)).

And to their advantage. I think a common survey would get a larger response and benefit, not only upstream development, but Ubuntu as a whole.

[Vadi]

Forget the Pidgin survey, their devs are as unbending as ever (all the did was then reply why they won't add this and that to the survey). Empathy developers are ones who listen, and I hope they get it on par feature-wise with Pidgin soon.

[jenkinbr]

P.S. I'm still against WYSIWYG for both web design and web development.

+0.9

I use a WYSIWYG editor for the design process of the site. Once I have a good template, I begin to iron out all the <div>this</div> and <craptag>that</craptag>, put things into CSS, and from that point on, use that as a template for my pages.

WYSIWYG is good in the early stages of design, but when it comes to page efficency, I stick to HTML and stick the CSS outside, not buried in the HTML tags.

[Tibuda]

The issue is that there are few tools that enable someone not skilled in coding HTML and CSS (or with a very basic knowledge) to create content.The survey idea is not bad, but I think you got ideas for upstream projects, and you should tell them. Maybe they like your ideas. I can understand the need for WYSIWYG, but it would be better to ask them to "write a WYSIWYG html/css editor" or "add a WYSIWYG feature/plugin to editor X" than "write a substitute for Dreamweaver". There's a "Linux is not Windows" article somewhere I can't remember, but I think the same applies to many projects.

[Vadi]

I might have been wrong.

People listed a lot of these online sites that allow you to create websites in this blog post: http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/blog/?p=334

[geoken]

Btw, might want to check out Firebug for that. It allows real-time changes to web-pages for drafting.

I already use firebug. The process is no easier because I need to go back to my editor and implement all the changes I just tested in Firebug.

On a side note, I've always wondered why the people who bash Dreamweaver users don't see the contradiction when they praise firebug (that's not directed at you Vadi as you didn't bash anyone and were being helpful). The benefits of Firebug are exactly why people like dreamweaver, namely, the ability to view a rendered version of your code and select the region you want to edit by directly clicking it. Dreamweaver has the added benefit of actually saving the edits I make (as opposed to firebug which requires I merge them back into my css file, then re-upload that new file)

[aktiwers]

Gedit + plugins = Close enough.

There's also Komodo Edit which I find better than Textmate

I will give Komodo a look, but could you point me to some of the Gedit plugins that makes it as useful as TextMate? Because the ones I have installed does not :(

[Sand & Mercury]

Lately my preferred platform for web development has been Kate.

WYSIWYG editors are for beginners who are not serious about web design IMO. Do your mockup in something better featured for visuals like GIMP or Photoshop, then write the HTML/CSS by hand.

Pros that regularly use Dreamweaver for web development, would spend most of their time writing by hand and only use 1 or 2 graphical features for the sake of convenience.

* (My opinion here has probably been covered earlier in the thread, I haven't taken the time to read it all)

[Tibuda]

I will give Komodo a look, but could you point me to some of the Gedit plugins that makes it as useful as TextMate? Because the ones I have installed does not :(
This is a must-have extension, but it is not available from Ubuntu repositories (at least not in intrepid):
http://live.gnome.org/Gedit/LineToolsPlugin

[Rokurosv]

I will give Komodo a look, but could you point me to some of the Gedit plugins that makes it as useful as TextMate? Because the ones I have installed does not :(

Well just check for the gedit-plugin package (http://live.gnome.org/GeditPlugins), it contains a lot of useful plugins like snippets, autocomplete, code comment, color selector and the Gemini plugin (http://www.garyharan.com/index.php/2006/11/16/gemini-gedit-plugin-for-all-those-textmate-fans/), dunno if it's still maintained. There's also my favorite gedit theme, Tinge (http://www.harshj.com/2008/01/27/tinge-theme-for-gedit/)

For web development all my needs are fullfilled with Aptana Studio, I'm using it as a plugin right now with PDT till version 1.3 comes out, which should be soon. As far as equivalents, for me there's a tool that has no equivalent in any other platform: Coda, damn you Mac users D:

[Vadi]

http://www.micahcarrick.com/09-29-2007/gedit-html-editor.html [Customizing gedit as a Web Developer’s IDE]

[jenkinbr]

http://www.micahcarrick.com/09-29-2007/gedit-html-editor.html [Customizing gedit as a Web Developer’s IDE]
Thanks for that!

[a_terrestrial]

Endless debate over proper coding methods. Endless argument on weather WYSIWYG is or is not useful. On and on everyone goes when nobody, not even the anti-WYSIWYG people, ever address which programs offer the best coding features, the best ftp, and so on. Annoying. One person finally did addressed the "WYSIWYG" toss around love/hate point with regard to Dreamweaver and terminated the ability to argue about it any further.


OK, but this thread is actually about Dreamweaver. And WYSIWYG is only a small part of what Dreamweaver does. In fact one of the options you get when you first run it is whether you want to disable the "designer" interface altogether. The WYSIWYG interface is entirely optional.

And that's just it! Dreamweaver is everything an OSS alternative is and more! Just because it is famous for it's visual aid does not eliminate it's many positive attributes. So now that that is out of the way, I'd like to begin discussion on features of all the various softwares regardless of weather or not they include a visual option to test-view your pages.

Dreamweaver is a very powerful tool. What I have enjoyed most out of it was the ease of ftp. I would very much like to know which one of the many OSS alternatives offers similar local/remote ftp views.

What I have tested:
(This was a month ago and I was troubleshooting a bad Ubuntu install, so these tests didn't get very much attention. I plan to take a closer look at them)
First up was Bluefish. Problem was, I didn't discover any built in ftp so I found software that did under Add/Remove and selected the highest rated one. I was not thrilled. Next I tried Eclipse with Aptana plugins. But it's method of synchronization seemed, to me, pretty ridiculous. Again, not thrilled.

What I would like is comprehensive code view and excellent ftp. Primarily, I would like to know which one handles ftp the best, in your own opinion.

Next up for testing is KompoZer / Quanta Plus / Amaya.

[Vadi]

Ftp is made easy with GVFS, which now comes standard on Ubuntu.

Connect to a server via Places ▸ Connect, and voila... all gtk+ programs are now able to open, edit, and save files on the server. Gedit though has the best integration as it shows progress bars and etc.

[MasterNetra]

No substitute. Some windows programs just have no good substitutes.

Adobe After Effects being one as well it seems >.> Be nice if we had good alternatives to all of adobe products... As well as 3Ds Max... of course i suppose there is the linux version of Maya...

[Nevon]

I've been doing web development on and off for a couple of years now, and while I agree that Dreamweaver is a nice IDE, it's by no means a "killer app". For my needs, Bluefish is an excellent replacement. I don't think it has a "visual designer"-mode that I suppose some people might want (honestly I don't see the problem with just having your web browser pointing to the edited file and then just refreshing it). However, I'm not aware of an OSS substitute for Dreamweaver that has that functionality.

On a side-note, regardless of what people may have said earlier in this thread, no professional web designers (as in the people that actually code - not just the people who make the graphic design) use visual design modes to do their coding. As far as I know, Dreamweaver is only able to use absolute positioning - which is almost never what you're looking for. Secondly, the generated code is very, very sloppy.

[MasterNetra]

I've been doing web development on and off for a couple of years now, and while I agree that Dreamweaver is a nice IDE, it's by no means a "killer app". For my needs, Bluefish is an excellent replacement. I don't think it has a "visual designer"-mode that I suppose some people might want (honestly I don't see the problem with just having your web browser pointing to the edited file and then just refreshing it). However, I'm not aware of an OSS substitute for Dreamweaver that has that functionality.

On a side-note, regardless of what people may have said earlier in this thread, no professional web designers (as in the people that actually code - not just the people who make the graphic design) use visual design modes to do their coding. As far as I know, Dreamweaver is only able to use absolute positioning - which is almost never what you're looking for. Secondly, the generated code is very, very sloppy.

Then prehaps its time for someone to create a alt for dreamweaver that is better with its code while allowing pure visual editing with a option to have its objects to be absolute or relative. I would do it, if i had the programming skill.

[Nevon]

Then prehaps its time for someone to create a alt for dreamweaver that is better with its code while allowing pure visual editing with a option to have its objects to be absolute or relative. I would do it, if i had the programming skill.

Well sure, that would be great. There's never anything wrong with having extra functionality, as long as that functionality doesn't get in the way of the core focus of the application. However, creating an application that rivals Dreamweaver in all aspects is not an easy task - especially considering that Dreamweaver is backed by a huge company. Just look at The Gimp. While it certainly has come a long way and is an excellent piece of software, it's still not nearly as good as Photoshop.

But if someone has the time, energy and skills to do it - why not?