What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Band Hero view!
guitarhero.com - The biggest event music event of the year is now in your living room.
48 Comments
- Bartboy919, on 10/12/2007, -3/+42I prefer to not call it adobe Dreamweaver until some adobe people actually make a new version of Dreamweaver. Macromedia FTW!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18You know where the _real_ gold lies?
~$ vim - julianrod, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14I know, it looks funny... 'Adobe' Dreamweaver
- REDBLIND, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14Take the money you would spend on the new Dreamweaver and go take some web development night classes at the community college.
- stockjones, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Higherlogic has a point. No real developer is going to use a wysiwyg all by itself, then again no commercially developed website that both "looks" professional as well as functional would be built in text editor all by itself. Every time I hear some programmer claim their greatness because they only use notepad its pretty obvious just looking at the site. Many times you may comp out a layout for look and feel in an editor like Dreamweaver and then hand code and polish up your code in a text editor. Obviously logical code both server side and client side scripting will most likely be done in a text editor. The whole hubris I only use notepad is a bit overwhelming unless you just need your page to have the look and layout of something like the Google homepage which is a nursery school layout. Granted Google is more about the coding and engine behind the scenes.
- HigherLogic, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Real developers can still use DW and not use DW's WYSIWYG editor. That's why when you install it, and run it for the first time, it specifically asks you if you want Code or Design View. Always, always choose Code View. Otherwise, you might as well download Frontpage and be on your way...
/waits for the "hardcore" "developers" (purposely done with two separate quotes) from raving about how they use notepad for developing a website, when you know this is just ridiculous if you've ever actually worked on a legitimate, popular website. - goodtimej, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8God, digg is really full of a bunch of snob, better than you, trolling asshats. If you don't like the software, why the hell are you posting in this thread!?!?!? Go somewhere else, this is for people who want to learn *GASP* how to use Dreamweaver. Go post your credentials somewhere else you ***** blowhards.
- ngmcs8203, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11I can understand Photoshop being so overwhelming that someone may need tutorials to use it. Maybe even Illustrator and/or InDesign... but Dreamweaver? There's a reason it's called a WYSIWYG editor. And anyone who really uses it in it's Design View probably already owns a copy of "Dreamweaver 8 for Dummies". I really hope most Diggers have grown accustomed to code view because that where Dreamweaver's gold lies anyway.
- Elranzer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Dreamweaver makes a great color-coded hand coder, along with a bunch of other tools and shortcuts for hand coders. It's not just WYSIWYG.
- NeoRicen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5CS3 has barely changed, didn't get the complete make over like flash, dissapointing really.
- NeoRicen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I just find it handy for being able to see what I'm doing and auto-complete on some code.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I can't believe there are people that still believe DW is nothing more than a WYSIWYG. Using it in code view is like a whole other program. DW provides convenience for me by having FTP/SFTP support, quick upload, auto complete, find & replace, code coloring, and folder management. Combined with Firefox add-ons like Firebug and WebDev Toolbar, it kicks ass and takes names.
I loathe Design View or Split Screen and cringe when I see coworkers using it. I much prefer using dual monitors.
For the nerds saying VIM!!11, get over yourselves.
"As a professional web developer I can, without a doubt, tell you it does NOT do its job very well at enterprise level. No serious coder will ever let a third-party application determine the boundaries of ability or delivery. Dreamweaver is for amateurs learning the trade. Sure you can use code view but if that's the case use a REAL project manager that can do it's job properly. The very nature of DW allows the person using it to produce the most disgusting and bloated mark-up ever. Not to mention non-compliant and totally inaccessible."
Wow. What a lie. We create professional level coldfusion applications, intranets and extranets in Dreamweaver. We don't use any markup. It can all be done in Notepad too but why waste more time than necessary? It's much easier to scan through 300 color coded lines of a component than 300 black text lines in Notepad. Don't knock it before you even know how to use it properly. - cortlandjim, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I don't use DW for the WYSIWYG stuff, I use it to speed up the process. auto complete, easy addition of new tags, etc. I keep it in split screen but I spend 95% of my time in the CODE area. the ability to accurately see what you have coded in real time without having to constantly go to the browser also adds speed. Don't get me wrong sometimes I hate DW because it is Slow to open and doesn't handle large forms well, but having used other, APIs I can see why it is #1
I am not a big tutorial fan but I like some of the ones at the Macromedia(Adobe) site. Most of them are aimed at the true beginner and I find them boring and long winded. - HigherLogic, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Yeah, let's not give Adobe credit for something they had absolutely no part of. Macromedia FTW! Now...let's just hope Adobe doesn't ***** up the next version (btw, any word on this?) with their horrible, horrible GUIs.
Also, Fireworks is your friend :) Learn it. Love it. Use it. - dukem72, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5 I think there are valid points with using an editor and learning to code by hand. Reason being that when you do learn what the different tags do, then you are going to be able to troubleshoot many problems and also gives you an edge over people that have no exposure to code at all.
On the other hand using an editor does prove useful for production environments, database driven sites, multiple pages that use repetitive elements, rapid site development, etc.
And to keep it in simple terms imagine that you need to do some carpentry work and you have the choice of using a nail gun, a hammer or your hands. After all you can use any of them but using your hand is going to hurt more than the others and will take longer to finish.
And by the way the training videos from Lynda.com are amazing. - marc2242, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I prefer the tutorials at adobe.com in the Dreamweaver developer's center.
- rholloway, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4well, we don't to act as if we're still using punch cards--if you're looking for say, the value of a form field, it's not a sin to switch to split view, scroll down and find the text field, click on it and let DW highlight the tag in code view for you. Why waste time when you have tools that are supposed to help?
- Agret, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"I hate DW because it is Slow to open and doesn't handle large forms well, but having used other, APIs I can see why it is #1"
DW isn't an API.... It's a web editor. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Either or, same. It's not conducive or productive to use something like VIM in an environment where not all the workers are tech geeks. Dreamweaver is a good medium that isn't hard to learn or use for the newbies. The last thing a business wants to do is impede your work flow, DW is a pretty easy tool to use for web app development or front end coding.
Aptana is nice too though, as a free alternative. - spliffy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3it's actually much faster to hand code it 100% of the time if you know what your doing.
that way you only get what you want. not a bunch of spaghetti (even if you know what your doing with wysiwyg) - FZero, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Real men write code by hand.
- UrsusMorologus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2No, real men have other people writing code for them
- SomaSynth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Dreamweaver's layout engine is just plain bad. The more complex the site is, the less of what I see is what I get.
I've tried using Dreamweaver's WYSIWYG, I really did give it a chance. It often tends to take up more time than it saves. Not only do you have to bend to Dreamweaver's will if you're doing interactive layout through the GUI, which often leaves undesireable code, but even using it passively for instant feedback tends to be deceptive at best, sometimes completely messed up.
I've stopped using Dreamweaver and gone with a plain-text editor, and I feel much better for it. Not because I'm a snob and enjoy pointing fingers at WYSIWYG users, but because it gives me complete control and understanding of my code. Plain-text in combination with a real browser window that's either refreshed manually or javascript reload on interval gives me much more confidence in my work than WYSIWYG. Modifying any existing page with WYSIWYG makes me feel like I'm stepping over a mine field.
By plain-text I don't necessarily mean notepad. Auto-complete, code-snippets and such are helpful, Dreamweaver itself without WYSIWYG is good for that purpose, even though I don't use it. - insovietrussia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Probably meant to say IDE, but even that's a stretch for DW.
- redivider, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"DW is for people that still believe table are for layouts."
That's funny, I've been building CSS-only sites for a while now and using DW. I guess I should use something more elite like vim or eclipse.
"Dreamweaver is for amateurs learning the trade."
I guess that's why it's one of the most widely used web IDEs in the industry. We must all be amateurs. What do you use that makes you so much more of a "professional?"
The future of the web is going to be sites and apps that are easily edited by people that wouldn't know the first thing about something like vim (or whatever it is that the professionals are using these days). Sure there are plenty of good CMSs out there, but DW is one of the only apps I know of that's added a pretty comprehensive layer that allows the average computer user to be able to edit content, even on an enterprise level (using DW in combination with Contribute).
I completely understand that everyone has the tools that work best for them. But saying that DW isn't appropriate for enterprise level sites or that only amateurs use it is a pretty naive statement. - rholloway, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1My guess is you're very fat, utterly sexless, and probably haven't been able to see your penis since you were six.
- PimNL, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4If the fastest way is wysiwyg, and you know exactly what it does, use it, instead of spending time analysing the html structure.. (i'm a fulltime developer).
- jtms1200, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2VIM FTW
- gnelson90, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Notepad ++ is great. (http://notepad-plus.sourceforge.net/uk/site.htm)
- Ricochet1269, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I logged in just to give you a digg, thanks!
- Subtonic, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Whenever I see a long page of tutorials nobody will ever go through it just reaffirms my belief in software books.
http://www.friendsofed.com - iPointe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I pretty sure digg can read my mind...i was just looking for dreamweaver tutorials.
- spliffy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1textmate anyone?
- xiojqwnko, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1lynda.com has some really good dreamweaver tutorials
- Agret, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1They said VIM not notepad, VIM has coloring.
- mikehill33, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1http://www.lynda.com
- berkeleyblue, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2The Ask the Techies video podcast has a couple of videos on Dreamweaver as well as many other topics. If you liked The Screensavers, you might like this show. If you scroll down their web page you will see the videos sorted by category (easier to sort through to find older videos than the RSS feed). http://www.ohiou.edu/aac/lab/techies/
- paulm, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3"Adobe" Dreamweaver will be released in a couple weeks making all of these tutorials irrelevant as they are not DW 9 (CS3) tutorials.
- crossers, on 07/15/2008, -0/+0you can find many dreamweaver tutorials in google.
http://www.shpe-sac.org
http://www.ocflex.com/
http://www.trgovinca.org
http://www.chasr.org/ - hontis, on 03/11/2009, -0/+0I prefer video based Dreamweaver tutorials like the lynda ones or the ones listed at http://www.computer-training-software.com
- TheLostSignal, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2It's not a naive statement when you deal with 35,000 pages weighing in at a cool 15GB (which is without images) which I do on a daily basis.
When was the last time you attended a conference for developers? Did you ask what they used? Where do you think you're getting your stats from about the most widely used? I REALLY beg to differ on those fronts. DW offers poor levels of conformity for Triple-A accessibility standards (which is getting to be the law in my country), it also offers poor levels of compliance for XHTML Strict to the end user (but fails to notify them of this fact so shirks the responsibility) and because of the weak visual conversion of a external CSS doesn't show the end user the REAL DEAL.
Contribute is a nightmare, there is no proper version control, no way to indicate WTF is going on. That's where DW stepped over the mark where a real enterprise class CMS needs to take over so that your end users (at whatever level of expertise) can take over the content end of things.
Sorry but I think it is you that is naive to think that DW serves as a tool to deploy a site as large as I help maintain. It simply is NOT up to the job (tried and tested). FYI we use a range of tools to get the job done, de-coupled systems for a start. Get reading. Come back when you realise that DW *IS* for people learning and NOT for enterprise class (which in my experience is 10,000+ separate pages) and although it might very well serve the needs of the lower end of the market it really, and I mean REALLY doesn't serve the higher end. Please not that I have been a developer for more than 14 years, I think I am versed enough to know what I am talking about. - BigPapi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2I still refer to that whole package as Macromedia. Screw Adobe, I'm not giving them any credit just because they bought it and slapped their name on the label.
I still use an old version on MACROMEDIA Homesite sometimes. It's a nice stripped down version of Dreamweaver, without all the WYSIWYG crap. - coolspray, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Couldn't agree more.
+Digg - n00ge, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0For those that avoid Dreamweaver, here's a Dreamweaver tutorial for you...
http://www.creativeruin.com/index.cfm/year/2006/month/05/article/27508 - wooptoo, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4Gedit + http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/ + http://validator.w3.org/ + http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS1 + http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
- TheLostSignal, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2DW is for people that still believe table are for layouts.
As a professional web developer I can, without a doubt, tell you it does NOT do its job very well at enterprise level. No serious coder will ever let a third-party application determine the boundaries of ability or delivery. Dreamweaver is for amateurs learning the trade. Sure you can use code view but if that's the case use a REAL project manager that can do it's job properly. The very nature of DW allows the person using it to produce the most disgusting and bloated mark-up ever. Not to mention non-compliant and totally inaccessible.
If you're going to take the time to learn DW then use that time in a better way and go and learn XHTML specifications and get coding with some confidence.
Buried for lameness. - thunderup, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0rrjtrjetljretjlrkejtlrkejtlkrejlkrjelkjrelktjrelkjlkrjtlkrejklrejtlkjerlktjrelkjtlkrejtlkrejtlkrejtkljrelktrelktjrlekjtlkrejtlkrejtlkjrelktjrelktjrlkejtlerkjtklrejtlkerjtlkerjtkljretkljrekltjrekljtklerjtlkrejtklerjtkljrekltjrkletjklrejtlkrejtlkrtlkrfgdfgfgfgfgdfejtlkerjl
- spectre_25gt, on 10/12/2007, -16/+8The best tutorial for Dreamweaver can be summed up in 3 words. "Don't use it."
Learn to hand code and you'll be much happier in the end.
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is