This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters  


Home > Archive > Dreamweaver > March 2005 > Re: GoLive User Curious about benifits of switching. Can anyone advise?





You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

Author Re: GoLive User Curious about benifits of switching. Can anyone advise?
CMBergin

2005-03-02, 6:31 pm


"CPruitt2" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:d04q2a$474$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> Hi everyone, I'm hoping some of you who are experienced with advanced web
> development can lend some insight on how well Dream Weaver is working for

you.
>
> Background:
> Currently I'm a GoLive user and am moderately happy with the product but

it
> has had some shortcomings that have not been addressed for several

versions. I
> develop large data driven websites, often under severe time constraints.
> I currently use ASP as a server side scripting language, and though I may

also
> use PHP I have no interest right now in learning or using ColdFusion.
>
> OK now the questions I'm hoping someone can answer...
>
> I've been using Apple's X Code software development environment a lot

lately &
> the interface is so good that its agonizing to work in GoLive lately.

I've
> looked at Dream Weaver and on the surface the interface looks much more
> intelligently designed, however there are a few things that just might
> completely prevent me from being able to switch.
>
> #1: I NEED text macros in the source view. Someone PLEASE tell me DW

offers
> this! Currently in GL I can type 'MMDBRS' and then type Cmd+Shift+M and

the
> 'MMDBRS' text is immediately replaced by my custom code for creating ASP
> objects, connecting to a datbase, opening a recordset, and hi-lights the

SQL
> String placeholder ready for me to start typing. Doing the same thing I

have
> macros set up to generate Loops, complex if/then's, output formats, custom
> functions, and much more. This is such a time saver I'd rather work with

a
> simple text editor than a web development package without them.


It's not exactly the same, but DW allows you to write your own server
behaviors, which are pre-defined code blocks. You can even set up
parameters, so that you will get a dialog window asking for the parameter
value, and the completed code block is inserted directly to the page. DW
has built-in server behaviors as well which handle common tasks such as
recordsets, executing stored procedures, etc.
There are also code snippets and library items. All work a bit differently,
and among them all, you should be fine.


>
> #2: Does DW offer anything similar to Photoshops "smart Objects" system,
> allowing me to drop in images, HTML blocks, etc... but keep them linked to

an
> editable source document? This is INCREDIBLY useful in GL, especially

when
> combined with GL's use of variables in Photoshop documents. If not, is

there a
> good way you've found to manage images? Do you really have to keep

opening up
> the source document & re-exporting any time a client wants a change?
> (Definitely not interested in Fireworks though).


As far as I know, that's all you can do. Edit the image and save it over
the old one. That doesn't sound like a lot of work to me, though, so maybe
I misunderstand the question.

>
> #3: Server Side Includes. If I insert a server side include into the

source,
> does Dreamweaver render it into the layout view, (even if its not

editable)?
> This has annoyed me about GL for several versions (that it doesn't render

the
> SSI).
>

Yes, as long as it's properly formatted (no html, head, or body tags in the
file being included).


> #4: I like the toggle between edit view & "site view" or whatever you

guys
> call it instead of having a separate site window. Is there a keyboard

shortcut
> for this? I couldn't seem to find one.
>

?
Preview - f12
Code view/Design view toggle - ctrl+`

> #5: I see DW uses tabs for documents. This is really handy in one way,

but
> limiting in another since it seems like drag & drop and Mac OS X's Espose
> feature would suffer reduced functionality. Any comments good or bad?
>


I don't think the Mac version has tabbed documents.


>
> Thanks so much for your help guys. I've looked for feature comparisons

but
> nothing good turned up & I'd rather just get it straight from people who

see
> the good the bad & the ugly every day.
>
> [Sorry if this gets posted twice. I tried once & the site goofed up on

me.]
>



Sponsored Links


Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com  Software forum  Computer Hardware reviews