Computer Graphics with Photoshop - What is GoLive? or Dreamweaver for CSS?

Author

What is GoLive? or Dreamweaver for CSS?

ronviers@gmail.com

2007-02-07, 10:14 pm

Hi,
I have been trying to understand where GoLive fits into Adobe's
product suite. I thought GoLive was Adobe's web publishing solution
but after looking at Adobe.com it seems that Dreamweaver is. Is GoLive
a competitor to Dreamweaver?
Does anyone have an opinion about which product, Adobe or otherwise,
would be best to publish CSS webpages?

Thanks,
Ron

cperkins

2007-02-07, 10:14 pm

GoLive and DreamWeaver used to compete with each other until Adobe
bought Macromedia. I think a lot of people are waiting to see how
Adobe decides to position both products. As I understand, they are
not planning on cancelling either, but time will be the judge of that.

> Does anyone have an opinion about which product, Adobe or otherwise,
> would be best to publish CSS webpages?

If you are using Photoshop to design your pages, then I'm biased to
the product I wrote, the SiteGrinder plug-in for Photoshop:
http://www.medialab.com/sitegrinder It's heaps easier than either
DreamWeaver or GoLive, is more productive, and it interoperates well
with both. Many of our users use it in conjunction with DreamWeaver.

My personal choice for an HTML editing package is DreamWeaver. I like
the code assistance, the built in reference, the ability to execute
javascript from within DW, and its very nice shorthand support of PHP
(require(), etc.) It's WYSIWYG tools are ok.

I have used GoLive a half dozen times and I've never cottoned to it.
However, that may simply be a matter of familiarity. Many folk find
GoLive more like the other Adobe apps, and thus easier or more
understandable. I'm sure they'll have a list of the features they
like.

Hope this helps,

Chris Perkins
http://www.medialab.com/sitegrinder <-- Photoshop to the web plug-
in.All XHTML 1.1 and CSS. Full support for text, buttons, menus,
image galleries, flash slideshows, automated email form creation,
vertically resizable documents and more. No slicing, no coding, no
hassle.

Little Juice Coupe

2007-02-07, 10:14 pm

That's just stupid. They need to cannibalize GoLive for the few good things
it has and concentrate of Dreamweaver which is far better and has a far
larger market share than GoLive ever did or hoped to have.

ljc

"cperkins" <cperkins@medialab.com> wrote in message
news:1170894488.087571.176790@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> GoLive and DreamWeaver used to compete with each other until Adobe
> bought Macromedia. I think a lot of people are waiting to see how
> Adobe decides to position both products. As I understand, they are
> not planning on cancelling either, but time will be the judge of that.
>
>
>
> If you are using Photoshop to design your pages, then I'm biased to
> the product I wrote, the SiteGrinder plug-in for Photoshop:
> http://www.medialab.com/sitegrinder It's heaps easier than either
> DreamWeaver or GoLive, is more productive, and it interoperates well
> with both. Many of our users use it in conjunction with DreamWeaver.
>
> My personal choice for an HTML editing package is DreamWeaver. I like
> the code assistance, the built in reference, the ability to execute
> javascript from within DW, and its very nice shorthand support of PHP
> (require(), etc.) It's WYSIWYG tools are ok.
>
> I have used GoLive a half dozen times and I've never cottoned to it.
> However, that may simply be a matter of familiarity. Many folk find
> GoLive more like the other Adobe apps, and thus easier or more
> understandable. I'm sure they'll have a list of the features they
> like.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Chris Perkins
> http://www.medialab.com/sitegrinder <-- Photoshop to the web plug-
> in.All XHTML 1.1 and CSS. Full support for text, buttons, menus,
> image galleries, flash slideshows, automated email form creation,
> vertically resizable documents and more. No slicing, no coding, no
> hassle.
>

ronviers@gmail.com

2007-02-07, 10:14 pm

On Feb 7, 6:28 pm, "cperkins" <cperk...@medialab.com> wrote:
> GoLive and DreamWeaver used to compete with each other until Adobe
> bought Macromedia. I think a lot of people are waiting to see how
> Adobe decides to position both products. As I understand, they are
> not planning on cancelling either, but time will be the judge of that.
>
>
> If you are using Photoshop to design your pages, then I'm biased to
> the product I wrote, the SiteGrinder plug-in for Photoshop:http://www.medialab.com/sitegrinder It's heaps easier than either
> DreamWeaver or GoLive, is more productive, and it interoperates well
> with both. Many of our users use it in conjunction with DreamWeaver.
>
> My personal choice for an HTML editing package is DreamWeaver. I like
> the code assistance, the built in reference, the ability to execute
> javascript from within DW, and its very nice shorthand support of PHP
> (require(), etc.) It's WYSIWYG tools are ok.
>
> I have used GoLive a half dozen times and I've never cottoned to it.
> However, that may simply be a matter of familiarity. Many folk find
> GoLive more like the other Adobe apps, and thus easier or more
> understandable. I'm sure they'll have a list of the features they
> like.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Chris Perkinshttp://www.medialab.com/sitegrinder <-- Photoshop to the web plug-
> in.All XHTML 1.1 and CSS. Full support for text, buttons, menus,
> image galleries, flash slideshows, automated email form creation,
> vertically resizable documents and more. No slicing, no coding, no
> hassle.

Hi Chris,
I am not comfortable admitting this, but because of the comfort level
and legitimacy-by-proxy associated with using industry standard
products like Illustrator and Photoshop, plus their robustness and
stability, not to mention the countless hours dedicated to using and
understanding them, I feel wedded to Adobe. It is a relationship that
has been good for me and since I don't know enough about web
publishing to intelligently research the decision I think the best
thing is to stay committed to Adobe.
Your product looks to me, and correct me if I'm wrong, target
Photoshop users that are first and foremost Photoshop users, maybe a
little reluctant to leave their comfortable environment, with a desire
to publish web pages as a sideline, non-core, part of their business
or without the time to commit to the more difficult, although more
flexible, products like Dreamweaver or GoLive. Then again I admit that
I enter this with a bias, not against your product, but for Adobe's.
You mentioned the possibility of either Dreamweaver or GoLive
canceling the other and after visiting Adobe.com and seeing the pride
of place given to Dreamweaver the war may be over.
You can see here:

http://www.adobe.com/web/

under Adobe's Web Solutions page, that GoLive is not even mentioned.
On the other hand it is mentioned here:

http://www.adobe.com/products/creativesuite/

but not only in the table not explicitly like Dreamweaver.

I hope that if I have mischaracterized your Sitegrinder web design
tools you will have time to set me and others straight - it looks to
me like an excellent solution.

Thanks for the reply and the helpful information,
Ron

cperkins

2007-02-08, 3:14 am

On Feb 7, 6:09 pm, "ronvi...@XXXXXXXXXX" <ronvi...@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote:
> You can see here:
>
> http://www.adobe.com/web/
>
> under Adobe's Web Solutions page, that GoLive is not even mentioned.

You are right, it is not explicitly mentioned. But it does appear on
the page, as it is part of Creative Suite. So it's there, it just
doesn't have its own entry. I think literature people refer to this a
"foreshadowing" :-)

> I hope that if I have mischaracterized your Sitegrinder web design
> tools you will have time to set me and others straight - it looks to
> me like an excellent solution.

SiteGrinder is for anyone who has Photoshop web page design that needs
to get/start a web site from it. Yes, it is great for non-HTML users
and we go out of our way to support them, but it was originally
designed as a Photoshop-to-web bridge for experts. As web designers we
were getting handed Photoshop designs all the time and there was
simply no good way of making web sites from them short of re-doing all
the work someone did once in Photoshop over again, but in HTML.
SiteGrinder focusses on modern web standards, use of CSS, always valid
markup, maximum re-use of graphics and CSS - things that experts
appreciate and beginners do not. Also the type of thing that is often
repetitive soul draining work. It's a nice utility to have in your
tool belt. Like I said, a lot of our users use it in conjunction with
DreamWeaver, and probably GoLive too - it just has a smaller audience.

If you end up using both GoLive and DreamWeaver for any length of
time, let everyone know your experiences. I wish I knew more about
GoLive to be able to judge it properly.

Chris
http://www.medialab.com/sitegrinder <-- Photoshop to the web plug-
in. You design, we grind.

Zier & van de Steenoven

2007-02-08, 6:14 pm

best to publish CSS webpages?
>

Hello Ron,

We have been using the full versions up til now. With localized Dutch
language.

We like the way the what you see is what you get lay-out grid works.

When desired you can see the code and edit. it.

We know some people have been saying Dreamweaver is better.

So we bought it.

It sit`s still in the box.

Now Adobe bought it, I`ll be mainly interrested in the how` todo
intructions.........

Nowadays one could look for freeware software too.

HTML kit.

http://www.chami.com/html-kit/

I know it is OK and free; but the time to learn another app. again is
scarce..

Succes,

Rob van de Steenoven

There is no substitute for work, effort and love.

tacit

2007-02-09, 3:14 am

In article <1170891490.288735.84510@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
"ronviers@XXXXXXXXXX" <ronviers@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote:

> I have been trying to understand where GoLive fits into Adobe's
> product suite. I thought GoLive was Adobe's web publishing solution
> but after looking at Adobe.com it seems that Dreamweaver is. Is GoLive
> a competitor to Dreamweaver?

Yes. Adobe made GoLive before they bought Macromedia and acquired
Dreamweaver.

> Does anyone have an opinion about which product, Adobe or otherwise,
> would be best to publish CSS webpages?

I have and teach GoLive and Dreamweaver. I have extensive experience
with both, and prefer GoLive.

--
Photography, kink, polyamory, shareware, and more: all at
http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html

ST.D.AL

2007-02-09, 3:14 am

On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 23:51:38 -0500, tacit in comp.graphics.apps.photoshop wrote:
>In article <1170891490.288735.84510@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
> "ronviers@XXXXXXXXXX" <ronviers@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote:

No Adobe owns Dreamweaver, since they bought Macromedia. Adobe has
publicly stated that Dreamweaver is their application for the future,
while remaining pretty close mouthed about the plans for GoLive.

GoLive will probably be positioned much like PageMaker is now vs
InDesign.
[color=darkred]
>Yes. Adobe made GoLive before they bought Macromedia and acquired
>Dreamweaver.

Actually (to be pedantic) Adobe bought GoLiveCyberstudio back in the day,
and built on it's foundation and rebranded it as Adobe GoLive.

To publish or to make? Either or, you can use either application to
create CSS.
[color=darkred]
>I have and teach GoLive and Dreamweaver. I have extensive experience
>with both, and prefer GoLive.

GoLive is more or less dead in the water. All future enhancements are
going to be rolled into Dreamweaver, which will probably get the better
features of GoLive.

If one is doing any web programming, then Dreamweaver has better support
for PHP, ASP, Coldfusion and JSP.

In terms of CSS all one needs is a good text editor. ;)