Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 22.214.171.124
Forum Moderators: open
HomeSite development ended effective May 26, 2009 [adobe.com]
After careful consideration, Adobe discontinued development of MacromediaŽ HomeSiteŽ software effective May 26, 2009. Field and channel sales of the product ended on May 26 and sales across all channels, including the online Adobe Store, ended June 18, 2009. Existing customers are encouraged to consider the development environment of AdobeŽ DreamweaverŽ CS4 software.
Dreamweaver - to much code bloat last time I looked - and I don't want all the bells and whistles. Why pay the inflated price for lots of things i don't want. I know more than a few others that feel the same too....
I have used Dreamweaver since 2002 and have never had any code bloat
Normal day to day HTML and CSS use though I find it the best out there.
joined:July 3, 2008
Fortunately, I've still got an old copy of HomeSite that came free with the late, unlamented NetObjects Fusion about 10 years ago. It's still a great alternative to Notebook for editing .htaccess files.
are encouraged to consider the development environment of AdobeŽ DreamweaverŽ CS4 software.
Like there's a comparison for a hand coder . . . no thank you. DW sits useless on my HD, like a Corvair on the blocks in someone's back yard. :-)
joined:Jan 3, 2003
joined:Nov 11, 2000
In the WebmasterWorld Supporters PC Software forum, there's been a discussion about the change in ownership and development of the new release, and how old versions of TopStyle differed from Homesite....
Nick Bradbury gives up TopStyle
I haven't tried it yet, but it sounds like TopStyle might be ideal for HTML and CSS development... perhaps less suited for other types of code editing, though that's not yet clear to me.
They are introducing CF9(Centaur) and BOLT(Eclipse based and Standalone) at CFUNITED Soon! I've seen a presentation of both by Ben Forta couple of weeks ago, looks very promising.
-- are encouraged to consider the development environment of AdobeŽ DreamweaverŽ CS4 software. --
I personally have a copy of DW8, I have used it extensively in the past as a text/code editor until one of my co-workers introduced me to Eclipse. It is not a WYSIWYG as DW Or Homesite.
Most of the work I do revolves around ColdFusion/SQL and at this point it is Eclipse(CFEclipse) = FREE = I could copy it to my USB Drive and install it on any other PC by simply copying it to the HardDrive with all the config intact.
So the Evolution for me was HomeSite >> CFStudio >> DW(last time use about year ago) >> Eclipse(for the past 3 years)
I pretty much only use Dreamweaver's GUI when I want to locate an element in the page. You just select it in GUI mode and switch back to code view. It happens frequently enough that it's actually worth it.
I would never use an aplication to generate HTML code for me in GUI mode though. I need full control.
I don't know why but I don't like other editors like Dreamweaver or EditPlus and can't give up HomeSite.
I also use Notepad++ daily and happy to get updated versions from their Website.
The code is pretty clean and, with some minor tweaking in the code, cross-browser and platform. Who cares if the code isn't optimised, as long as the rendered web page looks and works OK? The main reason for slow downloads is bad optimisation of images.
joined:July 3, 2008
Frankly, I am suprised people are still using GUI for html. I thought the Frontpage bloatware would have killed that off.
Apparently you haven't used FrontPage and other WYSIWYG authoring tools in quite a while.
There's still plenty of bloatware around, but these days, the current term for it is "Content Management System." :-)
>> Who cares if the code isn't optimised
(httpwebwitch raises hand)
If you've been using it for a long time, and have used it's ability to build in your own code snippets, it just gets more powerful over time.
Who cares if the code isn't optimised, as long as the rendered web page looks and works OK?
Poorly optimized code:
- Higher bandwidth costs. The bigger, more traffic heavy you get, the bigger the cost.
- Heavier server load. At the begining, when you've got a small, low traffic site, server load is a none issue. As you scale up, it gets to be an issue. Scale past a certain tipping point, and you'll hire teams of geeks to pour over the code to get rid of every last unnecessary tag and comma
- Heavy code is more likely to break in a browser. Every time the popular browsers update, you have to verify cross browser compatibility.
- Heavy code is more likely to bog down and render slowly in a browser. Not an issue on today's computers, faster browsers, and broadband up the wazoo? Have you ever watched a power surfer open up web pages 20 tabs at a time, with a single click of the centre wheel?