Skip navigation

Revive GoLive - Interested Parties Only

Nov 4, 2009 10:04 AM

  Latest reply: sonofmrsnak, Apr 3, 2014 9:37 AM
Replies 1 2 3 4 5 ... 20 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 5:38 AM   in reply to LRK 2

    My pleasure ...

     

    Some thoughts.

     

    Mmm, Adobe should not be threatened if GoLive were to be revived, they hold a huge market share of the editing environment as it is - so it would be pertinent to free GoLive code, make it open source, so that like minded people can develop it to their liking.

     

    I've a small business, employ 6 people and have 7 licenses for GoLive.  Believe me there are many people like me the world over who use GoLive as their principal editor.  Adobe does not realize the damage it has done to several small companies' economic situation by disontinueing software as in the case of GoLive.

     

    I say, either revive the program (which I think is wishful thinking), or free the code, let us few miserable wretches develop it to our liking and use it :-)

     

    Incorporating key features into Dreamweaver would also work I suppose; although agreements, licenses and so on would probably come in the way.

     

    Either way would be cool, but the world of software and the economics that drives it is much more complex than that; agreements, licenses and so on are major obstacles - but something needs to done - even if it's just let people know that there still is interest in GoLive !!

     

    Thanks

     

    All the best to all ....

     

    Basil

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 6:46 AM   in reply to Basil - S

    Basil - S wrote:

     

    ...or free the code, let us few miserable wretches develop it to our liking and use it :-)

     

    Incorporating key features into Dreamweaver would also work I suppose; although agreements, licenses and so on would probably come in the way.

    Why is there such an obscene vacancy of logic here? These two sentences totally disagree with each other. No software developer is going to find a market for those that suffer from schizophrenia or delusions.

     

    If any of us are familiar with Adobe for at least one year of their history, we know that they develop and acquire technology (ie: software patents) and do not give it away. That is why Adobe and Macromedia were suing each other for a decade. If you are a software developer, you are not going to let your valuable assets just slip away. Adobe is not going to release GoLive code to the public or to a competitor. Why would you give your customers an option to go elsewhere?

     

    And if Adobe owns both DW and GL, what agreements and license issues would come in the way? Adobe can do whatever it wants with its own code.

     

    These two quoted senteces are total nonsense. The first sentence (correctly) notes that Adobe owns the code and would have the right to free it (if it wanted) - - - while the second sentence seems to (incorrectly) indicate that Adobe does not own code and would have license issues with blending features of its own apps.

     

    GoLive was Adobe's 'professional web design program' but the people here seem to be advocating for a casual web design program that is not intended for intelligent users. That's just an observation based on everyone's posts here. Someone is welcome to prove this assumption wrong by introducing some intelligence to this thread.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 6:52 AM   in reply to Marian Driscoll

    Golive was not a program for unintelligent users. It was a program designed for designers as opposed to Dreamweaver – Webmaster's favorite since the beginning–who created 90% of the horrible sites in the Internet: "Webmaster Specials".

     

    The problem I had with Dreamweaver  from the beginning was that it wasn't Adobe logic. I started with Adobe in 1988. I consider myself an Adobe baby. I started with Photoshop 1, Premier 1, Streamline, etc. There had always been a logic of user-friendly first in all their software. In 2003, while working for a company with 10 programmers, I was forced to use Dreamweaver because the programmers loved it. They loved it because they all thought they were designers... but their main thing was code. I didn't want to know code (I am not talking about html... I started using text edit for my editor in 1994), I am talking jsp and php. That was great for them. But the Dreamweaver environment was something that us designers used at work  because they had to, while using Golive at home for our own sites. That was how it was until we had no choice but to go wioth DW.

     

    Now I use both programs simultanioulsy. I have no choice...

    • I manage all my sites through Golive. I like the little bug that shows me the broken links. That is a major detail for me.
    • When I double click on a folder, I want to go inside of that folder... This is particluarly helpful when you are working with an umbrella site that has several smaller sites that also contain index files in them.
    • I like the  GL CSS editor much better.
    • I like the way Golive worked with layers
    • I liked the GL layer timeline
    • I liked the GL Actions panel much better
    • I liked that I didn't have to type in http:// for every URL and Mailto for email addresses – GL  would fill that for you. When you are working in on address listings with hundreds of listings... that came in handy. If DW does this I have not been able to find it.
    • I liked the separate folders to keep all my documents together (templates, smart objects, etc... specially the site trash. I liked having the site trash together with the site. You never know when you need to pull that file back out.

     

    I use Dreamweaver for a few things, then take my site in Dreamweaver to change the code before I give it to programmers who cringe at my mention of GL.

     

    If Adobe added some of these small, but useful, details to DW, I would be perfectly happy with DW. I understand that it is a very powerful program. I get that. But, I just want to design... I don't want to do all those other things. I have hired code monkeys to do that for me for 17 years now, I have no desire to do it myself.

     

    So... DW wins... it would just be nice to have these little details added to it for the pleasure of Adobe's LONG TIME LOYAL clients

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 7:55 AM   in reply to Marian Driscoll

    Hi,

     

    Cyberstudio, the old name for GoLive if I remember correctly, was first developed by a German company who sold the software to Adobe.  I know about these kind of agreements, I develop software.  If I sell my software to someone, it becomes binding for a very long time, ownership and usage to third parties is binding for a very long time - that's what I'm talking about .. as to been unintellegent .... well, who knows ....

     

    LOL

     

    Basil

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 8:02 AM   in reply to Basil - S

    I knew about yberstudio... When I started using it that was the name. But, one of the things I liked about it was that it was very Adobe-like. That is why I was so happy when Adobe bought it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 8:14 AM   in reply to Marian Driscoll

    I suppose obscene logic precludes any requirement to speak civilly? I'll wager you are not a teacher.. unless of course you have tenure to cover your aggressive demeanor.

    All that behind let's see where we agree and disagree and see if I can teach nicely here.

    We agree that Adobe would never under any circumstance bring back GL. Not only would it water down market share identification it would be prohibitively costly to keep two complete support divisions running. I am thinking there may be another reason  but I cant prove it: It may have been also that the low level architecture of Dream Weaver was less crowded and more open to future technologies. Just an educated guess on my part because having been in the programming world for forty years I have noted that the easier the high level interface is to use the more cluttered the lower and mid-level code becomes. Object oriented programming leads to the insertion of complete algorithms that have ten times the functionality required simply because it is already compiled and waiting for parameters to be passed. So it is inserted if only to pass one parameter in and one out. I have heard from programmers that GL low level code is very cluttered.

    As far as using GL, as I posted once I will use it as long as it does what I need. I have four educational web sites now and they all make a fine stipend for me every month so there is no reason to change. In fact I don’t know why this thread was started in that regard. If you have GL and it works why switch? I have GL and Photoshop and Premier on a computer to my left running under XP and it shall forever be so because I Ghost the entire drive twice a week so I can move everything bit by bit to a different drive should my computer crash.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 9:35 AM   in reply to Marian Driscoll

    Marian, would it be illogical since (A) GoLive is dead and (B) Adobe has made no clear public statement to the effect that they are building a hybrid GL/DW app to suggest going open source with GL? After all, it is theirs to do with as they will. They could choose either course.

     

    Basil just presented 2 scenarios - possible paths - that would work for him. I fail to see the illogic in presenting 2 paths. Would you be willing to further expand your thoughts?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 9:41 AM   in reply to Basil - S

    Basil - S wrote:

     

    Cyberstudio, the old name for GoLive if I remember correctly, was first developed by a German company who sold the software to Adobe.  I know about these kind of agreements, I develop software.  If I sell my software to someone, it becomes binding for a very long time, ownership and usage to third parties is binding for a very long time - that's what I'm talking about .. as to been unintellegent ....

    So if you know about these kinds of agreements and think Adobe does not fully control the code, why did you propose the silly idea of Adobe releasing code?  

     

    Actually, Adobe did not license the software from the creator. Adobe acquired the full assets of the company. So they do not need to go back to the creating company to ask permission for anything.

     

    camper92663 wrote:

     

    We agree that Adobe would never under any circumstance bring back GL.

    I'm pretty sure everyone agrees to that. Even Linda has noted that.

     

    Personally, I find it most uncivil and abusive that Linda started this impotent poll as it distracts folks from reality and from discussing how to move on (or hold on to the version that they have).   We each have our own perception of 'uncivil'.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 9:52 AM   in reply to LUH3417

    LUH3417 wrote:

     

    Marian, would it be illogical since (A) GoLive is dead and (B) Adobe has made no clear public statement to the effect that they are building a hybrid GL/DW app to suggest going open source with GL? After all, it is theirs to do with as they will. They could choose either course.

     

    Basil just presented 2 scenarios - possible paths - that would work for him. I fail to see the illogic in presenting 2 paths. Would you be willing to further expand your thoughts?

    Basil's 2 options or paths conflicted with each other. The only thing he was nearly correct on was that Adobe owns GoLive and could release the code as open source if it wanted.

     

    How much alcohol must one intake to come to the belief that Adobe, a company concerned about profit and sustainability, will ever release GoLive freely to the public (GPL) and as a product that will compete with their current commercial product?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 10:05 AM   in reply to pachi1

    pachi1 wrote:

     

    Golive was not a program for unintelligent users. It was a program designed for designers as opposed to Dreamweaver – Webmaster's favorite since the beginning–who created 90% of the horrible sites in the Internet: "Webmaster Specials".

     

    ...

    I just want to design... I don't want to do all those other things. I have hired code monkeys to do that for me for 17 years now, I have no desire to do it myself.

    Dreamweaver was created for designers just as much as GoLive. GoLive users who are being told to upgrade to Dreamweaver by Adobe are missing the full picture. In the Macromedia web development mindset, Fireworks did much of the design work. Adobe should not be marketing a move from GoLive to Dreamweaver. Adobe should be marketing a move from GoLive to Dreamweaver and Fireworks.

     

    But we're not bound by using only Adobe apps. The web design market has grown well and there are plenty of options available to us.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 10:59 AM   in reply to Marian Driscoll

    Hello Marian,

     

    I understand what you saying; there are however others, with similar web design and authoring programs who are also trying to revive similar applications.

     

    You could possibly find this interesting: http://www.freefreehand.org/  What I mentioned earlier is what I believe could be a solution.  I know 3 people off-hand who could and have the capabilities of developing GoLive further, people who have contributed a lot to GoLive over the years. I personaly am not in a position to undertake such a project as it is not my expetise.  Whether Adobe would be willing to release the code is another story alltogether and not really under debate here.  I just made a suggestion.

     

    As to a revival ... nothing is written in stone, and I believe it is worthwhile making a statement about this.

     

    All the best

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 12:39 PM   in reply to Basil - S

    Basil - S wrote:

     

    You could possibly find this interesting: http://www.freefreehand.org/ 

    No. Not really interesting. This GoLive topic seems to have more traffic than the >month old posts on freefreehand.org. You can go to the Adobe Freehad forum here on adobe.com to see this site mentioned often in a lengthy thread (maybe several threads now) that looks very much like this one about GoLive. Freehand revival wishes are much more numerous and vociferous than revival wishes for GoLive. And what progress has been made for Freehand? Absolutely none. So why would anyone think GoLive, which has so fewer rusty wheels here, will have any better chance of revival? Can we learn anything from Freehand users or do we just keep banging our heads against the wall?

     

    If anyone is serious about keeping GoLive functionality alive, they would not be posting in this impotent thread. They'd go directly to Adobe or to a competing web design program developer and submit a feature request like this...

     

    Dear developer,

     

    I am a long time user of GoLive and am looking for a new application. I would like to buy your program if you could support the following features that I enjoyed in GoLive... [ list features here ]

    Have we all submitted a feature request or are we too foolish to think that this forum thread will have any effect?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 12:48 PM   in reply to LRK 2

    No worries Marian - point taken - the reason I am bothering to post here is the fact that I love using GoLive, and also the fact that there are also like minded people like me, who have invested time and money and have built a business around using apps like GoLive.

     

    So ....... in fact what you are saying is that we should forget about it, should we just say "oh well, this is the end, lets let this thing go, move on to better things like Dreamweaver" or something similar ??

     

    Hey, we do have the right to complain you know

     

    Have a good weekend everyone

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 1:43 PM   in reply to Basil - S

    Words used in this discussion, pointed out in the hopes that:

     

    1. we can move towards civility amongst each other, despite our strong feelings/opinions and frustration

     

    2. an uncivil tone serves no good purpose as it undermines the effectiveness of an otherwise plausible argument:

     

    • anti-intellectual

    • selfish

    • private club

    • empty wishful thoughts

    • insanity you are fostering

    • silly beliefs

    • trivial impotent threads

    • mindless drivel

    • silly folk

    • trouble-maker

    • snobby, pretentious, pompous

    • extremely uneducated, arrogant

    • absurd claims

    • this thread is about nothing

    • obscene vacancy of logic

    • total nonsense

    • how much alcohol must one intake...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 2:37 PM   in reply to wayneswhirld

    Congratulations on wasting your time compiling that list. How are you moving forward by nitpicking words?

     

    How would you re-write my first post without the mention of 'anti-intellectual'?

     

    It seems that you do not understand what anti-intellectual means.  How can you describe this thread as anything but anti-intellectual after recognizing what the word means? Is it uncivil to provide others with facts and resources instead of an impossible dream?

     

     

    So back on the real topic of GoLive, how are you coming with those table border colors? Do you need additional assistance or does the GoLive forum deteriotate into this anti-intellectual poll as the only forum activity?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 5, 2010 6:38 PM   in reply to Basil - S

    Basil, Marian finds it silly for those of us who are like minded to post here on this topic. It appears to be her opinion that we are all wasting our time talking with each other on this subject. Her stance is that this forum should be used for helping others solve issues they are having with GL. Even though this thread seems to upset her, she continues to return which is obviously her right - although it seems just as silly of her to do so as much as she feels we are silly to be involved in this discussion (IMO).

     

    Marian, makes a good point. Have any of us here sent in a feature request to the folks who hold the keys so to speak? I haven't. I will when I compile my list.

     

    Marian, you shouldn't get so upset about this thread. These are not your forums - they're Adobe's. They are here for the users - at least that's how they used to be identified -- "User Forums". If this thread is offensive to the gatekeepers I am sure they will not hesitate to remove it. I understand you feel the rest of us here are wasting our time. It is our time to waste. Again, if Adobe finds this thread offensive they will remove it. You seem to take this very personally which gives the impression you have a vested interest - which you have made clear you don't. I respect your input on this discussion. I trust I have addressed you with respect also - I have always meant to. Some of your replies here have been somewhat rude and mean. I do not drink as you implied in your response to my question to you; one in which I sincerely wanted to know more of your angle on my question. I wish you no ill will - only the best.

     

    Thanks to the rest who have offered thoughts on this subject. I have found it beneficial for my part.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 6, 2010 1:41 PM   in reply to LUH3417

    Actually, there are very few like minded individuals here. We each have our own way of working and we all rely on different features of GoLive. Some of us are professional designers. Some are developers. Some are hobbyists. And some fall everywhere inbetween. There are some of us that need to know how to keep GoLive running on our computers as we upgrade them and there are those of us that need direction to a new application.

     

    I am truly not upset or loosing sleep over anything here. My only concern is for those that might be misled by Linda's well-intentioned but misguided aims. She really has no interest in reviving GoLive. Compare her revivegolive.com site with freefreehand.com. Which site looks like it is designed to actually accomplish something? Which site looks like it was designed with a professional web design app?

     

    If any of us are truly interested in having something done, take action.

     

    I'm not here to intentionally insult anyone. I assumed we're here to learn and share; not promote ignorance.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 6, 2010 5:36 PM   in reply to LRK 2

    LRK 2 wrote:

     

    I submitted requests prior to DWCS4. Not one was added.

    Perhaps Adobe did not receive enough requests like yours or perhaps whatever feature that you requested is still slated for an upcoming release. Perhaps it would be wiser to direct us all to the Adobe feature request form than encourage them to post in this thread. When was the last time that you saw an Adobe employee in this forum?

     

    LRK 2 wrote:

     

    But rather than do nothing, I decided to at least make my voice heard, and make it possible for others to join up and do the same.

    Again. If you really want to be heard and do something, why are you posting in this forum which is ignored by Adobe? You should be telling people to use Adobe's feature request form. Has anyone in this forum directed us to the Adobe feature request form?

     

    LRK 2 wrote:

     

    At least we all had our say and made our wishes known.

     

    But you are not making your wishes known to Adobe by posting all these "me toos" in this user forum. No one from Adobe is reading this forum. Contact Adobe directly through the feature request form.

     

    LRK 2 wrote:

     

    On another note: Make no mistake. From what I understand, Marion is not even a Marion, and previously went by a different male username. She/he admitted it her/himself earlier in this thread. She/he is a previous user who had been known to cause other problems among other participants in other forums in the past. I defended him at times thinking he surely was misunderstood. Now I see that it is I who was naive.

    LRK, we all use aliases here, for various reasons, and I am sure that you are still misunderstanding me.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2010 4:45 AM   in reply to LRK 2

    Of all the things in the world to complain about...after months and months we've still got somebody heckling us about a GREAT program.

     

    The news flash is that we're not going to change our minds about GoLive. So heckle away..............

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2010 8:05 AM   in reply to AlleyCatSmith

    diloretta wrote:

     

    Of all the things in the world to complain about...after months and months we've still got somebody heckling us about a GREAT program.

    Diloretta, are you really so ignorant? I'm not heckling you. I'm telling you that if you want your voice to be heard, CONTACT ADOBE DIRECTLY. Linda has distracted you with this impotent thread where Adobe pays no attention.

     

    EDIT: I just answered my own question with this thread from diloretta.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2010 10:00 AM   in reply to Marian Driscoll

    blah, blah, blah

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 9, 2010 9:20 AM   in reply to LRK 2

    Yes.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 10, 2010 8:56 PM   in reply to LRK 2

    First off, I know Adobe is never going to revive GoLive.  Their business is based on serving creative people, yet they abandoned them by going to Dreamweaver.  Oh well, I would happily abandon them too if there were decent competitors to their other apps.

     

    My question though is has any GoLive Mac users here switched to another app and become happy with it?

     

    I've spent two weeks with Dreamweaver and even though I can use just about any other program put in front of me, it makes no sense to me as it was built with a coder mindset, which I do not have.  It's like using Excel in place of InDesign to make a newsletter, only far worse. 

     

    So any suggestions as to whom I can give my money since Adobe no longer wants it from me?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 11, 2010 6:18 AM   in reply to AlleyCatSmith

    diloretta wrote:

     

    Of all the things in the world to complain about...after months and months we've still got somebody heckling us about a GREAT program.

     

    The news flash is that we're not going to change our minds about GoLive. So heckle away..............

     

    It's not heckling, it's frustration that few people here are listening to the reality she is laying down. And not only am I in complete agreement with her reasoning as far as the business end is concerend, I would also encourage anyone here who hasn't to look at GoLive 9. It's not as impenetrable as Dreamweaver, surely, but speaking as someone who first used the software when it was GoLive Cyberstudio, it looks to me that with GoLive 9 Adobe has clearly lost its way. And if that's where it was headed, then I think putting it down was the only humane thing to do.

     

    But man I hate Dreamweaver. I don't even know where to begin. My son says it's easy, but he's 17 and clearly is just plain nuts.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 11, 2010 6:25 AM   in reply to LRK 2

    Wish I could have gotten it. Don't mean to derail the thread, but is it Intel compatible? That's why I upgraded to GoLive 9 form CS after having been out of the game a while. Boy did I regret that wasted $200.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 11, 2010 6:41 AM   in reply to LRK 2

    LRK 2 wrote:

     

    TheTSArt wrote:

     

    My question though is has any GoLive Mac users here switched to another app and become happy with it?

     

    Unless you are ready to switch to a CMS setup like Joomla or Drupal, Dreamweaver is your best option.

    A CMS is not a design application. CMS stands for "content management system". A CMS can only replace the site management and template/component functions of GoLive.

     

    There's been a bunch of noise in this thread that probably distracted from the list of alternatives. Scroll back through this topic to find several options. A Mac-based designer may want to look to Adobe Fireworks, MediaLab's SiteGrinder, or Softpress' Freeway Pro.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 11, 2010 6:55 AM   in reply to LRK 2

    LRK 2 wrote:

     

    You are not derailing the thread. This is all good information… and it keeps this thread alive. Who knows if a developer might come along and decide he/she wants to pursue an option that might be at least similar to GoLive. Or preferably that Adobe might even reconsider down the road. I know it's doubtful, but it never hurts to put this kind of information out there.

    It does hurt if you do not tell people where they really need to go.

     

    I posted a link some time ago that listed several web editors. If you really want an application like GoLive, you'd contact the developers of those programs and tell them what features you'd like that are not already present. The specific features you seek are probably already there.

     

    When you say "Dreamweaver is your best option", you reveal that you have not given consideration to the alternatives. There are plenty of WYSIWYG design programs out there that mimic GoLive's ease of use for a designer that does not want to touch HTML.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 11, 2010 7:08 AM   in reply to LRK 2

    I use GoLive. That is why I am here.

     

    I also use Photoshop, Fireworks, Aptana, Dreamweaver, Firebug and Geany. I like these because they all do different things. I would never want to lock myself into a single tool. At that point I am just an operator of a program, not a web designer/developer.

     

    But it does not matter what I use as we all have our own unique way of working. I would not dare tell anyone which program they should use. We each need to shop around for a design tool that suits our own personal style.

     

    After looking at some of these other design tools, you may wonder why you bothered with either GoLive or Dreamweaver.

     

     

    ...to add to the Mac editor list, do not forget RapidWeaver or iWeb.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 11, 2010 8:46 AM   in reply to LRK 2

    LRK 2 wrote:

     

    These options are very limited, in my opinion.

    The last suggestion of apps was for people that did not like my previously suggested options. Are you saying the previously mentioned programs like Freeway Pro are too limited in your opinion as well? Freeway Pro seems like a perfect replacement for GoLive. It is designed much more like a page layout application with style sheets, an always accessible site window, built-in menu capabilities, and easy form processing. It does what GoLive failed to do (unless you also bought extra add-ons like NateMail and MenuMachine). GoLive seems clunky and ancient compared to modern WYSIWYG editors for Mac.

     

    Check out some videos of the program in use:

    http://www.softpress.com/support/tutorials/

     

    LRK 2 wrote:

     

    It may not be perfect, but GoLive still rocks!

    So why does it need to be revived? And how is it not perfect?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 13, 2010 5:43 PM   in reply to LRK 2

    Well I don't know why, but since there is an upgrade option from GoLive 8 or 9 to Dreamweaver CS4, I went ahead and took the plunge and upgraded. As has been said, the future--if you're going to stick with Adobe--is Dreamweaver. I actually used it years ago around version 2 or 3 or whatever back in the Mac OS 8 days when Macromedia owned it, and it has definitely evolved to say the least.

     

    Anyway, the interesting tidbit I picked up while working through the Dreamweaver tutorials was that Adobe seems to have updated GL 9 as a stepping stone of sorts for the transition to Dreamweaver. This explains a lot about why GL 9 isn't what it coulda/shoulda been. The plan wasn't to make a better GoLive. The plan was to move people away from GoLive to Dreamweaver using GoLive itself as transitional bridge. This suggests to me that Adobe planned on killing GoLive for quite a while prior to the announcement of its discontinuation. Seems like GoLive was marked for death a long time ago. If that's true, it sort of leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I have a hard time believing Adobe would market GoLive 9 as The Ultimate Transition Tool to Dreamweaver. I'm not sure I would have plunked down my $199 upgrade fee if I'd known this was their intention for the software.

     

    Then again, how smart can I be? I just plunked down $199 to upgrade from GoLive 9 to Dreamweaver CS4. Adobe gets their $400 no matter what. Shame on them for preying on fools!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 23, 2010 8:33 AM   in reply to LRK 2

    Revive GoLive — I hate change so I would love it!

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 3 4 5 ... 20 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points