Can I use InDesign to make a webpage w/out knowing code 2?... ehem

[Yerbodygotmyscreenname]

Or DreamWeaver? OMG yes I'm a dum dum, but trying to get there and become GREAT just like u

[medeamajic]

Yes you can but Dreamweaver is not as easy as Muse and InDesign does not work as well as Muse. I hope Indesign gets better for web design but as for now I am very impressed with Muse.

[Guest]

GIGO.

Dreamweaver makes tables and lists much, much easier than Muse.

[Yerbodygotmyscreenname]

Thanks 4 the replies, so as long as I'm not working with lists or tables..... Muse is probably the way to go for a beginner like me. If I have a data base to display in a table, it's normaly in my Excel so I normaly import that, if that's what is ment by lists/tables.

[Guest]

Lists and tables are two different features that are missing from Muse. There is no other web design program in the world that lacks these features. Even Adobe's PageMill web design program from over a decade ago had these features. I was just challenging medeamajic's suggestion that Muse was easier than DW. A crayon is easier to use than Photoshop but few of us would choose such an elementary tool.

One does not need a database to display a table or list.  These are very basic design tools that should not have been neglected.

The last screen shot of this Muse Showcase site shows where an actual unordered list would be ideal. Instead, the designer had to manually drop in bullets in a very crude way. The ordered list on this page has ragged type on the left edge. It is just messy.

[Wade_Zimmerman1]

Yes but tables are not the way of the future and it is suggested that you will not be able to maintain a table based website in the future. And even with dreamweaver it is rightfully suggested that you not use tables. Why support a feature that is no longer useful or preferred?

Can you suggest why it is needed other than you might have used them in the past or you still like tables.

After all are most web designers using divisions instead of taables?

[Guest]

Wade, are you kidding? Do you understand what tables are for?

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1942.html

Even InDesign uses tables.

[Wade_Zimmerman1]

Marion I am serious.

[Guest]

Then you must not understand what tables are for.

Your comment just caught me off guard as you normally make sense here.

[medeamajic]

Marian Driscoll wrote:

Lists and tables are two different features that are missing from Muse. There is no other web design program in the world that lacks these features. Even Adobe's PageMill web design program from over a decade ago had these features. I was just challenging medeamajic's suggestion that Muse was easier than DW. A crayon is easier to use than Photoshop but few of us would choose such an elementary tool.

One does not need a database to display a table or list.  These are very basic design tools that should not have been neglected.

The last screen shot of this Muse Showcase site shows where an actual unordered list would be ideal. Instead, the designer had to manually drop in bullets in a very crude way. The ordered list on this page has ragged type on the left edge. It is just messy.

Marian,

Muse is a new program. Why do you want to knock it so much? I think Dreameaver is great but in another 18 or 19 months I think Muse may out shine DreamWeaver. If it does not that is OK with me. Like others have stated I think Muse can do some very cool things and will get even better. I admit so will DreamWeaver. I seen a favicon option in Muse. I am not sure if DreamWeaver CS 6.0 has it or not. I insert the favicon on the host server myself s opposed to using software. I am just getting into web design myself. Below are two websites I designed using Dreameaver. I know they a pretty lame compare to what you folks can do. Having said that I just think Muse might be very usefull for some of my clients websites. The cheesy imagekraft website is mine. What can I say other than I am still learning?

http://www.innovativeupholsterysolutions.com/

http://www.imagekraft.org/

[Guest]

I'm sorry if you perceive me as a "hater". I am certainly not. I am an "expecting more-er" from a company that should know better. You might feel some disappointment in Muse if you knew the competition (ie: Freeway Pro) and the previous Adobe program that could do so much more for a designer (ie: GoLive).

You seem to be confusing the idea that Muse and Dreamweaver are related and that one might fall to the other. They are two very different tools intended for two very different types of people. Adobe is marketing Muse to people that previously did not have the confidence or experience to dive into web design.  Muse delivers on the confidence but it cannot supply experience. In some ways, this is like giving someone a wrench and a screwdriver and telling them that they are an auto mechanic.  As you progress as a web designer, you may see the same faults in Muse that others see... and hopefully expect more from Adobe.

[medeamajic]

I have heard GoLive was cool but it got EOL before I got into web design. I like Muse and I am sure it will get better. Some can argue WordPress is better than Dreamweaver because of the CMS. I just do simple websites myself so a good CMS is a non issues. We will all have different needs. Muse will work OK for some of my clients but not all of them. I wish Adobe had kept Flash Catalyst. I liked that a lot.

[e.reed.rogers]

Go Live was fantastic. I actually used it in Win7 under VM until I learned about Muse. Although there is no HTML editor to tweak stuff out, it is my experienced opinion as a designer of 20 years that MUSE is a great tool for creating simple, sexy, speedy and powerful sites.  I am in the middle of a redesign for my three sites and it is awesome to work with. Look: Try out MUSE.  If you don't like MUSE then don't use it. PERIOD. End of story. Don't whine and say it writes bad code or is missing this or that. It's a beta. Nobody has a gun to your head to use it. Heck, my PS CS 4 & 6 has bugs and still can't preview type correctly after 20 years!!! Go figure.  Make your own decision by doing, not listening to a bunch of insecure coders.

[Guest]

Even with 20 years of alleged experience, it is ignorant to think that coders are "insecure" about Muse. Adobe is not selling Muse to steal work from professional web designers. Adobe is selling Muse to the print design market to introduce them to web design. The web design market is growing, not shifting from one app to another.

Who is arguing that WordPress is better than Dreamweaver? We're comparing apples to oranges again. Dreamweaver can be used on WordPress design. It is insane to think that there are disputes between different types of designers and different apps.

As expressed earlier, Muse is an ideal way to go for a beginner that does not need advanced web design and interaction. If you like Muse, you might also like similar apps like Freeway Pro that have been on the market for over a decade and offer more mature options. I'm not mentioning Freeway to push sales their way. I'm pointing out that a web designer should be aware of the tools available to them. Some of the participants in this discussion are ignoring possibilities.

[e.reed.rogers]

Ignorance is bliss now isn't it? (Get the Irony there?)  If you understood my comment I was stating that MUSE is not designed for the hard core coder, but for the "Right  side of the brain(ers)".  Look up all the discussions/blogs about MUSE and you will see self proclaimed coders complaining about how sloppy the code it writes is, and how (indirectly) they feel threatened that it will take business away from them because the "average joe" will design their own sites. That, my dear, implies insecurity!  If you happen upon my comments on the other forums/blogs you will clearly see that I support and respect coders. I don't support their (or anybody's) snobbery that the only way to truly design a site is by hand coding.   I don't agree that MUSE is for beginners as I am sure there will be some professionals using it to save time on less consuming sites to make a quick buck.  MUSE is simply a tool, and any tool can be modified to suit your needs. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, this is just mine. It's been fun but now I have to go design an awesome site without (thankfully) having to code with MUSE.   Peace.

[Guest]

rogersphoto.com wrote:

...Look up all the discussions/blogs about MUSE and you will see self proclaimed coders complaining about how sloppy the code it writes is, and how (indirectly) they feel threatened that it will take business away from them because the "average joe" will design their own sites. That, my dear, implies insecurity!

It would be fun for you to point to just one post from just one "coder" who has explicitly (not "indirectly" in your warped perception) expressed insecurity from the advent of Muse. 

This is lunacy. There is no war here. Lay down your gun.

If you have a false sense that inexperienced designers from the print realm are going to replace the professional web designer because of an easy-to-use tool, then you must conceed that their client (with neither design nor technical skill) could bypass both parties with that same easy-to-use tool. 

Take a peek at a tweet from someone who worked on the Muse team:

Christine worked on the development of Muse marketing (the old muse.adobe.com site). She is an experienced web designer. She knows web design and she knows Muse.  It is not a product intended for professional web designers. They don't really care and are not threatened by it. Your assumption of Muse threatening professional web designers is as crazy as PowerPoint users being a threat to the professional print designers that use InDesign.

[e.reed.rogers]

"Is this a bad thing? Yes, in the same way Dreamweaver design view is a bad thing. If I were a freelance web designer I’d be a little concerned that the market may get saturated (like it already isn’t) with cheap and cheerful website-for-£200 guys who will poach my business but not to the point where I’d lose sleep..." http://elliotjaystocks.com/blog/adobe-muse-a-step-in-the-wrong-direction/

"I’m sure this could hurt web devs..." http://www.zeldman.com/2011/09/02/fast-company-on-adobe-muse/

Those two examples are mild granted, and they do go on to say/suggest that it is not a big deal, but there it is. It's all how you interpret it I guess.

Taking a step back, my problem is the snobbery of coders calling it "sloppy "and "a step backward..."  Why do coders care so much (insecurity)? If the code is so sloppy and will interfere with the end users experience, then they should rejoice because no respectable company would put up with that.

http://www.zeldman.com/2011/09/02/fast-company-on-adobe-muse/

elliotjaystocks.com/blog/adobe-muse-a-step-in-the-wrong-direction/

http://mattkersley.com/general/not-a-muse-d-by-adobe/

As for "a war, lay down you gun." Jeez.  Lighten up. My replies are done. Thanks for exercising my brain.

[Guest]

This is silliness. Read the full quote and quit trying to snip sections to suit your delusional perception of web design.

rogersphoto.com failed to fully quote:

"I’m sure this could hurt web devs, but in general I believe any time a machine or software is created to do a human job, we see professionals step up their game and make some really incredible work out of necessity to compete. So perhaps we should be excited by what we’ll see devs do.

I have a feeling that the work this will cost us is probably the kind led by people with delusional budgets and a general lack of appreciation for an expertly crafted website. So fear not."

The sad thing is that you have somehow found three very well observed articles that detail the problems of Muse, yet you are too blind to understand the articles.

[medeamajic]

Maian,

There are indeed other web desing software programs on the market that have a very friendly GUI like Muse. They may even be much better  than Muse. I know you can use DreamWeaver with WordPress. My point was some foks like WordPress because of the CMS and it is free. I think WordPress is great if you like to use templates and then code by hand a tad bit. I am trying to avoid coding by hand and focusing on the artistic side of web design and I doubt I am alone. I am not worried about CMS, databases and shopping carts at this time. I wish I knew how to do all that and maybe one day I will. As for now I am glade Adobe's Muse is out there. Where will it be in another 18 months? I am not sure but I know it will be better and not worse. I think it is wise for some of us to use Muse  if it can get the job done for certain clients. No one is arguing that Muse can replace WordPress or Dreamweaver as of now or that Muse is perfect. I know I have never tried to imply that Muse will do everything I need it to do as of now but it is an intersting program with a lot of potential in my opinion. Have you sent any feature request to try and make the program better? If not why haven't you?

[Guest]

medeamajic wrote:

...They may even be much better  than Muse...

So why aren't you using them?

medeamajic wrote:

...No one is arguing that Muse can replace WordPress or Dreamweaver as of now...

You are still incapable of realizing that Muse is not positioned to replace Dreamweaver ever. Your belief is as silly as saying that Microsoft Word will replace InDesign. Two different markets! Two different types of users! ...and neither one is a threat to the other.

[medeamajic]

If I only did web desing I might buy the less expensive alternatives but I do video editing as well as graphic desing so I have bought The Master Collection. MicroSoft Word to replace InDesing? Muse is going to get better and better regaurdless of what you want to believe. In 3 years from now you might even be using it :  )

[e.reed.rogers]

medeamajic wrote:

If I only did web desing I might buy the less expensive alternatives but I do video editing as well as graphic desing so I have bought The Master Collection. MicroSoft Word to replace InDesing? Muse is going to get better and better regaurdless of what you want to believe. In 3 years from now you might even be using it :  )

[KeyStudio]

Just wanted to respond to the idea that Indesign users are rank amatuers as far as web design goes. Most print designers I know do web design as well, even if we're laying it out in INDD and having someone else code it. Even in doing this, we have to be aware of web standards, sizing convetions, colorspace converstions, etc. Along the way I've tried many web design programs, and I do also know how to write basic HTML and CSS code enough to recognize that which is good or sloppy. It's been many years since designers could make their livings being blissfully unaware of tags and pixels.

The one thing that keeps me well-rooted in Indesign, though, is that it's just the best design tool, period. I don't want Muse to be a light version WYSIWIG web program just because it's based on Indesign and the prospect of getting the print workers engaged. We bring a lot to the design table and I think the best case scenario is not watering down the pool of web designers but bringing new persepctives to current web asthetics and standards.

[Guest]

KeyStudio wrote:

Just wanted to respond to the idea that Indesign users are rank amatuers...

Nobody said that.

[dsmithdcom]

If you use InDesign to build web pages, then you are a rank amateur at web development, in the same way as if you use Microsoft Word to layout print design, you are a rank amateur at publishing. That's ok, not everything needs to be professionally designed, or coded. People can learn, by starting out with the easy and progressing to the dificult. Or they can stay with the easy. Whatever.

This whole discussion feels a tad overwrought. Muse is rubbish, and like countless similar products, it is not aimed at professional web developers. If that works for you, great.

Otherwise, don't worry about it.