Adobe Community: A challenge to Adobe: Allow me to use inline styles in DW by default or I dump DW

anygiven Calculating status...

Currently Being Moderated

A challenge to Adobe: Allow me to use inline styles in DW by default or I dump DW

Jan 22, 2010 12:34 PM

Years ago I switched from FP to DW because FP started forcing people to use CSS over HTML. That was FP 2000. I switched to DW because it respected my code... Now that CSS is mainstream and we are all in love with it, DW CS4 decides to throw a bone and tell me to fetch -- forces me to use CSS rules. I am fine with Adobe hurting my intelligence but at the very least I need the ability to convert CSS rules to inline styles. I do a lot of HTML emails for clients and as I am sure you know, Adobe, most [web] email clients ignore external CSS and <style> tag. Or let me put it this way: I simply want to choose between inline style and rules based on type of project. No questions or comments please.

So Adobe, you can remove this post right away if you like, but here is the challenge for you: If in a month you do not update DW SC4 to allow me to choose whether I want to use CSS rules at all + if you do not provide the ability to convert all CSS rules in a page to all inline I dump DW altogether. How's that? Also please check your records and see that I recently purchased your CS4 Master Collection. I am a serious CS4 user and this is a serious challenge.

With DW CS4 you abandoned DW's character of being a TOOL that lets users decide how to code. Redemption period of 1 months starts.... NOW. Tic toc, tic, toc.

2157 Views 32 Replies Latest reply: mongo60, Mar 2, 2010 9:08 AM

Replies

Currently Being Moderated

1. SnakEyez02,

Jan 22, 2010 3:12 PM in reply to anygiven

Report

First off, Adobe won't delete your post. In fact they won't even read it because these are user to user forums. If you have a suggestion, Adobe has a form for that:

Adobe - Feature Request/Bug Report Form

Second, threatening Adobe with 1 month's time? That's a joke. Nothing would ever happen that fast in a Fortune 500 company unless it threatened their business and losing a few hundred in profit for one customer who thinks the world should stop for one month to satisfy them...I won't even comment further.

Lastly, if you bothered to use the Help system Adobe built into their application you would realize that DW is capable of writing inline styles. In the CSS portion of the properties toolbar you will find an option for a targeted rule. Here is whether you state whether the rule is inline or written to a style-sheet or a style within that document.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

2. Nancy O.,

Jan 22, 2010 3:29 PM in reply to SnakEyez02

Report

SnakeEyze02,
I couldn't have said what you said any better.

OP,
Use Code View and you will find the inline CSS option.

Nancy O.
Alt-Web Design & Publishing
Web | Graphics | Print | Media Specialists
www.alt-web.com/
www.twitter.com/altweb
www.alt-web.blogspot.com

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

3. David_Powers,

Jan 22, 2010 3:57 PM in reply to anygiven

Report

anygiven wrote:
If in a month you do not update DW SC4 to allow me to choose whether I want to use CSS rules at all + if you do not provide the ability to convert all CSS rules in a page to all inline I dump DW altogether. How's that?
I'd start looking now for an alternative program. Wanting the choice is a reasonable request. As SnakEyez has pointed out, you can submit a feature request. But posting a "threat" in a user-to-user forum to dump a program that you have already paid for isn't going to produce the result you want.

No doubt, Adobe will be sorry to lose your custom if you don't upgrade to the next version, but it has already got your money. And since you have the Master Collection, are you seriously going to dump it because there's one feature you don't like? In the days before the Macromedia/Adobe merger, I had both the Macromedia Studio and Adobe Creative Suite to get the best features of both. I didn't use all the freatures, but the ones I wanted certainly made it worth having both.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

4. anygiven,

Jan 22, 2010 4:15 PM in reply to SnakEyez02

Report

See, this is one of those things. I don't think you understood. I am not looking for the possibility of using inline styles. I am aware of what you suggested. But try going para after para of pages of text that needs to be heavily styled. You click B or I and you get a popup window to define a class. So if you have 200 bolds to do, you have to tell DW 200 times "No, I don't want a class." But lets say that's not an issue... I get a file that is all rules and I need to create an HTML email out of it. Now you tell me how do I do this. How do I convert rules to inline to prepare 200 bolds, 100 italics and 75 underlines to inline? Keep in mind, I am talking about 4 pages of heavily formatted text.

Also, so freaking what if I want to use occasionally? Is that illegal? Will someone's browser crash if I do that? I am talking about the fact that email clients ignore rules in HTML emails while Adobe is saying "oh you can use inline styles, it is just that you will spend hours telling DW that you are absolutely sure you want to do that every time you hit B or I"

So let me repeat:

DW is going the way of FrontPage: "'let us teach you proper code."

They have a month to give me a freaking checkbox in Preferences to say "Use inline style be default."

Have a good weekend.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

5. John Waller,

Jan 22, 2010 4:27 PM in reply to anygiven

Report

They have a month to give me a freaking checkbox in Preferences to say "Use inline style be default."

Pointless for you to wait a month. Nothing will change by trying to goad anyone here. Start looking for an alternative now.

This is a user-to-user forum. We share knowledge and tips with each other. Adobe has other areas for input on new features.

If you're as serious about Adobe listening to your request as you claim to be about being a CS4 user then post your request to the Official Adobe wishlist (you've been given the link for that above).

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

6. anygiven,

Jan 22, 2010 4:33 PM in reply to anygiven

Report

And let me also say that I did say this to Adobe directly. I yelled too just like in this forum. Whether I threaten with an ultimatum or not a Fortune 500 will not listen anyway, right? Well, maybe if I get really loud they will hear me. It is not like I am asking for something outlandish. It was stupid of them to not allow me the choice int he first place. And it is not like I am am asking for a redo of the CSS panel interface. How about just having a checkbox in Prefs that allows <new inline style> to be a default selection on the CSS panel?

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

7. evereddie2,

Jan 22, 2010 7:33 PM in reply to anygiven

Report

All I can say is, WOW, just WOW!!!

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

8. David_Powers,

Jan 23, 2010 1:32 AM in reply to anygiven

Report

anygiven wrote:
You click B or I and you get a popup window to define a class. So if you have 200 bolds to do, you have to tell DW 200 times "No, I don't want a class."
Alternatively, you click the HTML button on the left of the Property inspector, and Dreamweaver does what you want - at least as far as clicking B and I are concerned.

You can also open the Text category of the Insert bar/panel, and click B or I. Regardless of which button is selected on the Property inspector, Dreamweaver uses HTML tags. Similarly, if you use Ctrl+B or Ctrl+I.

And if you want to get font tags back instead of using inline styles, there is a way to do it. First you need to add the Font Tag Editor to Insert panel/bar:
Open the Favorites category of the Insert bar/panel.
Right-click and select Customize Favorites.
In the Available Objects, select HTML from the pop-up menu.
Select Font Tag Editor from the bottom of the list, and click the double-chevron button to add it to Favorite Objects.
Click OK.

Whenever you want to apply font tags to text, select the target text, and click the Font Tag Editor icon in the Favorites tab. This gives you full access to styling text with old-style font tags.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

9. martcol,

Jan 23, 2010 9:23 AM in reply to anygiven

Report

anygiven wrote:

...allow me to choose whether I want to use CSS rules at all + if you do not provide the ability to convert all CSS rules in a page to all inline
Please don't take this as a dig but I'm not sure why you need that at all? I'm genuinely interested to know. I think that CSS makes most sense when it's applied externally. And if you use external, embedded and inline styles, isn't that a primary way to exploit the cascade?

Martin

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

10. David_Powers,

Jan 23, 2010 9:32 AM in reply to martcol

Report

martcol wrote:
Please don't take this as a dig but I'm not sure why you need that at all? I'm genuinely interested to know.
Many email programs don't support CSS, except through inline styles. What has confused many people, including the OP, is the way the Property inspector now has an HTML mode and a CSS mode. If you try to use the Bold and Italic buttons when the Property inspector is in CSS mode, it prompts you to create a class. If you switch to the HTML mode, it inserts and tags.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

11. martcol,

Jan 23, 2010 9:43 AM in reply to David_Powers

Report

David_Powers wrote:

Many email programs don't support CSS, except through inline styles.
I suppose he's got a point then.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

Martin

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

12. anygiven,

Jan 23, 2010 11:00 AM in reply to martcol

Report

All I want is:

- An option to do inline style by default and

- Menu item to convert rules to inline.

This should be available but it isn't. Anyone who had to do heavily styled HTML emails in DW CS4 knowing that email clients ignore CSS rules MUST have found this to be frustrating. I had a a case where a long HTML email was designed in DW CS4 and it was all rules. Try testing that through a an email blast system. Then you go into the menu to to convert rules to inline and you only find the option to do vice-versa. My frustration turned to anger because Adobe's DW now tells me "you are stupid for wanting to use inline styles because rules are more organized and compact." I think my arguments are clear and valid. I want DW to go back to being my programming tool, and not my educational tool. I am in this business over 10 years and I will decide how I program. I started using DW in the first place long ago for this reason -- it respected my coding method.

I find that shouting sometimes actually produces results, so lets wait and see.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

13. pziecina,

Jan 23, 2010 11:05 AM in reply to anygiven

Report

Hi

You could re-install your old version of Dreamweaver (mx2004, or whatever), just for emails. That is what I have (mx2004 and cs4 installed), I know it is not ideal but it works.

PZ

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

14. {sitewide},

Jan 23, 2010 11:24 AM in reply to anygiven

Report

I just read on Adobe news that they are suddenly redesigning CS5 (before the release date) and have a major update do out in less then 30 days for CS4 users. It has to do with something for inline styles. hmmm...I thought DW already had that option. Anyway...this is great news as I have heard complaint after compliant on these forums about such an issue (ok...maybe one and only one). I am still in shock Adobe is making such an update for everyone...ok...maybe not everyone...just "anygiven".

"anygiven" I am sure you will see your update very soon as adobe would not want to loose your business. Spending thousands of $$$ to update a software program that thousands and thousands of people use to make one person happy is a brilliant business model.

Before the 30 days come and go I will say my good byes now to you from these forums and thanks for the laughs. As in 30 days you won't be using DW.

PS. all tongue and cheek of course. Well... most of it other then the fact it won't happen.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

15. Nancy O.,

Jan 23, 2010 12:26 PM in reply to anygiven

Report

Remember, Adobe's target user wants DW for building Web Sites; not just HTML emails.

Inline CSS styled Emails can be built easily enough in DW Code View or with the aid of other software specifically designed for this purpose - such as HTML Email Creator.

If your feature request ever sees the light of day (and I'm not saying it won't), I can almost guarantee you it won't be added to CS4 because that ship has sailed. Software makers - not just Adobe - have to think ahead. Improvement efforts are almost always put into future products rather than backward engineering old ones.

Good luck,

Nancy O.
Alt-Web Design & Publishing
Web | Graphics | Print | Media Specialists
www.alt-web.com/
www.twitter.com/altweb
www.alt-web.blogspot.com

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

16. anygiven,

Jan 23, 2010 1:00 PM in reply to {sitewide}

Report

Oh wise one, so in your book, essentially no single individual can make a difference. It is completely pointless for anyone to complain because Adobe is a F500 company and they do not need to listen. You need to check your logic. If Adobe can learn anything from Microsoft it is that your software enters the danger territory only when it becomes standard. Microsoft became lazy with IE after it became as common as coffee makers in people's houses. THen they started telling their users how to use internet and what's good for you so they could continue to be lazy. It only took a couple of years for IE to start rolling down unstoppably. It is stupid little things like tabs and support for rounded corners that brought down IE. Now Adobe feels very comfy with DW being standard so they've started telling web programmers what's good completely ignoring the fact that going full CSS means people looking for alternatives to design HTML emails. I am upset, like many others because we love DW and this decision to so decisively discourage inline styles is dumb and leads DW on the path of FrontPage. I am telling you there is something up with Adobe, they are pushing things, they want to control their users in order to maximize dependability. I want DW to be my tool. If it cannot be that and continues to 'educate' me, I WILL dump DW in a month's time, come back here and tell you what I switched to...

Like I said I am in this industry for over 10 years. Freelancing for the last 6. I have clients who demand IE6 compatibility. I have clients who have archaic websites where I do updates and who refuse to upgrade. I receive content for HTML emails in Word. With HTML only import it used to be easy to get clean content with basic formatting. Now I get a mix of inline styles, classes and HTML from hell. This is reality of the web today and not some bunch of isolated cases. I don't use a number of features DW offers. I don't use assets. I don't rely on DW to update links in a site when a page name changes. There is half a thousand of situations where this is not desirable. But am I bothered with this prompt when it pops? No because it offers me a choice not to update links. There you have it. In this instance DW behaves like a programmer's tool right? it does not care why you would not want to update links, it offers it to you and that's how a programmer's tool should behave. Why can't I then have a damn choice to use inline styles for styling and tell DW to shut up about classes. I substantiated this request with arguments from a real situation and what p***** me off is that I know Adobe is aware that these situations exist -- HTML emails being as real and present as Earth itself -- yet they decide to deny that as a small little choice for programmers that would take them less than 10 lines of code in an incremental update.

I know their marketing gurus will read my feature request and say "hey, here is a way to get this one to upgrade to CS5 -- we just include this choice in DW SC5 -- hahahahaha". Not going to happen. I am sure there is a lot of creative people out there trying to get DW's piece of cake. I WILL not upgrade to CS DW5 out of principle unless they comply with my request for tis in CS4. So yes, they will lose only one individual. But if Adobe ever gets to read this as a follow up to my angry feature request here is a simple question i have for them: OVER WHAT?

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

17. anygiven,

Jan 23, 2010 1:24 PM in reply to Nancy O.

Report

"Remember, Adobe's target user wants DW for building Web Sites; not just HTML emails."

Your argument is misleading. You are saying this as if DW is already efficient at HTML emails. It is not. Maybe if you said that DW does not care about HTML emails you and I would agree. This whole thread is about an argument that a little bit of small choice that would literally require a checkbox in Preferences to control default targeted rule in that drop-down menu -- not back-'engineering' like you suggested -- would make DW an efficient HTML email design program. Something that would prevent me from looking for alternatives.

You are also speaking from the perspective of a perfect web project: You get a website to design from scratch, you have all content ready, the whole planet uses only latest browsers and you have full creative control. Well, maybe this is your situation and I may be just unlucky to work in an ecosystem that's not from Adobe's or Microsoft's fantasy world. For some reason I do not think this is the case. But in any case, it looks as if DW and I are on separate paths. My frustration is that all I need to follow them is a stupid little legitimate choice.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

18. {sitewide},

Jan 23, 2010 1:25 PM in reply to anygiven

Report

If you don't like advancements then you will be disappointed with cs5. Like Beth said...have you ever thought about code view? Being that you are a web designer for ten years it is surprising that you are stuck on a feature that you need to code with. Most experienced web designers feel more at home looking at code then clicking in some wizard.

Check back in 30 days and let us now what you switched to. Try notepad ++...I use it from time to time...nice program.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

19. anygiven,

Jan 23, 2010 1:37 PM in reply to {sitewide}

Report

You are just not letting me in. You refuse to hear me. Are you aware that your insulting reply has absolutely no relevance to my issues and arguments?

Let me try this with a metaphor.

Here is what you are saying.

"I am surprised that you are a driver for over 10 years, yet you refuse to buy a new car because it replaced CD player with only a USB slot for mp3 players. Maybe you should buy a 1979 Beatle."

Are you aware that this is how you sound? What I am saying is that...

"I want a car with both because for some F'd up reason I go on a road trip with friends who bring along this ancient stupid looking round thing called CD."

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

20. {sitewide},

Jan 23, 2010 2:00 PM in reply to anygiven

Report

Then maybe your friends should take the road trip in the 1979 Beatle...is it a convertible?

Look I know what you want and sorry if all this seems insulting to you. But it is humorous that you think by saying you will not support DW if you don't get your wish in 30 days. Do you really think Adobe cares if you buy CS5 or not (which you will)...they roll the dice with the majority of users. The majority wants progress...not options for CD players.

Sorry you will not get what you want from DW...thats why you have other choices for html editors.

It has been fun...good luck. My replies for this post here are done.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

21. mongo60,

Jan 23, 2010 5:30 PM in reply to anygiven

Report

Hey anygiven. I share your concerns (and I walked much the same path). The whole CSS system is an abysmally bad implementation of a decent idea, but as far as I can see, the Code Nazis have taken control of the castle. The whole move to CSS makes no sense at all, unless your goal is job security for Web jockeys. At least we've gone a long ways toward that, by way of utterly needless complexity. CSS uber alles!

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

22. anygiven,

Jan 23, 2010 5:36 PM in reply to mongo60

Report

Well mongo60,

Thank you. You said it very well in one short para.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

23. Ned Murphy,

Jan 23, 2010 7:57 PM in reply to anygiven

Report

Godwin's Law prevails... it is pretty humorous how it seems to play out that way so often.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

24. mongo60,

Feb 18, 2010 9:22 AM in reply to anygiven

Report

Hey anygiven. Appreciate your comments too. Think you might enjoy "The Digital Rip Van Winkle Returns" at http://www.astonisher.com/archives/ripvanwinkle1.html. It deals with some of the Dreamweaver shortcomings you addressed...

"The poster child for the dumbing down of American PC software is Adobe Dreamweaver, which is currently (and tragically) suffering from early-onset Alzheimer's."

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

25. anygiven,

Feb 18, 2010 10:44 AM in reply to mongo60

Report

mongo60, thank you for that link.

This is exactly what I am talking about. Ctrl+I/U/B are something Adobe decided to change like matter to antimatter for reasons only known to them. Ctrl+U for Preferences????? And as for underline, is that discouraged too? Press Ctrl+B and you get a prompt to define a new class with background images, justification, padding and all that. Check this out: this little Web based HTML editor does bold, underline and italics on Ctrl+B/U/I and it does not prompt me to define background image and padding for my bold underline and italics!!!!!!! Buhahahahahahaha. Adobe, these are keyboard shortcuts! They have been here ever since humanity invented calculus. The whole purpose of them is to do something quickly with one act of a keystroke combination. Pasting with basic formatting is gone too from Dreamweaver CS4. All in the name of the almighty CSS.

I just worked on an HTML email yesterday, Hotmail and Gmail do not even support inline style for TD background image. I eventually ended up using plain ole HTML for the entire thing. How, with Dreamweaver 8 which is the slowest piece of software you can get on Mac OS X. But at least I getr a solid WYSIWYG that only does HTML. I was pasting with basic formatting too. I used all over the place and it felt f***** good.

I swear, Adobe is the new Microsoft only it does not really know what it is doing. The scenario for anyone to really want to get DWCS4 is this:
You are building a website from absolute scratch.
Your client never sends you content in Word and never tells you keep the formatting.
In fact, all underlines you will ever do will never come from a text file of any sort, you will do all of those manually, and these things are so rare that there is no reason why you should have a keyboard shortcut for it. You will, however, be accesing your preferences every about 3 minutes so you have the convenience of pressing Ctrl+U on your keyboard to have the Preferences pop up.
Oh, and you will NEVER have to take content from a page you developed and use it as content for an HTML email.. NEVER. Who would ever want to do that??

Of course I have to use DW. It is really the only solid WYSIWYG/Code combo out there, sadly. But I swear for this particular reason -- the fiasco of DW -- I am through with Adobe, and CS4 (my Master Collection) is the last Adobe product I will ever purchase. If they answered my complaint and provided the ability for me to choose between HTML/CSS, I would have stayed. The moment a solid alternative to DW 8 comes to my attention DW is a goner form my computer altogether. I am sure there are people out there right now who are aware of the fact that DW is alone, lazy, fat and spoiled. It will not even notice when some new horse takes about 50% of its market share. This always happens. Look at IE crumbling like a paperhouse.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

26. mongo60,

Feb 22, 2010 4:44 AM in reply to anygiven

Report

Hey anygiven. Appreciate your observations. I also feel that Adobe has lost its way as far as the Web is concerned.

Here's another example from the Dreamweaver Help files. In the second video down on the Dreamweaver CS4 launch screen, called "Live View" (which isn't, BTW), the Adobe talking heads spend a lot of time on how to use a Yahoo calendar widget to create a calender of coming attractions. They make it sound cool and contempo and "next generation."

As a longtime webmaster with a small client who owns a bar & grill on the Oregon coast, I react to this Adobe video in two ways. First, if my client's competition is using Dreamweaver and following Adobe's directives, I'm absolutely thrilled. Couldn't be happier. Here's why. In the Real World, it's crucial to get search engine traffic to the calendars. But if you do what Abobe suggests in their "Live View" (Not) video, you will get just about zero search engine traffic to your calendar because the search engines can't fully index pages whose content changes in response to user actions! Boiled down, if you do it Adobe's way you'll spend a lot of time and energy to get significantly less functionality in your coming attractions calendar, and thereby deliver less value to your client.

So in a way, Adobe's Real World Web cluelessness actually helps me by making Adobe-led webmasters less effective and easier to beat. The problem here -- for me and everyone else -- is that is that Adobe and Dreamweaver have no competition any more. I'd be delighted to stand on the shore and watch the grief on the good ship Adobe from the distance, but I can't do that because in the so-called "free market economy" I don't have that fundamental freedom of choice any more.

I've also begun to wonder about my freedom to express my views here. Last month, I posted a comment noting the basic problem with the Dreamweaver CS4 calendar widget video in the comments section at the bottom of http://tv.adobe.com/watch/inside-the-dreamlabs/dreamweaver-cs4-live-pr eview/, and it was deleted by Adobe. As of February 22, 2010, the last comment on the page now reads: "Excellent video." That'll take care of the issue! I paid $800 for CS4 (on top of a shelf load of Adobe products going all the way back to 1992) and I logged in, but I don't get to offer an honest (and helpful) comment if it doesn't support the current Adobe dogma?

I hope that's not the case. I hope there's just some sort of honest misunderstanding here. I also hope that Adobe can appreciate that this is not just empty complaining. I'm not sitting here moving my mouth because it feels good. I'm taking the time out of a very busy morning to offer these comments because as an independent Web developer I believe it's imperative for Adobe to rethink where it's taking Dreamweaver.

Among the issues crying out for Adobe's reconsideration:

* Cascading Style Sheets. CSS is a hideously bad implementation of a decent-enough idea. Because of its inherent design flaws, CSS will never be adopted widely UNLESS people don't have a choice. Adobe should stop making Dreamweaver an agent of Web totalitarianism by removing the webmaster's choices as to how he/she constructs their pages. Just say "no" to the Code Nazis.

* Feature Loss. Adobe needs to start adding features and functionality to Dreamweaver, instead of taking features out as is the case with Dreamweaver CS4. Like the man said, Job One should be to bring Dreamweaver up to the same functionality that FrontPage had 15 years ago in 1995, including all the Web Bot functions. (I realize that it might take a couple of versions to get Dreamweaver up to full FrontPage functionality, but high on my list for the first version upgrade would be a robust threaded discussion group component AND the ability to include blog-like comments at the bottom of the pages.)

Like to see some positive response here from Adobe to these issues that have been raised by longtime, professional customers...

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

27. mongo60,

Feb 26, 2010 3:21 AM in reply to mongo60

Report

"Like to see some positive response here from Adobe to these issues that have been raised by longtime, professional customers...
"

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

28. David_Powers,

Feb 26, 2010 11:45 AM in reply to mongo60

Report

As was pointed out more than one month ago, this is a user-to-user forum. You won't get an official response from Adobe here.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

29. anygiven,

Feb 26, 2010 2:22 PM in reply to David_Powers

Report

There is this overwhelming feeling that Adobe is a huge monster that is too big to listen to a few voices. They also have a history of asking people to pay for fixes in next versions. But this will only cause developers to start looking for alternatives.

I am getting into Video editing and after buying Master Collection blindly thinking that Adobe is THE solution, I decided to switch to Final Cut Studio. My Adobe marriage is already crumbling away. Now here is a company that is a control freak but somehow manages to provide features and tools that for most people make sense and are at least sufficient to work with -- Apple.

How long ago have people asked for an option to hide the ******** File Activity window in DW. It is almost like asking DW to circumcise itself -- this is how much persistence they've shown in NOT providing an option for this. The point here is an option to hide it automatically not to eliminate it, and they keep refusing to provide this option for years. I work in Spaces and anyone who works in Spaces will agree what a frustration it is to have to catch and move that little window to the space you are working in to prevent DW from switching spaces every time you hit Cmd+S to save and upload. I mean, what is DW's obsession with this little window? I just don't get it...

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

30. Nancy O.,

Feb 26, 2010 2:46 PM in reply to anygiven

Report

Yawwwwwwn. I wish this month old discussion would finally end. It keeps getting bumped up and displays in my email box. There is no point to this. This is a user-to-user forum. If you have a beef with Adobe, take it up directly with them. That's my final word. I won't be looking at this again.

Nancy O.
Alt-Web Design & Publishing
Web | Graphics | Print | Media Specialists
http://alt-web.com/
http://twitter.com/altweb
http://alt-web.blogspot.com

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

31. caferacer,

Feb 27, 2010 8:27 AM in reply to David_Powers

Report

After a mighty effort to learn CSS basics, then discovering email clients could usually care less about my artistic vision, I returned to tables and inline for my email template, so far without a problem although my html emails generally contain a minimal amount of text, and that's usually not styled.

Since the OP seems to be emailing mainly styled text, couldn't this be done as efficiently out of an html-capable email app like MaxBulk Mailer? Format options include text, plain/html text, html only, web page, and - styled text. I know that doesn't address the issue of preferred workflow, but it might solve the ease of use issue.

|
Mark as:
Currently Being Moderated

32. mongo60,

Mar 2, 2010 9:08 AM in reply to Nancy O.

Report

Hey Nancy O. Appreciate your comments. Other people's problems are kind of a hassle aren't they? Hope you'll just take my word for it -- the reason we're talking about this is that it matters to some of us. In fact, it's a Big Deal. Suggest you take a look at the Digital Rip Van Winkle link earlier in this thread if you want to understand all this better.

I can see by your signature line that you are a Dreamweaver pro, so I'm hoping you can help me. Elsewhere on this forum I've had a question floating unanswered for a while about Flash in .lbi files. Can you help? Here's the deal. When I insert a Flash Asset (either via the Insert Menu or by dragging the Flash file out of the Assets Window) into an .lbi file, I get an error that says I can't use Flash in Dreamweaver Library files, which is of course a crippling limitation for Dreamweaver. But if I cut and paste the Flash code into the Library file in Code View, the Flash animation works just fine.

What am I doing wrong here? I'm sure it's me because I can't believe Adobe would make it so that its own Flash doesn't work fully in its own Dreamweaver. And there's no reason why Flash can't work in Dreamweaver Library files since Flash doesn't require a <head> statement. The only possible issue I can think of here is that it would require Dreamweaver to keep id="FlashID" numbers straight. This seems like an awfully simple thing to do. Is that why Dreamweaver can't fully use Flash? Really appreciate it if you could shed some light here.

I'm also curious if this is another case of Adobe dumbing down Dreamweaver -- in other words, did you used to be able to use Flash in .lbi files, like you used to have a Link View and all the other things Adobe took out of Dreamweaver CS4? Thanks for your help...

|
Mark as: