I will not buy DW CS3

SoftIDEA wrote:
> I read on the forum that there are many other "exotic" conditions in which DW
> crashes. Also there are an huge number of other bugs, all related to both the
> old and the new features. Over all them Spry seems buggy.

Expressing your opinion like this in a public forum probably helps get
your frustration off your chest, but it doesn't really help pin down the
areas where you experience problems with Dreamweaver. What the
development team says time and again is that it needs reproducible steps
to identify a bug. When you experience a problem, submit a bug report:

http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform

It might not be as therapeutic as a rant in the forum, but it's probably
a lot more effective in getting a stable program.

--
David Powers, Adobe Community Expert
Author, "Foundation PHP for Dreamweaver 8" (friends of ED)
Author, "PHP Solutions" (friends of ED)
http://foundationphp.com/

> I want to see a serious bugfix effort by ADOBE before to upgrade. ADOBE
> is a
> billion dollar corporation, and it is distributing an application in
> severe
> conditions, that are not acceptable even for a garage-based company.
> Sorry, but this is my opinion. A customer opinion.
>

I can understand your feelings. When software makers fix bugs,
the release should be free. I think that DWCS3 did fix some bugs
or at least problems with CSS but Adobe knew this probably wasn't
enough to get people to pay for a release so they threw in Spry -
which IMHO is a crock.

I have pesonally never found DW to be unstable - quite the contrary, it's
always ran really well for me.

My personal "disgust" at this point was the shock and suprrise I felt when I
installed CS3 to find out it was virtually the same as CS2. I cannot belive
what constitutes a "new version" these days, and I have never ever seen a
weaker "release" than this in my 20 years plus in software/web development.

Maybe its me, but CS3 contains so few new features and these features are so
small and lacking, that it's just becoming a joke now as to people like
Adobe doing minimal work for huge dollars.

I've uninstalled my trial and will plod on with CS2 until they genuinely do
release a new version.


"SoftIDEA" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:f77eg7$eol$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> I'm a DW customer since the version 3, and I have to say that while it was
> full
> of very interesting features, it has always been a buggy pain in the back.
> The DW project has always been completely not interested in releasing
> something really stable. Both whe it was Macromedia and now that it is
> Adobe.
> A proof of what I say is that the first version MX 2004 was so buggy that
> even
> in the advertise of the "second" version the chief of the DW development
> wrote
> that a strong effort in bug-fix had been done, and that DW was a truly
> stable
> tool.
> Completely untrue. And little serious too.
> I had both MX and MX2004 and it was as buggy as the previous ones.
> Then I upgraded to DW8, and since then I have seen a new show in bug term
> "evolution".
> In my experience DW crashes truly respecting the Murphy's law: during file
> save.
> I read on the forum that there are many other "exotic" conditions in which
> DW
> crashes. Also there are an huge number of other bugs, all related to both
> the
> old and the new features. Over all them Spry seems buggy.
> So I decided not to upgrade to DWCS3 because I'm a worker and my time is
> precious for me and I cannot afford to waste it into redoing what I did,
> or
> even worst cases.
> I want to see a serious bugfix effort by ADOBE before to upgrade. ADOBE
> is a
> billion dollar corporation, and it is distributing an application in
> severe
> conditions, that are not acceptable even for a garage-based company.
> Sorry, but this is my opinion. A customer opinion.
>
>

CS2? Whats that then? I rememeber DW8, but must have missed the release of CS2.

Apologies - DW8 is what i meant. (Had Photoshop in my mind as I was
recalling how they released a 6.5 version in acknolwledgement that it was
barely a "new" release)

I've been using DW since before it was released (the first ever beta) and
I've trained hundreds of people to use it over the years - and, as I say,
this is the most dissapointing and weakest release I've ever seen. Adoeb
ought to be ashamed of tehmselves pulling a "fast one" like this!


"Doooza" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:fc5k0k$q70$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> CS2? Whats that then? I rememeber DW8, but must have missed the release of
> CS2.

I think they wanted to release the new Photoshop and include the new integrated features in Dreamweaver, but I do whole heartedly agree, the changes did not warrant a release, they should have concentrated on fixing DW8 first.

I found a bug in CS3 and confirmed it with Adobe, they said it was most likely to be addressed in the next release, not in a fix, which I find insulting, as they will want us to pay for that.

Steve

re: I found a bug in CS3 and confirmed it with Adobe, they said it was most
likely
to be addressed in the next release

I think its all totally disgusting - CS3 is in no way at all a new release
of Dreamweaver. It's not even DW8 fixed!

I agree with op comments too - this also has to be the best example
available today of a software company ripping off thousands of users by
claiming "new version" when in fact there is no new version by what most
"normal" people consider a "version" or "release".

I'll be sticking to DW8 also - there's no need to jump on the "got to have
the latest" band wagon.

Shame on Adobe for pulling such a devious little stunt. Shame on many of us
who WILL be upgrading and encouraging such bad behaviour.


"Doooza" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:fc5md5$smm$1@forums.macromedia.com...
>I think they wanted to release the new Photoshop and include the new
>integrated
> features in Dreamweaver, but I do whole heartedly agree, the changes did
> not
> warrant a release, they should have concentrated on fixing DW8 first.
>
> I found a bug in CS3 and confirmed it with Adobe, they said it was most
> likely
> to be addressed in the next release, not in a fix, which I find insulting,
> as
> they will want us to pay for that.
>
> Steve
>

unbelievable - they haven't even uprgraded the already lousy support for
asp.net.


"adlevoice" <adlevoice@calista.net.au> wrote in message
news:fc5u6t$7j3$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> re: I found a bug in CS3 and confirmed it with Adobe, they said it was
> most likely
> to be addressed in the next release
>
> I think its all totally disgusting - CS3 is in no way at all a new
> release of Dreamweaver. It's not even DW8 fixed!
>
> I agree with op comments too - this also has to be the best example
> available today of a software company ripping off thousands of users by
> claiming "new version" when in fact there is no new version by what most
> "normal" people consider a "version" or "release".
>
> I'll be sticking to DW8 also - there's no need to jump on the "got to have
> the latest" band wagon.
>
> Shame on Adobe for pulling such a devious little stunt. Shame on many of
> us who WILL be upgrading and encouraging such bad behaviour.
>
>
> "Doooza" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
> news:fc5md5$smm$1@forums.macromedia.com...
>>I think they wanted to release the new Photoshop and include the new
>>integrated
>> features in Dreamweaver, but I do whole heartedly agree, the changes did
>> not
>> warrant a release, they should have concentrated on fixing DW8 first.
>>
>> I found a bug in CS3 and confirmed it with Adobe, they said it was most
>> likely
>> to be addressed in the next release, not in a fix, which I find
>> insulting, as
>> they will want us to pay for that.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>
>

adlevoice wrote:
> unbelievable - they haven't even uprgraded the already lousy support for
> asp.net.

Nor will they. It's being dropped completely from the next version of
Dreamweaver:

http://www.adobe.com/go/kb402489

FWIW, I find a lot of improvements in Dreamweaver CS3, particularly the
way it renders CSS in Design view, and the functioning of the CSS Styles
panel. There's also the Photoshop integration, Spry, Device Central, and
Bridge. However, if they're features that you don't need, or don't use
very often, then upgrading might not be the best option for you.

--
David Powers, Adobe Community Expert
Author, "The Essential Guide to Dreamweaver CS3" (friends of ED)
Author, "PHP Solutions" (friends of ED)
http://foundationphp.com/

I changed jobs and they asked me what I needed, I said Dreamweaver so they went and bought the latest version. When I got to the job and found the CS3 was not really much different I was slightly disappointed too.

I am not defending Adobe, but the new CSS features are cool, being able to move/copy styles between sheets are good, and has been needed for a while, but a brand new version with a hefty price tag?

re: However, if they're features that you don't need, or don't use
very often, then upgrading might not be the best option for you

Of the thousands who uprgrade - how many do you think will get "new version"
value for their hard earned dollar? Not many I suspect.

This is the weakest "feature set" I've ever seen in any release of software.
Correctly rendering CSS instead of doing a lousy job at it - a feature?
Taking away Asp.Net suport?? Nah, this is piss weak and fitting only for a
point release at no charge. (or just saving it untill they had actual real
features to incorportae)


"David Powers" <david@example.com> wrote in message
news:fc5vlh$90d$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> adlevoice wrote:
>> unbelievable - they haven't even uprgraded the already lousy support for
>> asp.net.
>
> Nor will they. It's being dropped completely from the next version of
> Dreamweaver:
>
> http://www.adobe.com/go/kb402489
>
> FWIW, I find a lot of improvements in Dreamweaver CS3, particularly the
> way it renders CSS in Design view, and the functioning of the CSS Styles
> panel. There's also the Photoshop integration, Spry, Device Central, and
> Bridge. However, if they're features that you don't need, or don't use
> very often, then upgrading might not be the best option for you.
>
> --
> David Powers, Adobe Community Expert
> Author, "The Essential Guide to Dreamweaver CS3" (friends of ED)
> Author, "PHP Solutions" (friends of ED)
> http://foundationphp.com/

The bad part for Adobe might be that since I am not upgrading Dreamweaver, I'm also not upgrading to the next Photoshop and Illustrator this time around either. All the products are so focused on the suite with cross features between them that it doesn't benefit me that much to upgrade just one or 2 programs.

What are the alternatives if one chooses not use DW at all?

There's all new stuff from MS - Expression Web, which is actually quite
good. They also have the free visual web developer - though this is more for
coders nd not so big on designey features. There's plenty of other choices
too.

I'm happy to just stick to DW8 until they (really, genuinely) release a new
version.

"joat-mon" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:fc70dm$gtk$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> What are the alternatives if one chooses not use DW at all?

I purchassed DW8 4 months before they realeased DW CS3. I was not told of the new upcoming release at all and was interested in the "new" version. Ofcourse they told me I had to pay an UPGRADE fee for the new version!!! They wouldn't give me any credit what so ever for the "old" version.

At first I was disapointed and felt cheated, but after reading this post and finding out that I really didn't miss anything I feel much better.

Adobe ought to know that there are a lot of great products with great customer support, and one of these days programers will get tired of their "customer satisfaction" issues.

There is an old saying that the customer is always wright! someone should tell them about it!!!

> At first I was disapointed and felt cheated, but after reading this post
> and
> finding out that I really didn't miss anything I feel much better.

I agree with those of you who find DW CS3 a disappointment.
I know Murray disagrees with me, but I didn't find anything
worthwhile in this release. Yes, it handles CSS a bit better, but
hey, that's a fix not a release since that's what they advertised
in DW8 that we didn't really get.

Spry is a crock and IMHO thrown into CS3 only so they could
clain it as a new version. As far as I'm concerned, Adobe can take
Spray and throw it in the garbage. I purchased the upgrade only
because of other upgrades and PS and Illustrator thrown in to the
package. Otherwise, I would not have purchased.

re: As far as I'm concerned, Adobe can take
Spray and throw it in the garbage.

Whats your problem with Spray? I've only looked briefly at it, but it seems
okay. Whats it weakness??

"Katsuey" <katsuey@removeitkatsuey.com> wrote in message
news:fc91iv$rf3$1@forums.macromedia.com...
>> At first I was disapointed and felt cheated, but after reading this post
>> and
>> finding out that I really didn't miss anything I feel much better.
>
> I agree with those of you who find DW CS3 a disappointment.
> I know Murray disagrees with me, but I didn't find anything
> worthwhile in this release. Yes, it handles CSS a bit better, but
> hey, that's a fix not a release since that's what they advertised
> in DW8 that we didn't really get.
>
> Spry is a crock and IMHO thrown into CS3 only so they could
> clain it as a new version. As far as I'm concerned, Adobe can take
> Spray and throw it in the garbage. I purchased the upgrade only
> because of other upgrades and PS and Illustrator thrown in to the
> package. Otherwise, I would not have purchased.
>

Hmm, what a nice and interesting discussion... Isn't it M. Powers?

Here's my Contribution.

Upgrading need or not need is the key. Adobe has first built software for print. For exmple designers have a strong relation between them, agencies, customers, printers and more.... What happens when you receive files from someone else (ie: a logo, whatever, etc..) to start a new job, just working on it, or printing it. You'll simply need to be able to read it!

For many years Adobe has released backward compatible versions. Thing they stop for illustrator after version 8. Of course at a point new features become unreadable for older versions. But the latest trend is to make new version files unreadable for the very previous version.

I haven't bought CS3 SO far. But I noticed that CS2 files were not readable by CS1 (for illustrator at least). I think this is not fair and an abuse due to a very strong market domination (remember user, competition is your best ally).

An other sad thing, MM used to ship their software for both mac and win. Usefull when you have a PC at work and a Mac laptop at home. Now, forget.

One last for the road: I suspect Adobe to be somehow inefficient producing software for users, but surprisingly efficient at producing software making money. Every year or year and a half a new release, a plugin and a few more pattern, here and there something really new and usefull, but for sure double space, double memory and double CPU usage. More than that these softwares comes with more and more intrusive abilities (hey who gives it this automatic mega upgrade download permission?), install a lot of new pieces that you wonder how the hell you can uninstall (and spend hours on forum to find how).

Who's benefits? Not the users that have to buy new software and new computers almost every two years, to at least, have little room for their data and not to wait hours to open big files.

Dreamweaver need to be file compatible for the web of course, you should never get a version that can't read newer files. But wait my friend. Macromedia helped to produce web standard compliant pages. But Adobe? (I haven't used GoLive and can't say if it produce standard code). For how long will we produce html, php or whatever file that can't be edited with your favorite text editor and that is truly w3 standard (remember Microsoft).

I'll meet you in the future to check the answer...

ps: I know this seem very critic and Adobe software that I received education on (certainly because it is cheaper for schools, smart marketing by the way) helped me get a job and make money. I won't discuss Adobe produce very usefull software. But the giant should never crush the dwarfs.

richsky wrote:

> I noticed that CS2 files were not readable by
> CS1 (for illustrator at least). I think this is not fair and an abuse due to a
> very strong market domination (remember user, competition is you best ally).

This is not unusual. Flash files created in a newer version cannot be
opened in previous versions. However, there is some backward
compatibility in CS3. I've been working on a project with InDesign CS3,
and sharing files with a colleague working on InDesign CS2. Adobe has
released an updater for InDesign CS2 that allows her to open my files
when saved in a special compatible format.

> An other sad thing, MM used to ship their software for both mac and win.
> Usefull when you have a PC at work and a Mac laptop at home. Now, forget.

It's true that Macromedia had both versions on the same disk, but the
serial number limited you to either Mac or Windows. You couldn't use
them on both.

> ps: I know this seem very critic

There's nothing wrong in criticizing things that you feel are wrong. I'm
openly critical of Adobe's discriminatory pricing policy outside North
America, and of the problems that many people have encountered with the
CS3 installer. However, it's not true that Dreamweaver CS3 contains no
new features. The features might not be important to all users, so it
might not be worth their while upgrading. Nevertheless, Adobe lets you
try the new version for 30 days without charge. If it doesn't suit your
needs, don't buy it.

--
David Powers, Adobe Community Expert
Author, "The Essential Guide to Dreamweaver CS3" (friends of ED)
Author, "PHP Solutions" (friends of ED)
http://foundationphp.com/

quote:

---

It's true that Macromedia had both versions on the same disk, but the
serial number limited you to either Mac or Windows. You couldn't use
them on both.

---

This is even more sad, but had several fixes ; )
I heard that you are allowed to install a same licence on your main and secondary computer (laptop). At least we have only two hands and a brain. And since we code for both platform it is quite usual to have a mac and a pc (but I agree, differences are getting thin, and we could choose to run window on our new intel mac, but honestly, this would be the saddest thing).

quote:

---

However, it's not true that Dreamweaver CS3 contains no
new features. The features might not be important to all users, so it
might not be worth their while upgrading. Nevertheless, Adobe lets you
try the new version for 30 days without charge. If it doesn't suit your
needs, don't buy it.

---

Ok, I know I'm on the Dreamweaver forum, my post was rather about the "force to upgrade" with Adobe specific application format with the no backward compatibility trend. By the way I feel that PSD files soon or already won't be compatible with previous photoshop versions.

quote:

---

I'm openly critical of Adobe's discriminatory pricing policy outside North
America...

---

You are right about Adobe's discriminatory pricing policy outside North
America, I'm not so patriot. But if you working or have strong partnership with Adobe, don't be too open.

One day will come the end of juicy fruits.

quote:

---

and of the problems that many people have encountered with the
CS3 installer

---

I didn't enjoyed them yet, but haven't installed everything yet. Got a tip?

richsky wrote:
> I didn't enjoyed them yet, but haven't installed everything yet. Got a tip?

The main problem with installation appears to stem from using CS3 betas,
particularly the public Photoshop beta. If you participated in any beta
program, you must run the CS3Clean script:

http://www.adobe.com/go/kb401574

Sometimes, you also need to uninstall Flash Player. The real problem
with the installer is that it doesn't report most problems until it has
finished "installation" or "repair".

Of course, not everybody encounters problems, but there have been more
than usual with this installer.

--
David Powers, Adobe Community Expert
Author, "The Essential Guide to Dreamweaver CS3" (friends of ED)
Author, "PHP Solutions" (friends of ED)
http://foundationphp.com/

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 11:25:58 +0000 (UTC), "richsky"
<webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote:


> For many years Adobe has released backward compatible versions. Thing they
>stop for illustrator after version 8. Of course at a point new features become
>unreadable for older versions. But the latest trend is to make new version
>files unreadable for the very previous version.

with Dreamweaver that surely isn't an issue - html, css, php etc are
open standards. It's other that have html editors building proprietary
code.

And code solely used by Dw such as template code etc can be avoided.

--

~Malcolm N....
~

Wow... lot of anger in this thread. I upgraded from DW7 to CS3 and I have to say it's a good upgrade. As for ASP.NET... isn't that what Visual Studio was for? Dreamweaver is more tied to ColdFusion anyways...

You could always use Eclipse if you want something that is free. :)

re: However, it's not true that Dreamweaver CS3 contains no
new features.

But is is true that Adobe are are taking the piss by calling what they have
added a "new version". This is a joke in the same way it would be for me to
write an extension for Dreamweaver and call my version a "new version" of
Dreamwever. Or, to fix up something that didn't work properly and claim it
as a "new version" and not a "fixed version" patch.

It's always kind of subjective as to how much work or change must take place
before its reasonable to claim a product as "new version" of an existing
one. But, in over 20 years in the industry (IT/Software) this is the most
blatant abuse of respect for the customer I have ever seen. Anyone who knows
Dreamweaver knows that this release is in no way worthy of "new version"
status.


"David Powers" <david@example.com> wrote in message
news:fcdu02$hbi$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> richsky wrote:
>
>> I noticed that CS2 files were not readable by CS1 (for illustrator at
>> least). I think this is not fair and an abuse due to a very strong market
>> domination (remember user, competition is you best ally).
>
> This is not unusual. Flash files created in a newer version cannot be
> opened in previous versions. However, there is some backward compatibility
> in CS3. I've been working on a project with InDesign CS3, and sharing
> files with a colleague working on InDesign CS2. Adobe has released an
> updater for InDesign CS2 that allows her to open my files when saved in a
> special compatible format.
>
>> An other sad thing, MM used to ship their software for both mac and win.
>> Usefull when you have a PC at work and a Mac laptop at home. Now, forget.
>
> It's true that Macromedia had both versions on the same disk, but the
> serial number limited you to either Mac or Windows. You couldn't use them
> on both.
>
>> ps: I know this seem very critic
>
> There's nothing wrong in criticizing things that you feel are wrong. I'm
> openly critical of Adobe's discriminatory pricing policy outside North
> America, and of the problems that many people have encountered with the
> CS3 installer. However, it's not true that Dreamweaver CS3 contains no new
> features. The features might not be important to all users, so it might
> not be worth their while upgrading. Nevertheless, Adobe lets you try the
> new version for 30 days without charge. If it doesn't suit your needs,
> don't buy it.
>
> --
> David Powers, Adobe Community Expert
> Author, "The Essential Guide to Dreamweaver CS3" (friends of ED)
> Author, "PHP Solutions" (friends of ED)
> http://foundationphp.com/

re: Wow... lot of anger in this thread. I upgraded from DW7 to CS3

You are'nt seeing any anger from anybody who upgraded from DW7 to CS3. You
are seeing anger from those who upgraed from DW8 to CS3. (In so much as it
turned out there was no upgrade, it was the same product!)




"Xuan Mai" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:fce7nk$s6b$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> Wow... lot of anger in this thread. I upgraded from DW7 to CS3 and I have
> to
> say it's a good upgrade. As for ASP.NET... isn't that what Visual Studio
> was
> for? Dreamweaver is more tied to ColdFusion anyways...
>
> You could always use Eclipse if you want something that is free. :)
>

I think it was mainly a marketing issue. Like the boss saying: let's reshape all our product for the launch of CS3.