# Need help deciding on a WYSIWYG site builder...



## themacko (Aug 29, 2002)

Hi guys, I need to start and keep up a website for a BIO class this semester.  It's going to need to have lots of pictures, graphics, text and files on it so a regular .Mac site won't quite do.

So, I need to get some kind of a website builder.  I checked out the bookstore and there is Macromedia Dreamweaver MX and Adobe GoLive.  I think both are OS X compatible.  Do you guys prefer one over the other or are there any other editors out there that would help me out?

Like I said, this doesn't have to be a very fancy site, but it does need to look respectable.  Thanks for any opinions!


----------



## uoba (Aug 29, 2002)

Hey Mack...

Well, I used to be a GoLive guy but now I'm a Dreamweaver dude.

From what you tell me GoLive seems your best bet... if your used to Photoshop and Illustrator then you will be familiar with the UI. It is more user friendly with things like tables as well.

However, I went over to Dreamweaver once MX came out because of its superior dynamic data handling (PHP etc.) This I guess, you will not need. But saying this, Macromedia's enforced interface (thnx to Adobe sueing them!) is actually very nice.

Get demo's of both, and test them. But provisionally, I'd say GoLive.


----------



## gatorparrots (Aug 29, 2002)

I've used both Dreamweaver MX and GoLive 6. Dreamweaver is the better program, hands down.


----------



## evildan (Aug 29, 2002)

Hey man, I thought I'd toss in my 2 cents...

Dreamweaver is better, but you migth want to buy GoLive. It's a bit easier to learn and maintain a website in. The features that GoLive is lacking in are all very advanced, and often browser specific.

I've used both, for years. Now I am required to handcode everything at my new job. Just before my hire I was fully switched to Dreamweaver. I loved it, but selecting tables seemed a bit harder then in GoLive. Perhaps because I was so used to GoLive.

Honestly, you'll be okay with GoLive OR Dreamweaver. They both get the job done. As I said, I'm simply suggesting that GoLive is a bit easier to learn so you might want to buy that.


----------



## uoba (Aug 30, 2002)

Actually, I purchased Studio MX this week and actually sat down to use it today... the integration between Dreamweaver and Fireworks is flawless, I cannot believe it (I never really took notice of Fireworks, but this is one hell'uva app! Haven't needed to reinstall Photoshop since Jaguar was clean installed).

Adobe play on the seemless integration between their own products, but I now see this is nothing compared to the way MM have figured it.

So, whilst GoLive maybe initially easier to learn, you may find the streamlined workflow of Macromedia's MX range more logical. I now do not buy into Adobe's GoLive and Photoshop compatibility (I never did use Smart Objects anyway )


----------



## themacko (Aug 30, 2002)

I went ahead and ordered Dreamweaver MX through our bookstore, that is the app my teacher was using (although in Windows) so I'll probably have more luck getting help from him in Dreamweaver if I get stuck.

I actually don't have a graphics app but that is going to be my next purchase ... again I find myself deciding between Adobe and Macromedia.  Photoshop Elements and Fireworks seem to be the best two options, but I'm leaning heavily towards Photoshop.

Basically, I'm going to need to make some simple graphics (nothing big, mostly text) and then some digital photo editing ... cropping, adjusting colors, labeling, etc.  What is the difference between Photoshop and Fireworks and is there a reason why I should get Fireworks instead?

Thanks for all your guys' help!


----------



## uoba (Aug 30, 2002)

Fireworks (as I have found out today)... is in my opinion, a streamlined version of Photoshop designed by Macromedia for the sole purpose of being their Photoshop for the web. And I think they have done it brilliantly. As I mentioned, if you have got Dreamweaver MX, the way it works with Fireworks is beautiful. Example:

One of our clients asked for some site amendments today (oops, just reminded myself to upload it to their server )... anyway, they asked for their company title to change from 3d Group to just 3d. A lot of the titles where images. So, a lot of boring work ahead. However, I used Dreamweaver MX and Fireworks MX for the first job on this job. Opened the html files in Dreamweaver, clicked on the image, clicked on Edit in Fireworks, edited in Fireworks, pressed done, and that was that! Groovy, all updated without a 'Save for Web' in sight.

Basically, Fireworks does not have the filters that Photoshop has built in (plus the layer options as in PS7) (though I think you can use Photoshop filters, which dismiss that theory (will check this)). The one disappointment was that Fireworks didn't have as many formatting options for text (no justification-word spacing options as Photoshop has taken from Illustrator and InDesign.) This is a small pain for me as I am a stickler for tight type, and especially a pain because Freehand has excellent type control.

But, Photoshop is the daddy, it works very well in OSX. But in my opinion, Macromedia have got it sussed with this web development sector, they really know their business (as opposed to Adobe, who got into it by feeling left out).

Anyway, just 'my 2 pixels worth!'


----------



## BlingBling 3k12 (Sep 7, 2002)

I used Fireworks and Photoshop... Photoshop wins my vote hands down... IMO, it was more flexible for me... and my work looked much better in PS than Fireworks (through my own comparison, work I did in Fireworks looks like crap compared to what I do in Photoshop)


----------

