Query failed: connection to localhost:9312 failed (errno=111, msg=Connection refused). Apple's own web authoring program? - Mac Software Discussions on AppleInsider Forums Toggle navigation All Forums Recent Posts Sign In Apple's own web authoring program? pocket Posted: April 19, 2004 4:02AM in Mac Software edited January 2014 Has anyone heard if Apple is making their own web authoring program? I heard a rumor about this awhile ago but wasn't sure. I think this would be great considering DWMX 2004 is pretty much worthless. Comments Reply 1 of 17 zo Posts: 3,115member April 19, 2004 6:15AM Here Love the program... Reply 2 of 17 bigblue Posts: 341member April 19, 2004 9:04AM Quote:Originally posted by ZO Here Love the program... Hehe. I think he meant an a little more up-to-date app ...Claris ... those were the days. Reply 3 of 17 hobbes Posts: 1,252member April 19, 2004 9:35AM It's not consumer-level, but as a fellow disappointed Dreamweaver user, I'm finding GoLive CS a really excellent piece of software.But it makes the most sense financially if you're a designer, and/or you spring for the whole CS suite.There's also Freeway... Reply 4 of 17 chucker Posts: 5,089member April 19, 2004 12:02PM WebObjects? Reply 5 of 17 celco Posts: 211member April 19, 2004 12:24PM Quote:Originally posted by pocket [ DWMX 2004 is pretty much worthless. [/B]Huh? Dreamweaver 2004 from Macromedia worthless. PUT AWAY THE CRACK PIPE NOW SONNY IT WILL ONLY END IN TEARS.... WHAT RU SMOKING?1. DWMX supports full CSS very well. 2. Its server based solution extensions are unmatched.3. Its support of XML is brilliant4. Its interface and GUI is one of the best.5. MM have done amazing job of flash and dreamweaver compatibility6. Its faster.7. Its cross platform compatible works. UNLIKE ADOBEGod next thing we will want to spin off allaire as a separate company again... Apple should BUY Macromedia if they ever had the money.Oh and by the way welcome to AI. Reply 6 of 17 moogs Posts: 4,296member April 19, 2004 12:42PM I dunno. I think this is a little outside of Apple's media-app scope right now but I certainly wouldn't mind it if Apple were to create a powerful, stable and standards-integrated WYSIWYG app. It would have to be a direct competitor to GoLive and DWMX though, otherwise I wouldn't even bother. The world doesn't need another failed "consumer web design app".FrontPageFusionPageMillClarisetcetcThose things are just worthless. Might've been cute back in 96 when everyone wanted to make their own web page but now they would do nothing but take shelf space away from more useful apps IMO. Even Freeway lacks truly powerful tools as far as CSS and the like are concerned. It's just "Quark for the web" IMO, which is not a good thing since Quark sucks. Reply 7 of 17 madmax559 Posts: 596member April 19, 2004 2:53PM vi Reply 8 of 17 burningwheel Posts: 1,827member April 20, 2004 4:05PM i've heard lots of people complain of Studio MX 2004 being bad. i've had some problems but overall i love it. it starts up quickly, finally! and files open quickly as welli'm selling an extra copy i have. check my signature for the link Reply 9 of 17 gizzmonic Posts: 511member April 21, 2004 1:07PM Quote:Originally posted by burningwheel i've heard lots of people complain of Studio MX 2004 being bad. i've had some problems but overall i love it. it starts up quickly, finally! and files open quickly as well Must be pretty good if you're hocking it on eBay!I have the original MX suite...and it's okay, but the interface is worse than it should be. And FlashMX is alpha-quality software. I don't think Macromedia has QA anymore...they've outsourced everything to India as well. Reply 10 of 17 sunrein Posts: 138member April 21, 2004 1:29PM Quote:Originally posted by pocket considering DWMX 2004 is pretty much worthless. Care to elaborate? Reply 11 of 17 burningwheel Posts: 1,827member April 21, 2004 4:43PM Quote:Originally posted by Gizzmonic Must be pretty good if you're hocking it on eBay!I have the original MX suite...and it's okay, but the interface is worse than it should be. And FlashMX is alpha-quality software. I don't think Macromedia has QA anymore...they've outsourced everything to India as well. as i said in my orignal post, this is an extra NEW copy Reply 12 of 17 amorph Posts: 7,112member April 21, 2004 4:59PM I think the time for an Apple web page editor has passed.If you look at HTML now - just W3C standard HTML - there is a potent enough combination of capabilities and limitations to make any drag-and-drop design tool very difficult. That goes double if you're trying to use XHTML and CSS in meaningful ways. It was much simpler back in the days of Claris HomePage, when there wasn't all that much to HTML, or to web design generally.Then, of course, there's the minefield of browser compatibility, which has gotten much harder to navigate since the early days.Basically, for the above reasons, and also because the original design goals of the web have been completely forsaken, web design is the province of pros. Given that, the only dead simple way to do consumer web pages that don't suck is to use professionally designed templates, which is the approach Apple's already taken with .Mac.Until a lot more progress has been made with web standards in general, and support for web standards in particular, it'll never be easy enough for an iApp to do. Reply 13 of 17 thunderpoit Posts: 709member April 21, 2004 11:42PM bah, you kids and your fancy WYSIWYG editors. apple already ships a web authoring app w/ every copy of os xjust pop urself in the terminal and type:Code:David-Legatts-Computer:~ dave$ cd sitesDavid-Legatts-Computer:~/sites dave$ emacs index.php Reply 14 of 17 bigblue Posts: 341member April 22, 2004 3:48AM ... and also as a non-WYSIWYG app, don't forget TextEdit ! Rock solid ! Reply 15 of 17 placebo Posts: 5,767member April 22, 2004 8:41AM Quote:Originally posted by madmax559 vi Well, aren't you 1337. Reply 16 of 17 staphbaby Posts: 353member April 22, 2004 9:12AM Quote:Originally posted by Placebo Well, aren't you 1337. Not so much 1337 as enlightened... Hey, since there's an emacs comment two posts up, we could turn this into an emacs vs. vi flame war!!! YAAY!!!Actually, I rather like SubEthaEdit. So useful, such a clean design. Reply 17 of 17 mattjohndrow Posts: 1,618member April 22, 2004 10:00AM yeah, vi is better...i think...that's what i hear, i can use emacs, don't know vi, oh well. that's my retarded opinion Sign In or Register to comment.