Starting Out... (Dreamweaver or GoLive?)

[GoingToShibuya]

Hi All,



I am pretty new to the Web Design scene, and I don’t know much about web programming. So let me get straight to the point, I have this site: http://www.theemptycanvas.com (http://www.theemptycanvas.com/), and I’ve only made a Coming Soon page for my site. I am looking just to make a good portfolio site for my work.



I’ve been trying to work with Dreamweaver MX but I don’t think it’s right for me, since I am not good at code editing. I friend recommended that I use GoLive CS2, he told me that it’s more visually easier to make sites especially if you’re fond of the rest of the other Adobe products. Do some of you consider this true? Thanks.

[typographics]

why would you need to edit the code in dreamweaver? ive used dreamweaver for years, and i almost never have to mess with the code directly. dreamweaver is a great application for people who are not code oriented. what specific problems are you encountering?

personally, i dont like GoLive. i havent tried the CS2 version, but prior versions were vastly worse than dreamweaver. its just poopy :)

[Godders]

If you are starting out then forget both programs. Open notepad go to http://www.w3schools.com/

and learn the basics! Start with html and css and take it from there. Hand coding is probably not as difficult as you think and you'll have much better control of your site.

Of course you can still hand code in either Dreamweaver or GoLive so there is that option. I do agree with Typographics in that Dreamweaver is my preferred software but remember these are only tools and just because you design in a different piece of software doesn't mean your design is worse. You're in control.

Good luck with it!

[kerrysmagicshirt]

Check your mode - with dreamweaver you can either view design mode (how most work-more visual), code, or spilt - which is ofen usefull if somethng is unexplainably going wrong, needs changing etc.

For HTML based websites i would highly reccomend DW - perhaps upgrading to version 8 would be better.

[1ooScreamingTrees]

Dreamweaver is my preference, however, I agree with Godders, but only if you plan on delving further into the field of web design. As a guitar player, I relate this to the way I learned music: listening to songs and learning them by ear, and reading tablature. 10 years later this has left a void in my playing, which I should have filled with music-theory from the get-go. Instead, I jumped right in because I wanted to play songs.

My point is that it is tempting to want to jump right in and pump out the site - web design is a ton of fun.

However, with your vested interest, this portfolio is going to have to be good. Not just a quick-fix-solution to your introduction on the web.

So what this comes down to is:

If you are going to do it yourself, keep it simple - for now. Don't bite off more than you can chew - and don't let technical difficulties lead you astray from your design vision.

You can invest countless hours looking at other designers web portfolios. If the current version of your portfolio does not stand up to these, don't publish it. Fix it before you create an impression.

[chris_bcn]

If you're serious about learning web design then you want neither. You need to learn HTML and CSS and you need to learn to hand code them. Both programs produce horrible code if you use them in design view.

You should get hold of topstyle pro - it's a great HTML and CSS editor and get hold of a couple of decent books and check out tutorials online.

[Patrick Shannon]

It's probably fine to use code view if you're just wanting to put portfolio pieces out there and don't know much about web design, but at the same time, don't promote web design in your repertoire until you can understand the code. Many schools simply put students through a WYSIWYG class and they falsely have webdesign listed as a credential. My work has weeded these people out through a XHTML/CSS test, in fact, we're presenting this test to a designer candidate this afternoon.

But as for WYSIWYG editors, while I absolutely abhor GoLive, it's probably the better choice if you are familiar with Adobe interfaces. Otherwise for code editing, Dreamweaver all the way.

[yugyug]

My guess is that now that Adobe have bought Macromedia, CS3 will include a synthesis of Dreamweaver and GoLive - I reckon probably a Dreamweaver back engine but with an interface more like GoLive (somewhat improved I hope).

So for a beginner, maybe learning GoLive might be more appropriate for that reason.... but who knows.

[fyred1]

Using a WYSIWYG isn't going to teach you anything. Learn to code. All of the programs, including Dreamweaver, suck. If you have to rely on a program to write your code, you shouldn't be building websites. HTML and CSS aren't that hard to learn.

Go ahead, make my day... :mad:

[typographics]

Using a WYSIWYG isn't going to teach you anything. Learn to code. All of the programs, including Dreamweaver, suck. If you have to rely on a program to write your code, you shouldn't be building websites.
come on, dont say things like that. thats an awfully arrogant and inflexible outlook on the matter. if you read the original posters question, youll notice that he/she only wants to create a site to showcase his/her work. they arent suggesting the idea of persuing web design as an added service.

a WYSIWYG program will be perfect for this kind of endeavor. the person in question doesnt have to necessarily learn any code; this will reduce the amount of time needed to get a site up, and bypass what could be a fairly steep learning curve. they can simply make it thru visual means, have it function the way it needs to, and leave it alone.

some of you guys that have this "everyone should design everything in notepad" mentality need to chill out a little. :)

[JPnyc]

I agree with the above post. We need to keep in mind the author's goals before we take a hard stance on coding by hand vs. WYSIWYG. Sure, I code everything in notepad but that's what my job is, along with watching over the forums.

[fyred1]

I agree with the above post. We need to keep in mind the author's goals before we take a hard stance on coding by hand vs. WYSIWYG. Sure, I code everything in notepad but that's what my job is, along with watching over the forums.My apology. I have always been against WYSIWYG programs. I guess I didn't read the post completely before I went off (I'm in an extremely poor mood today). Dreamweaver or Go Live are great for someone who is just going to do an online portfolio.

Notepad huh? Now that's hard core. I've used TSW Webcoder for a good while now, but I only use it for the code highlighting. I used to use notepad for everything.

[JPnyc]

No worries. I hate them too. I use notepad because it has no crutches for me to get dependent on, uses like NO resource, and virtually any PC that I sit down to work at will have it installed (I never use macs). I have used other things too, like EditPlus and such but with Notepad there's absolutely NO learning curve, because it doesn't DO anything. And I get a perverse thrill out of turning black and white chickenscratch into an animated page or program. It's the mad scientist in me.

[Emmanize]

Dreamweaver 100%.
I am a junior to HTML/CSS and I have tried learning in Notepad. But I feel I have learnt more by going into DW and SEEING the code developed under my nose. Sometimes people need to see things happen to learn. It’s all about taste though and how you learn.:)

[Patrick Shannon]

In response to the above about code vs. Dreamweaver, even if you do everything by code, Dreamweaver is still a fine program. It has a code view too ;)