ACK! Sorry Michael, I didn't see the request to move until after I answered my previous emails.
Consider it dead from my end. Sorry... | -----Original Message----- | From: Joshua Miller [mailto:josh@;joshuasmiller.com] | Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 8:18 AM | To: CF-Talk | Subject: RE: Anybody want to start a petition for CF Studio! | | | Ok, this will be my last comment on this thread since Michael | asked that it be moved. I don't subscribe to community, so | I'll say my last piece. | | HomeSite+ is NOT an upgrade to Studio nor is it a new version. Saying | that we still get it cheaper than Studio ticks me off because | it's actually more of a downgrade - it should be cheaper. UI | customization features removed, Query Builder removed and | CFMX syntax didn't ship with the product - you have to | download and install that yourself. It's not an upgrade, it's | a sidegrade to comply with a lost lawsuit. Ok, it IS a new | version in that it was released after CF Studio 5 and that | the features aren't identical, but it has fewer features - | that's not something I typically pay money for. | | I'm not the purchasing person, so I don't know if we got a | Subscription or if we bought a copy of Studio 5 so close to | the release date that we got DWMX for free, but if we got a | subscription I think we've been somewhat cheated. DWMX is by | almost everyone's definition not a complete or totally useful | product as even the DWMX proponents say they still use Studio | half the time, and HomeSite is a downgrade. I don't see why | people keep pushing HomeSite+ as an upgrade insisting that | everyone should be happy because it's cheaper than Studio. It | does less than Studio and has no new features. It has | features new to HomeSite - but HomeSite was $99 standalone | before DWMX. | | Thanks, | | Joshua Miller | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | | -----Original Message----- | From: Dave Watts [mailto:dwatts@;figleaf.com] | Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 3:13 AM | To: CF-Talk | Subject: RE: Anybody want to start a petition for CF Studio! | | | > Most developers I know don't use half the features of ColdFusion | > Studio (I can't remember the last time I click something in | the tabs). | > So a move to DW is totally nonsensical. Most developers, at | least the | > good ones, don't need or want designer tools. | | These seem to be pretty broad statements. I'd have a hard | time saying that I know what most developers want or need. | | > I do not feel like I'm in the minority by saying, skip | > the upgrade to DW and just get the tag updater for | > Studio 5. | | There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, if you prefer CF | Studio to Dreamweaver MX. You'd be a fool to do otherwise, | just because MM wants you to buy their latest shiny new toy. | On the other hand, you'd also be a fool if you just listened | to everyone complain about how bad DWMX is, without | evaluating it for yourself. | | > So the question becomes: what point is there to upgrading? There is | > none. | | There are certainly some people who prefer Dreamweaver MX to | CF Studio. They may not be especially vocal on this list, | they may be a minority, but there are some out there. | | > And perhaps, I'm being a bit critical, but I cannot figure out why | > developers are defending DWMX. | | Well, from my perspective, I can't figure out why developers | here are attacking DWMX. It's not like MM is coming to your | house and forcing you to buy it at gunpoint. No one's going | to pry your copy of CF Studio 5 from your hard drive. What | I've objected to, on this list, is the rabid "the sky is | falling" reaction that many people seem to have about the | very existence of Dreamweaver MX. To summarize, here's what people are | saying: | | 1. Dreamweaver MX sucks. | | I'll leave this open to debate. I certainly have my own | complaints about it, but frankly, the more I use it, the more | comfortable I become with it, and I find myself using Studio | less and less. There are a number of things that I think | Dreamweaver MX does for me better than Studio. Is it perfect? | No, far from it. Do I think that, two or three revisions down | the road, it'll be a really good editor? Yes, I do - and I | don't think the same is true for CF Studio, which really | hasn't changed that significantly over its last two versions. | | 2. MM is abandoning CF Studio and Homesite. | | This doesn't seem to actually be the case, since there's a | new version of CF Studio, relabeled "Homesite+". MM might not | be marketing it, but it's there. MM might abandon it in the | future, but who knows what will happen in the future anyway? | I think that the long-term goal for MM is to replace CF | Studio with Dreamweaver MX, but they won't be able to do that | successfully until they make it good enough for everyone to | want to use, and at that point, well, everyone will want to use it. | | This reminds me very much of the history of Visual Studio, as | I've commented here more than once. It started out being, | well, not very good, and no one liked it. Now, everyone who | uses it generally likes it a lot. Does that mean that those | people should have embraced the first, not-so-good version? | No, but it does indicate that we could do with a bit less | pessimism about the future. | | 3. You can't buy Homesite+ without buying DWMX. | | Big deal. You pay the same price (or less) buying the two | together as you paid last year for CF Studio by itself. | | 4. Dammit Jim, I'm a programmer, not a designer! | | Just because DWMX has functionality that's useful for | designers doesn't mean that it can't be made into a good | editor for coders. That should be a lot easier to accomplish | than making CF Studio into a good environment for designers. | | Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software | http://www.figleaf.com/ | voice: (202) 797-5496 | fax: (202) 797-5444 | | | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
