Ben, Well spoken! And also I agree with much you've shared.
The one thing that I'm not so sure about is the needing multiple IDEs, specifically when you are dealing with the same language set. What feature of DWMX or CFS is so compelling that one should be willing to switch between IDEs while doing CFML coding? Isn't there more value to mastering a single IDE and its extensibility to suit you, as opposed to bouncing between two IDEs? At any rate, I'd like to see MM make a solid commitment to making DWMX the IDE should be, which includes most of the features from the Homesite products (in addition to ensuring Code Trust - what one expects when they click that Never Rewrite Code for file types button in DWMX Preferences - is 100%), and discontinue any development or selling of Homesite at all, as opposed to keeping Homesite limping along and never actually doing what needs to be done in DWMX. - Calvin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ben Forta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 3:26 PM Subject: RE: DWMX 2004 - Whats new for us? > <CFSETTING MMHAT="off"> > > I've been watching this thread with interest, and have also been > forwarding the juicy bits to all sorts of folks within Macromedia. I've > stayed out of the discussion thus far, but ... > > I use Dreamweaver. I also use HomeSite. I also use CodeWrite (which I > migrated to after Sage which I migrated to after Brief). I'd love one > editor that did it all, it does not exist yet, so I use multiple. It > seems that many of you do the same. > > And no, I do not have to use Dreamweaver, I don't even have to like > Dreamweaver, no one (not even my employer) gets to tell me what editor I > should use or like. (Anyone who thinks otherwise does not know me). I > have been a semi-advocate of Dreamweaver since DWMX (I had been a vocal > critic of Dreamweaver prior to that), I have been on the backs of the > Dreamweaver team to improve CF support for a long time and continue to > do so, I publicly acknowledge what I like about Dreamweaver, and have no > qualms about stating what it is that I don't like. I have been very > honest in discussing Dreamweaver, and have never positioned it as a CF > Studio replacement, and always positioned it as "another tool in the > tool box" while stating that the Dreamweaver team had expressed a > commitment to continue to improve ColdFusion integration. > > It's that last point that seems to be the crux of this all. And for > those of you who have complained that Dreamweaver MX 2004 does not do > enough for ColdFusion developers, well, I agree. It has improved, and > some of the biggest complaints from ColdFusion users (including the > speed and needing to always define sites) have been addressed. I would > really have liked to have seen more, and as much as I don't like the > fact that the Dreamweaver team dedicated resources to improving support > for ASP.NET and PHP I also understand the economics. This is a business, > Macromedia needs to continue to sell lots of Dreamweaver. The product > has 2,000,000+ users (or something like that) most of whom do not use > ColdFusion, the static page market is saturated and they need to go > after where the big bucks are, targeting PHP and ASP.NET users make > sense. (Whether or not those users will buy the story remains to be > seen, but the Dreamweaver team had to make that effort). It is less "we > don't care about CF" and more "we care lots about those massive user > bases". Context. > > I have a laundry list of stuff I want in Dreamweaver (or HomeSite, or > any editor). Many of the items are my own wants, others are user > suggestions, all are shared by the wider community. I want data > awareness in the IDE, I want right click introspection everywhere and > anywhere, I want IntelliJ type intelligence so that when I change a CFC > method I can keep all invocations in synch, I want speed, I want decent > DB integration tools, I want a real debugger, I could go on and on and > on ... I'll keep pushing and nagging. > > So is the new Dreamweaver the ColdFusion aware IDE I wanted? Nope. Is it > a useful tool? Yes. It is an improvement over Dreamweaver MX, even for > us CFers? Yes. Is it good enough to be the exclusive editor for > ColdFusion developers? I'd say that depends on the developer, for > experienced developers I'd say no. Is it compelling enough for Studio > and HomeSite users to abandon those tools entirely for it? No. Does it > have any value at all for ColdFusion developers? Absolutely. > > I am at least thankful that HomeSite has been given a new lease on life. > HomeSite 5.5 is not a major upgrade, but it does add some important > enhancements some of which I may want to use. Some of you complained > about having to buy Dreamweaver to get HomeSite+, and that one irked me > a bit. We seem to have forgotten that CF Studio used to sell for, what > was it? $300? $400? I forget. Paying $199 for Dreamweaver + HomeSite+ is > less than you paid for CF Studio itself back then. Even if you never > ever look at Dreamweaver you are ahead of the game. I think that those > comments are more an emotional reaction to having to buy a box with the > dreaded D on it, than anything else. Well, get over it. > > For those of you who question the commitment to CF, um, hello? Did you > miss 6.1? I for one think that CFMX 6.1 is a very significant upgrade, > you may feel otherwise and are entitled to do so. Regardless, investing > as we did in CF and then releasing it as a free upgrade to me spells > Commitment (with a capital C). Yes, I know there are other departments > and product teams within Macromedia who like to play Switzerland and not > marry themselves to any product for fear of alienating users of other > technologies, but that is marketing and should be recognized as such. I > beat up on them for it, you should feel free to do the same. If you hear > nothing from the CF team for a while, get worried, until then realize > that Macromedia is a big company (i.e., not Allaire) selling lots of > products many of which generate far greater revenue than does > ColdFusion. > > Ok, I am way off on a tangent now, so, back to where I started ... No > one is forcing you to use Dreamweaver. I personally will use this new > version when it works for me, I have never used any of its design > features or CF generation features, and I doubt I'll start doing so now. > I'll use HomeSite 5.5 too. And I'll keep nagging the Dreamweaver team to > make their product a better option for ColdFusion developers, and you > should do so too. Although at some level I think that some ColdFusion > users will always reject it anyway, just because. > > </CFSETTING> > > --- Ben > > ====================================================== > Ben Forta - Macromedia Inc. > E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Phone: (248)213-0203 > Fax: (248)213-0299 > Macromedia: http://www.macromedia.com/ > Personal: http://www.forta.com/ > Blog: http://www.forta.com/blog/ > > Have questions about ColdFusion? You need the ColdFusion FAQ > (now in twelve languages) at http://www.cffaq.com/ - browse, > learn, link, comment, and contribute. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=t:4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm?link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm
