Forums | MacLife

knobtwirler wrote:

Damn I was hoping iWeb was cooler than that.

Actually, it is pretty cool.  The text as image problem seems to be font specific, which would indicate it could be fixed/enhanced easily, and the web pages it makes are beautful and easy.  Check out this and this for example.

iWeb's easier for the beginner?

Isn't that always how it is with "i" products? They're designed so that anyone can pick them up and use them.

I wouldn't say dreamweaver has that quality.

CaptKevMan wrote:

pcguy wrote:

I don't get it Caz, what is the benefit about iWeb over program such as Dreamweaver once you learn how to use both?

Do a price check on both, then ask that question again.

But didn't Czachorski say he had both?

Edit: indeed that is the inference in post #1

tF

Last edited by tomfoolery (2006-01-20 10:11 am)

pcguy wrote:

I don't get it Caz, what is the benefit about iWeb over program such as Dreamweaver once you learn how to use both?

I think you answered your own question in the 2nd half of it (bolded for emphasis).  What I accomplished in minutes in iWeb would have taken me countless hours of on-line tutorial, pre-content manipulation and then learning and using dreamweaver to accomplish.  I wish I had the time to learn dreamweaver, flash, firecracker, etc.  Unfortuntately, I just don't.

Czachorski wrote:

knobtwirler wrote:

Damn I was hoping iWeb was cooler than that.

Actually, it is pretty cool.  The text as image problem seems to be font specific, which would indicate it could be fixed/enhanced easily, and the web pages it makes are beautful and easy.  Check out this and this for example.

Your examples look good, there is no denying that, but each of those front pages are well over 800k each. Thats pretty damn heavy.
Just judging from past experience that amount of graphics could easily be made to be 200k.
Sure broad band is growing but over 1/3 of people still connect via a modem/56k and pages like that would take minutes to load.

I think that if you're able to take advantage of more advanced software, you should. Because, ultimately, you'll be able to do more.

meekar wrote:

I think that if you're able to take advantage of more advanced software, you should. Because, ultimately, you'll be able to do more.

I think for pro applications, you are absolutely correct.

For most non-pros, the overhead in learning dreamweaver is too much when you are coming in cold.  PCGuy - it is all relative.  I was able to pick up Final Cut pretty quickly, because I did a lot of video work before hand.  Someone coming in cold, would need more time.  The same can be said of iWeb.  I look at iWeb as an iMovie equivalent, and Dreamweaver like FCE.  I need to start with an iWeb to get up to speed on the content creation, layout and basic web design.  Once I master that, maybe I will be ready for Dreamweavers power, but for right now, it is just too much to learn a complex program at the same time that I am just learning the basics.  Not to mention, I want to focus on content right now, not learning a program.

Here is an example of what I am talking about.  I was talking to a coworker of mine about web pages.  I mentioned to him that I just launched an update to my site using a Apple's new iWeb.  He told me that a few months ago he was all gung-ho to get his web page up and running, and he downloaded the dreamweaver demo, went through several hours of demos and tutorials and was able to generate, what he called, a very basic page.  Here it is.  He said that he intended to come back and really spend some time with dreamweaver to unleash its power, but frankly never had the time to come back and learn it.  That is the problem - there is an initial investment needed with a program like dreamweaver, that most people simply don't have the time to get past.  iWeb's initial investment is nearly zero.  Consider this:  I was able to generate my entire web page in iWeb in about the same time that it took me to go through the basic tutorial in Dreamweaver.

BTW - my coworker is a PC user, and after hearing about iWeb, as well as iMovie and iPhoto, he actually said, "Well, there might just have to be a Mac in my future".

Last edited by Czachorski (2006-01-21 2:47 pm)

I'm impressed with iWeb so far. I threw together a little site of some photos and a video that I made. The Export to iWeb feature in iMovie worked, kind of. The movie won't load... you just get the big QuickTime "Q". So now I'm re-exporting as a "Web-quality" movie that is optimized for QT Streaming Server.

Maybe that'll work.

Pariah wrote:

Your examples look good, there is no denying that, but each of those front pages are well over 800k each. Thats pretty damn heavy.
Just judging from past experience that amount of graphics could easily be made to be 200k.
Sure broad band is growing but over 1/3 of people still connect via a modem/56k and pages like that would take minutes to load.

Totally agree.  My front page is 645k.  For broadband users, that it no big deal, but absolutely unacceptable for dial-up.  It does seem like it should be optimized down to about 200k.  Fortunately, the main people who I share my web page with all have broadband.  So for my personal web page, iWeb is perfect.

However, for a site like my wife's video business, I need to a random dial-up user and potential customer to get the page up fast.  For that, I think I will stick with the very simple dreamweaver page I have created.

Yes, PCGuy, I took the time to learn the basics of dreamweaver.  It was about 4-5 hours with the on-line tutorial.  Making the pages look good is very time consuming for me, and I have not yet had the time to learn the rest of the tools to move the quality of the page from basic to outstanding.  I gather that to customize the buttons, make good looking graphics and layout, that I need to use some of the other tools like firecracker, or the more advanced stuff in dreamweaver, or just work with dreamweaver a ton, but I have had little time to do so.  In that same "little time", I was able to launch my personal page with iWeb.  For my wife's video site, I am planning on just keeping it very simple.

MacBoy4139 wrote:

We all know how Apple feels about people on dial up

teh smurf!!

tF

   ^tF > a whole new meaning!!

MacBoy4139 wrote:

tomfoolery wrote:

MacBoy4139 wrote:

We all know how Apple feels about people on dial up

teh smurf!!

tF

   ^tF > a whole new meaning!!

Thanks.... I think.... ?

Yes, I have to admit that I surpassed myself with that contribution to the forums.

tF

Please don't raise zombies