anyone else disappointed with iweb?

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by MUCKYFINGERS, Jan 23, 2006.

  1. MUCKYFINGERS macrumors 6502a


    Jun 7, 2005
    i dont feel like typing all the particular reasons i'm disappointed with it, but does anyone else feel like they expected more from apple this time?
  2. andiwm2003 macrumors 601


    Mar 29, 2004
    Boston, MA
    i just love it. not many functions but very easy.

    even i can have acceptable websites now.:)

    keep in mind it's the first version of a software for consumers. it is very limited but it does the job.
  3. MUCKYFINGERS thread starter macrumors 6502a


    Jun 7, 2005
    it may be because i am used to using dreamweaver and am used to editing html myself, i was expecting a program comparable to dreamweaver or frontpage, but for a simple beginner's program, it gets the job done.
  4. Thom_Edwards macrumors regular

    Apr 11, 2003
    on the contrary. i find it to be perfect, as long as you don't expect it to be dreamweaver, golive or some other app (dare i mention front page?!?!?!?). to put together a simple site with some pictures to share or a few blog lines or stuff like that, i think it's perfect. it's not meant to build sites that win design awards or make people visit it based purely on some flash-like coolness hype. they don't expect you to know html, and that is quite fine. (just like in garageband they don't expect you to know key signatures and chord progressions.) if you want more advanced stuff, go to a more advanced app.

    i put together a cool little site for my niece's 2-year birthday in about 15 minutes. the image manipulation, being able to spin, layer and mask is pretty nifty. just right

    edit: you posted that about dreamweaver and your expectations before i submitted my reply. sorry for the repetition
  5. MUCKYFINGERS thread starter macrumors 6502a


    Jun 7, 2005
    i agree that the blog/podcast/etc specialty pages are nice and simple, i enjoyed the blog feature the most out of all of the features in iWeb. maybe i'll try giving it another go when i get home from work...
  6. bpd115 macrumors 6502a


    Feb 4, 2003
    It's a great app for what it's ment to be...set up simple, quick websites.

    Maybe we'll get more HTML flexability in iWeb 2.
  7. 20rogersc macrumors 65816


    Jun 28, 2005
    Brighton, UK
    Don't worry I'm disappointed with it as well. It's too template based (I only like the modern one), and I don't think there is a lot of freedom in it. And I though Apple was about 'Think Different' :eek:
    And the fact that massive pngs cause havoc, I'm not that impressed.
    (Although iPhoto 06 is worth the money alone!)
    Anyway there's my rant over and done with.

  8. Diatribe macrumors 601


    Jan 8, 2004
    Back in the motherland
    Every 1.0 version of Apple software has had moderate to "major" shortcomings... give it till version 2 or 3 and it'll rock the house.
  9. yoda13 macrumors 65816


    Sep 26, 2003
    Well, I love it, but I am aware of the limitations...the png files are huge and I don't care for some of its publishing limitations. But for a guy like me who knows less than the basics about designing and building a website, I am happy with it. I am ready for version 2, but I am happy with it.
  10. Epicurus macrumors 6502


    Apr 28, 2005
    Minneapolis, MN
    Dare we dream of the day when iWeb can spit out decent HTML code or hand it off directly to a 3rd Party editor like BBEdit/TextWrangler. Apple's already getting inside Adobe's comfort zone with Aperture. Perhaps iWeb would benefit from a tighter integration with Dreamweaver/Golive for more professional code-level editing. That way the beginner has a full suite of stuff out of the box to play with, and when he's bored with that he can toss the site into Dreamweaver to tweak it to his heart's content.

    There's no real reason for Apple to make a direct competitor to Adobe's pair of Pro Web design apps, but putting their iApp front end on a consumer level program like iWeb with the benefit of cross-integration with a pro level program like Dreamweaver would be well recieved.

    I know iPhoto already has the option of exporting images directly to 3rd party editors, so its not just Apple's Pro line (Aperture) that gets the 3rd party treatment.
  11. MacDonaldsd macrumors 65816


    Sep 8, 2005
    London , UK
    Its Great

    Agreed it is limited but what it does do it does very well. I mean the websites look good and it deals with creating the RSS for blogs and podcasts for you. And as I use .mac 1 click publishing is great. Feel sorry for .mac customers that don't have iweb.
  12. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Jan 6, 2004
    i love it. with a few exceptions.
    the blogging ability is great. but it has some shortcomings. like being able to edit the date. it really frustrates me as i wanted to back log my entries from a past blog, but it won't let me change the post date, anyone know a way around this? its quite vexing to me.

    i want to give RapidWeaver a chance, but i can't seem to get my head wrapped around it. like changing font styles etc.
  13. MacDonaldsd macrumors 65816


    Sep 8, 2005
    London , UK
    Rapid Weaver

    I used rapid weaver for a bit , I have to say iWeb is better IMO. iWeb is more flexible with moving stuff around the page, but i suppose it depends on wether your publishing to .mac .
  14. dr427 macrumors regular


    Oct 13, 2005
    Oklahoma City
    I will soon have iLife '06.

    Can you create an album (mabye call it iWeb) in iPhoto of just the pics you want to use for iweb? (avoid the library view). My thoughts are that I would resize the images with imagewell in .png format to help overcome this issue of large png files.
  15. cemorris macrumors regular

    Oct 13, 2004
    I am a bit disapointed. It consumes way too much memory (500mb!). And now I am having problems publishing as I get errors and not all the site gets uploaded. I have about 40 pages and it seems to bonk out around the 10th page or so.
  16. NerdBoy macrumors member


    Oct 25, 2005
    Why do you need to know?
    Not that I own iWeb myself, but I thought I heard at the Apple store that you can export your page as HTML. Maybe I'm wrong, as I'm just starting HTML, but couldn't you just edit that in TextEdit or TextWrangler after you've done the basics in iWeb?
  17. MacDonaldsd macrumors 65816


    Sep 8, 2005
    London , UK
    Create a folder

    You can indeed create a folder called iWeb or whatever and then this will come up in the "media viewer" in iWeb to save you time.
  18. kubark42 macrumors member

    Mar 17, 2005
    Where I'm really disappointed with iWeb is the complete lack of vertical navigation bars in the template. I know that I could make my own template, but I don't really know how and that kind of defeats the point of a "no knowledge required" program. If I were going to do that, I'd just use DreamWeaver.
  19. munkle macrumors 68030


    Aug 7, 2004
    On a jet plane
    I think it's great. I don't use it to build my sites (TextWrangler is my partner in crime) but when a friend asked how she could get some things up on the web with minimal hassle (keeping in mind she is slightly tech-challenged), we gave iWeb a shot. From never having looked at/used the app before we had a nice looking website up in 15 mins. And I guess that is why iWeb is meant to do, for that it's very impressive.
  20. raster macrumors regular

    May 15, 2005
    I'd say Apples Graphic Designers were on vacation the week they came up with those templates.
    In all the ilife apps the designs are weak, generic and sometimes REAL tacky...
  21. chaos86 macrumors 65816


    Sep 11, 2003
    I dont know about dissappointed, but its not for me. the reason is that I, like most MR members am a power user. ilife is for the people who just want to create simple stuff. easy simple websites, cheap easy photo albums, simple dvds and movies. but every ilife app's function (i dont include itunes in ilife) can be done better by pro apps.

    iphoto - photoshop (elements)
    imovie - final cut (express)
    idvd - dvd studio pro
    iweb - dreamweaver
  22. xyian macrumors 6502


    May 24, 2004

    It's okay for those of us who get frustrated by code of any sort, much less html. It's much easier to create pages and move things around and get it published.
    It does take a while to load pages created with iWeb and that's a tad bit frustrating. Also, the main issue I've run into is that I had to reformat the ol hard drive and I can't get my site to go back to the application. It is only giving me an option of creating a new site. Anyone know of a workaround for this? I'm at the point where I'm going to recreate my site. :(
  23. jacobj macrumors 65816


    Apr 22, 2003
    anyone noticed that the blogs on the .mac home page are iWeb and that they load really slowly for the content... too much ugly code.. no thanks..

    iWeb 2 needs to be better.
  24. dav macrumors 6502

    Jun 29, 2004
  25. Arnaud macrumors 6502

    May 24, 2005
    The Moon
    Very happy until today ?

    I appreciate iLife'06 very much, I think every part of it is very well conceived, very intuitive. Of course, much more can be done with other pro-programs, but not for that much money.

    Simple is good too: simple is fast. Sometimes you want a quick result without spending hours on it. (Did I mention my son was born last month ? Try to publish photos between two bottles...)

    Anyway, that was until today, because now I have iWeb saying "Publish error: An unknown error occurred".

    So, basically, all my happy mood is gone. iWeb makes huuuuge websites, takes ages to upload, it is even hard to write a blog of more than 5 paragraphs (have you tried ? On a G5!).

    ...And now, all is stuck. Not possible to upload anymore. Of what use is that ?
    (And I have better things to do than delete/re-create every single page to check).

    A. :(

    Addendum: I liked the "bandwidth explanation" blog on the .mac homepage of today; you are invited to use sound and video by iLife, and then Apple charges you for the bandwidth; I'd say they should provide more servers instead.

Share This Page