Adobe Releases HTML5 Extension for Dreamweaver CS5

[Great Dave]

Maybe now Apple will change their licensing agreement in the next OS update and make it so we are not allowed to use this on any Mac systems.

And if you break the agreement, they will have apple legal sue you and then they will have the local authorities come to your house, kick down your door, and steal all your computers away.

Fear the Apple!

 

[Xian Zhu Xuande]

Adobe is just digging their grave even deeper.

They acknowledge their latest tools are already outdated and requires immediate update to conform with latest standards. They also agrees HTML5 and everything that comes with it is the future.

Outdated compared to what? Anything coming out for HTML5 at this point is pioneering into comparably new territory. Neither HTML5 nor CSS3 have been finalized as specs, and much is still subject to change. Adobe released the Dreamweaver updates despite this uncertainty, focusing on elements of these specs which are in wide use and which have either been finalized or are relatively stable. It is clear from the fact they've been approaching HTML5 export features in Flash that they've been planning this for a while.

This sort of thing—HTML5—is Adobe's bread and butter. Many people who work with these web technologies are already using Adobe products to do their work, and will happily continue to do so once HTML5 starts to take shape in their development environments. They could sit on their asses and let someone else beat them to the punch, but they won't.

They're fighting to keep Flash alive as it is fairly relevant to their company (~7% of revenue) but I'm sure they're working to transition into HTML5 as well. They have a through understanding of web trends.

Their tools are by no means antiquated. They have admitted to none of the things you've attributed to them. They've simply embraced them as strong possibilities and that is evident in their approach to technology.

 

[j33pd0g]

Since this Flash/HTML5 situation started I immediately thought that HTML5 developers needed some type of true visual interface. I still do. I think any company (Adobe, Apple, 3rd Party) that can deliver an HTML5 Application will expedite the transition, and have the greatest impact on the web.

Adobe has started in the right direction. They are a head of the curve with an existing program that was leveraged to support HTML5.

Apple is also a company that already has software that can be leveraged. And so, my predictions (dreams):

1) The next version of Motion will gain HTML5 export.
2) The next version of iPhoto will gain HTML5 export.
3) The next version of Keynote will gain HTML5 export.

And #4 is way out there, but would be real sweet:

4) Apple will announce that a stand alone HTML5 composer will be a free download, for Mac/PC. Available for Xcode too.

 

[Scooterman1]

Maybe it's just me, but I believe that Adobe needs to get serious about their prices. I can't afford that kind of software. And, how many really can? If they had it at a max of $100, they could probably clean up volume wise. Oh, well.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

Maybe it's just me, but I believe that Adobe needs to get serious about their prices. I can't afford that kind of software. And, how many really can? If they had it at a max of $100, they could probably clean up volume wise. Oh, well.

Do you ask Apple the same question?

Just for comparisons sake we bought 3500 copies of CS5 this week. At my last job we bought around 1000 copies of CS4.

Companies buy it.

 

[Anuba]

Maybe it's just me, but I believe that Adobe needs to get serious about their prices. I can't afford that kind of software. And, how many really can? If they had it at a max of $100, they could probably clean up volume wise. Oh, well.

Well, it's the kind of pricing companies use when they target professionals, not so much hobbyists or consumers. If you work as a freelancing graphic designer you can recoup the investment in a matter of days. Let's say you charge $75/hour. Work 7 billable hours a day for 5 days straight and you can buy the entire Adobe Master Collection CS5 for $2599. And then you can use it for about 79 more weeks until CS6 is released and you buy the $800 upgrade. The $200,000 you've made in the meantime should cover it, no?

 

[retroneo]

It should also be said that Adobe Flash CS5 exports out to HTML5. This feature has been in development since last year... before the whole Apple vs Adobe thing.

It was in the betas of CS5, but was pulled from the shipping version. Hopefully it will come in an update to Flash soon, just as it has not been added to Dreamweaver.

 

[retroneo]

Except they shipped HTML5 Canvas export in Flash CS5. Before the open letter.

Canvas, Video and Audio are finalized. Hence why Flash CS5 does export to Canvas. On release.

No, it never shipped.

http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2009/10/sneak_peek_ai_fl_dw_canvas.html

Read the comment from Adobe:

Technically it wasn't removed as it was always prototype code, but you're correct that these capabilities aren't in the box with CS5. To everyone listening: If they're something you or others would value, please speak up so that the teams involved can make the appropriate trade-offs. --J.

 

[Digitalclips]

I agree with those saying 'smart move Adobe.' They would be stupid not to cover all bases.

 

[patent10021]

Good, now make it so that we can create HTML5 content visually. I don't want to type my website, it's freaking boring.

iWeb. Future versions will only get better...obviously.

 

[Anuba]

I agree with those saying 'smart move Adobe.' They would be stupid not to cover all bases.

They never were stupid about it. They've been working on HTML5/Canvas support throughout the CS5 development process. This whole idea of Adobe as a helpless dinosaur stuck in the past is just a FUD cloud whipped up by Steve and his minions.

As Nack said in the blog (link above):

Adobe makes money selling tools, not distributing viewing software. Those tools must address customer needs. If Flash Player is the right choice for some projects & HTML/CANVAS for others, no problem: we get paid to help you solve problems, not to force one implementation vs. another.

They do not make money distributing the damn Flash player, it only costs them money for the bandwidth. They make money on Flash Professional. If people want Flash to poop out Canvas instead of SWF, then Canvas it is.

 

[Atkins]

It should also be said that Adobe Flash CS5 exports out to HTML5. This feature has been in development since last year... before the whole Apple vs Adobe thing.

The Apple vs Adobe thing started much earlier than last year. And the issue was alive even before that and without Apple.

Adobe are in the HTML5 game, no matter what some people on here and Steve Jobs wants to claim.

I wonder how much 'in the game' Adobe would be without Apple's actions.

Unlike SOME COMPANIES .. Adobe proves that it's open .. and Loves Choice!
Adobe is allowing customers to choose WHAT THEY WANT! and how they want to build it. Not locking us into one CLOSED SYSTEM.
Apple could learn from this.

How is Apple refusing Flash locking you into a closed platform? Flash is much more of a problem than Apple's walled garden.

You guys are so used to Apple doing things like that that you have no idea how the world of professional applications work, Adobe could NEVER get away with not supporting the next version of HTML, its insane to even think that.

Adobe can get away with many things.

But Adobe wasn't going to sit on their asses anyway... they pretty much own the market for this type of software and they aren't going to let anyone sneak past them when it comes to supporting the latest standards.

Who is going to sneak past them? That's the problem - there is no one.

Phones are generally excused because they're tiny, the surfing experience is compromised anyway and it's sort of an unspoken understanding between vendor and user that we should consider ourselves lucky that it works at all. But the iPad is supposed to be this attractively priced internet tablet for the masses far outside the Apple fan base, and the empty Flash boxes are no longer the size of your pinky, they're the size of your entire hand.
I don't think it's a huge problem, but still, it doesn't mean that the "worked for iPhone!" excuse is entirely applicable here.

I really think it is a very small problem. The 'useful' Flash is not all over the web, and there are so many apps to cover for functionality.

I am pretty sure there wouldn't be a 10.1 and HTML5 plug-ins today if it wasn't for Apple. While Adobe surely must support the latest HTML, they can go on as slowly as they wish. HTML5 is not a standard yet - that would've been their excuse. You can't expect from the dominating company in design to not have a conflict of interest here.
Adobe needs competition.

Maybe now Apple will change their licensing agreement in the next OS update and make it so we are not allowed to use this on any Mac systems.
And if you break the agreement, they will have apple legal sue you and then they will have the local authorities come to your house, kick down your door, and steal all your computers away.
Fear the Apple!

Whatever.

 

[m85476585]

Sorry i'm a web noob.

How do people author HTML5 now?!

By flipping switches on the back of the computer to manually enter the ones and zeros, then sending them to the web server by FTP-over-Carrier-Pigeon.

Though a text editor works too. Personally I think the best way to create a website is to write the code from scratch. I'm not really that good at design, and I don't think something like Dreamweaver would even help me.

 

[Darkroom]

No. This is what I hate about Adobe's policies (apart from the fact that they charge foreigners up to 2X more than Americans... no, this isn't about VAT differences or exchange rates, it goes waaaaay beyond that).

When I buy music software (which I do, a lot) it always comes on a Mac/Win combo DVD and I can install either one or both. Not so with Adobe. You have to buy two separate licences. I thought they would change their way after BootCamp was released – after all, the license agreement does provide for installation on two computers, but not only can they not be one Mac and one PC, they can't even be two OS installations on one computer.

agreed, since it's designed as a cross platform suite, both versions should be included rather than one or the other. i personally know several designers and developers who switched to PC over the past year and i'm sure to follow suite in the next year. that will be a problem since my creative suite is the mac version. additionally, i'm curious about upgrades - can mac versions be upgraded to pc versions? i imagine they could, but sometimes adobe's policies are as dumb as a bag of hammers, so i'll have to research that.

[EDIT] i just spoke with someone at Adobe. while i'm not sure why the license doesn't qualify for both PC and Mac at the same time, i was happy to know that it's possible to swap a license from one platform to another at no extra charge (besides maybe shipping for a boxed version). you simply have to submit to them a Letter of Software Destruction. attached is the template/form of the letter.

 

[SactoGuy18]

I think Adobe did this because 1) Microsoft Internet Explorer 9.0 for (likely) Windows XP/Vista/7 will include HTML 5.0 support and 2) Adobe wants to be able to write HTML 5.0 code that works under Google Chrome 4.0 and later, a browser that has arguably more HTML 5.0 support than any other web browser in the world.

 

[KnightWRX]

2) The next version of iPhoto will gain HTML5 export.

You do understand that for the most part, HTML5 isn't anything new right ? iPhoto export as HTML 5 ? You can do that in HTML 3.2. You could do a photo slideshow back in 1998 in Netscape 4.0 of all things.

Some people really need to clue up on HTML5 and HTML in general before they comment on stories like these.

I wonder how much 'in the game' Adobe would be without Apple's actions.

I am pretty sure there wouldn't be a 10.1 and HTML5 plug-ins today if it wasn't for Apple.

Seriously dude, drop the Kool-aid. Apple is a latecomer to the HTML5 game. Google has been doing it for quite a while and was first to push for it with Youtube. Mozilla was amongst the first to ship beta HTML5 support. Opera was the first with a release browser that supported HTML5 video.

Adobe announced their HTML5 support in their tools last year.

Apple has nothing to do with it. The Flash debate ? Adobe is about way more than Flash. Only Steve followers think Adobe's business model relies on technology they acquired back in 2005. Adobe has been around and has shipped many great products (including PDF and Postscript, 2 very important technologies) way before they even had the idea of buying up Macromedia.

I think Adobe did this because 1) Microsoft Internet Explorer 9.0 for (likely) Windows XP/Vista/7 will include HTML 5.0 support and 2) Adobe wants to be able to write HTML 5.0 code that works under Google Chrome 4.0 and later, a browser that has arguably more HTML 5.0 support than any other web browser in the world.

Or Adobe did this because Dreamweaver is a money maker and an HTML/CSS/DOM authoring tool. Supporting the latest HTML/CSS/DOM standards makes sense for such a tool.

People are looking way too much into this to try and find someway to paint Adobe as evil.

 

[Atkins]

Seriously dude, drop the Kool-aid. Apple is a latecomer to the HTML5 game. Google has been doing it for quite a while and was first to push for it with Youtube. Mozilla was amongst the first to ship beta HTML5 support. Opera was the first with a release browser that supported HTML5 video.
Adobe announced their HTML5 support in their tools last year.
Apple has nothing to do with it. The Flash debate ? Adobe is about way more than Flash. Only Steve followers think Adobe's business model relies on technology they acquired back in 2005. Adobe has been around and has shipped many great products (including PDF and Postscript, 2 very important technologies) way before they even had the idea of buying up Macromedia.

I know that Apple is late to the game - yes, I didn't make it clear, but I said exactly that in the beginning of my previous post. Still, Apple has something to do with it - why are so many content providers changing their websites after the iPad's release? Also, I think Apple pushed the debate to everyone's ears.
Of course Adobe's model doesn't rely around Flash - but it is an important part of it - don't tell me they are pushing to enter Apple's garden, because they want to give us all choice.
And Adobe's products are not that great - they are the only ones out there. If they had some competition we would see some more serious improvements.

 

[Anuba]

I am pretty sure there wouldn't be a 10.1 and HTML5 plug-ins today if it wasn't for Apple.

10.1 has been in the works for a long time, long before Steve's anti-Flash campaign started. Adobe must've forgotten to run the "10.1" designation by the marketing department, because it fails to communicate that this is the biggest overhaul Flash has seen in many years, possibly ever.

The mission was to get memory and CPU usage down while at the same time introducing hardware acceleration, so that Flash would run more efficiently on computers but also with a small enough footprint to run on mobile devices like smartphones, tablets, netbooks.

If Apple had any influence, active or passive, on the overhaul of the Flash Player, it was the fact that the original iPhone was a game changer for web surfing on smartphones.

Browsing on smartphones, prior to iPhone, was at best on proof-of-concept level, at worst a complete joke. When the iPhone changed the rules, Adobe thought "yeah, this is a direction we should explore". Initially, both Apple and Adobe stated that they were working together to bring Flash to the iPhone in some way or other. Adobe continued to work on bringing Flash to the iPhone in different ways, both with the Flash-to-iPhone app builder and a Flash plugin of some kind. Apple, at the last minute, blocked this by disallowing apps built in Flash (while also making clear there would never be browser support for Flash in iPhone OS). Fine, said Adobe and continued working on bringing Flash to other mobile platforms later this year.

So it would seem that Apple's contribution to the evolution of Flash ended up being somewhat ironic: First they inspired Adobe to put a rush on bringing Flash to smartphones, and now it's coming to all smartphones except Apple's own.

 

[Atkins]

First they inspired Adobe to put a rush on bringing Flash to smartphones, and now it's coming to all smartphones except Apple's own.

Ok, point taken on the 10.1. But why then this change of mind from Apple - there must be some reason, it's a big company in the end?

 

[pmz]

It would be a death trap for Adobe NOT to support HTML5, and obviously they've been working on it for some time. Props to Adobe for getting this out so quickly.

I still believe Flash is useful for anything not related to video or audio (such as complex 3-D animation, games, etc.). Trying to convert these types of things into an HTML5/Javascript equivalent would be a coding nightmare.

An important bullet point is also that Flash CS5 supports exporting animations to HTML5 Canvas.

Adobe are in the HTML5 game, no matter what some people on here and Steve Jobs wants to claim.

And creating complex games in Flash requires more than just Flash CS5 and some pointing and clicking. ActionScript and Javascript are very similar and Canvas is made for such "coding nightmares".

Yeah, but you have to consider who you're going to creating such things for in the future. You have to acknowledge that the days of people pulling up a ***** page full of advertising with one tiny (albeit good) Flash game in the middle are coming to an end. Lot's of people used to do this. Then they got an iPhone, or an iPod touch, or an iPad, or and Android phone of some ilk, and discovered that Free games are better in that format. Faster, less distracting, smoother graphics, more fun and natural to play (touch).

For reasons of personal preference, there is going to continue to be less reason to create and publish Flash games in the way they've been done in the past, as fewer and fewer people are seeking them out.

 

[Anuba]

Ok, point taken on the 10.1. But why then this change of mind from Apple - there must be some reason, it's a big company in the end?

Plugins are always a pain in the neck. Doesn't matter who writes them or what the application is for. They're trojan horses who can wreck application stability from within and you have no control over it. So I can see why Apple would take a rain check on that.

That said, when plugins are well written and designed they work 99.5% of the time, and it's not like plugin-free applications are always stable either. Safari on the iPhone is stable now, but in earlier versions of iPhone OS it crashed a helluvalot more often than Safari with Flash crashed on your Mac.

 

[Dolorian]

Yeah, what's up with that? In Photoshop you can select "show Application frame" to get rid of the fullscreen nonsense, but in Dreamweaver this option doesn't exist.

Dreamweaver doesn't have the Application Frame mode/option. It behaves as if it were turned off and doesn't takes the full screen.

 

[Dolorian]

Who needs DreamWeaver? I like to code in raw HTML & CSS! I'd do it in raw binary if I could.

+1

TextWrangler is my tool of choice for creating web sites. Works for HTML, CSS, JS and PHP. I do use Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop for graphic creation, but I prefer hand-coding everything. I would be scared of a web programmer who solely used Dreamweaver.

You can hand code everything in raw HTML/CSS/JavaScript/PHP with Dreamweaver CS5, no problem. It's text editor is actually better in a couple of ways than the one in Coda and Expresso.

 

[Dolorian]

They never were stupid about it. They've been working on HTML5/Canvas support throughout the CS5 development process. This whole idea of Adobe as a helpless dinosaur stuck in the past is just a FUD cloud whipped up by Steve and his minions.

+1

 

[madina]

Html5? Vs flash

Great news! But to think adobe wouldn't run with HTML 5 is just daft.
Also daft is to think it's the end of flash. As an animator it's one of the best ways of creating animation efficiently for the web. As far as flash websites are concerned have you seen http://www.thefwa.com the best flash sites on the web are here. I don't think HTML 5 can compete with the animation & creativity that these sites offer.

I would like to think there is a future for flash and I can't understand why we are putting flash and html5 head to head as if one would replace the other I see them as completely different animals with different purposes.

At the end of the day if I have to export my tiny little crisp interactive scalable vector animation into a crude optimized non-intractive video then so be it.