Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Working on iWeb Pro?

Too late, Dreamweaver won this years ago

Dreamweaver won the Web Design App game years ago and even Adobe, with their Photoshop experience and credibility, could not catch up despite over a decade of trying. Dreamweaver, more than Flash, is what stopped Adobe crushing Macromedia and, finally, forced them to buy it.

Now that Dreamweaver is properly integrated with Photoshop and Illustrator, there's even less chance of anyone, even Apple, breaking into that market in any serious way. Web Design is evolving, anyway, towards a more complex role, involving powerful new frameworks such as Ruby on Rails and the recent open-sourcing of Flex suggests that Flash is finally coming to the fore. Apple has no previous form in those areas, it's ridiculous to suggest they'd even try.

My guess: Apple is gearing up for Leopard and making .mac a free service, something that should have happened years ago. iWeb Pro will simply be a range of better, paid hosting options with a nicely designed software front-end.

You heard it here first.
 
rydewnd2 said:
I'm sorry my friend you are wrong on this point. iTunes was formerly bundled with ilife. But no longer. In fact the only way to aquire itunes now is bundled with a new mac or through download.
Click to expand...

iTunes has always been bundled with iLife, from the first version of iLife in 2003 through the current version, iLife '06. But from a marketing standpoint, iTunes, though included, is no longer considered a core component of the suite as of its latest version. In a lot of ways, iTunes has become its own platform, independent of iLife, and Macs in general.
 
I Web

I have used iweb to build webistes for others on their macs and have enjoyed a quick profit doing so. I have them acquire a domain name then after I build their site, using the web forwarding service to eliminate the lengthy apple address and the customer only sees the wwwdomain name .com It is simple and easy to build clean functional websites in about an hour an a half.
aloha from maui
 
Mauiphoto said:
I have used iweb to build webistes for others on their macs and have enjoyed a quick profit doing so. I have them acquire a domain name then after I build their site, using the web forwarding service to eliminate the lengthy apple address and the customer only sees the wwwdomain name .com It is simple and easy to build clean functional websites in about an hour an a half.
aloha from maui
Click to expand...

I do the same - the problem is that these pages won't come up in Google. The combination of domain redirection & iWeb coding 'errors' (as defined by the website checking bots) gives the web pages a low ranking in my experience.

Anyone who knows of some ways to avoid that... let me know :)

In the meantime - hopefully the future iWeb will generate better code, and apple will allow us to use our own domain names on .Mac :)
 
GregA said:
I do the same - the problem is that these pages won't come up in Google. The combination of domain redirection & iWeb coding 'errors' (as defined by the website checking bots) gives the web pages a low ranking in my experience.
Click to expand...

I don't understand. Why don't you use iWeb's "Publish to a folder..." feature (located in the File menu) which just places the HTML files in a folder. Then you just upload the folder to a normal webserver, and there's no domain redirection needed. Google should pick these sites up fine.

Are you guys seriously publishing on .mac and then having the company websites redirect to the .mac page? Not a good thing to do, IMHO.
 
Something like this is sorely needed, in my opinion. I've never understood why web design has to be so complicated. I really believe that if someone bothered to build an HTML editor from the ground up rather than trying to repurpose an existing document editor, it could be much, much cleaner.

Dynamic pages are a combination of a template and logic. This too can be done much more simply than I've seen elsewhere.

Document editing has been made easy, application development has been made much easier than it used to be, there's no reason why Web design and development can't be improved to the same level.

I've been astounded by the lack of a decent, intuitive IDE for web development. Whatever Apple comes up with is sure to tick off a few people who are invested in whatever flow they currently use, but if they can show a dramatic increase in productivity, I think they can seize enough of the market to make this viable.
 
Coda looks to be completely different from iWeb, they're not targetted at the same type of people at all. The implication from the rumour is that 'iWeb Pro' would allow ordinary people - not web developers - to build stuff, whereas I think Coda is more of a nice tool for web people.

If 'iwebPro' does come out as a beefed up version of iWeb, I don't think the results are going to be great. The chances of getting clean, logical code are also pretty low, is my guess.

At this stage in the web's development I don't think it's really feasible to develop a fully WYSIWYG design tool that produces great web pages with clean code, it's just too hard to automate around all those browser bugs and still end up with pages that work well if you resize the text, resize the browser window, or use a non-visual browser. I think the only way to do it, would be to use a restricted set of layout templates and allow the user to select bits and pieces.
 
If this turns out to be truth and actually is a well made app I will be very compelled to buying it. I'm a good example of a wysiwyg-person, concerning all aspects of using a computer. I just don't like writing code. It's simply dull (and no fun makes me a dull boy).

Someone already referred to Coda, and actually when I first heard of it I thought it would've been a wysiwyg-editor. I was sad to find out I was wrong. Still after giving it a short try it really seems like a very good product, so something like that but with wysiwyg-capability -- price it at $150 (or less:) and I'm in.
 
check out simplsoftware.com, my website I made in iWeb. iWeb really should have an overhaul, it is in dire need of one, as is with .Mac, a proper URL would be nice for my .Mac homepage :(
 
iWeb pro would be great. It would revolutionize the creation of websites. What would be even better is if they came out with a new version of iLife with a version of regular iWeb that is actually usable by anyone who is not a novice.
 
I would consider it, but iWeb is just fine for me. People should pay a lot more if they are going to make their living on this software!

Saying that, people get paid tons on keynote. Essentially, I am jealous!

Anyway, I am not making much sense.

.mac needs a serious overhaul. It's a little annoying to pay for it really!
 
I was the webmaster for a couple student organizations I was in in college and I just used TextEdit and coded in raw HTML and CSS. For those web sites, I didn't need anything fancy, just something to pass along information. If I did something that needed something fancy, I might consider Dreamweaver or something, but it's not worth the $$ considering I don't write web pages now. Only gripe I have w/ WYSIWYG editors is they often make bloated code. And w/ iWeb, instead of saving the text as text, I heard it saves it as PNG images. Kinda stupid. If I were a programmer, I'd make my own WYSIWYG editor that spits out nice, clean code.
 
It'd need to have everything to be any success, you can be pretty flexible with iWeb. Maybe it could have built in FTP, that's only annoyance for me, also maybe HTML insert.

I made this site in iWeb: http://www.svbc.org.uk
 
What about XCode-web ?

I've always been surprised that Apple haven't leveraged XCode into becoming a fully fledged web development environment. It's a decent IDE as it stands, and you could quite easily integrate things like real-time web preview (like Coda for example). I can imagine an 'interface builder' like application for doing the visual layout (or, maybe, something like Dashcode ?).

The mac has the full feature set for LAMP development, Rails, Web Objects, Java, heck - just about anything other than .Net and ASP, and even that can be done via Parallels or VMWare.

As a web developer, I've often looked with jealous eyes at the debugging and performance tools that are available for Cocoa developers. If something similar was made available for web developers, the Mac would be come the premier web development platform overnight. Much the same way that Final Cut has made it the platform for video production.
 
I think the name "iWeb Pro" is not what it would be called.
Take the current apps, apeture and final cut arent called.
iPhoto-----"iPhoto Pro"
iMovie-----"iMovie Pro"

Perhaps "Web Pro" or "Web 2.0 Pro"
but currently its not going to be iWeb Pro
 
I would bye it and learn it the Apple way ( no dreamweaver or any of that stuff), never have been busy with my website other then with the .mac software and iweb, and i would love a pro version of it .

And i would love a iTunes Pro version to wich would have DJ features such as pitchcontrol an being able to controlwit with rane live or some harware like that
 
Analog Kid said:
Something like this is sorely needed, in my opinion. I've never understood why web design has to be so complicated. I really believe that if someone bothered to build an HTML editor from the ground up rather than trying to repurpose an existing document editor, it could be much, much cleaner.

Dynamic pages are a combination of a template and logic. This too can be done much more simply than I've seen elsewhere.

Document editing has been made easy, application development has been made much easier than it used to be, there's no reason why Web design and development can't be improved to the same level.

I've been astounded by the lack of a decent, intuitive IDE for web development. Whatever Apple comes up with is sure to tick off a few people who are invested in whatever flow they currently use, but if they can show a dramatic increase in productivity, I think they can seize enough of the market to make this viable.
Click to expand...

What you say is true... but there is usually much more to web design than the presentation layer (HTML, CSS, AV Plugins, JavaScript, etc.). Many web sites need back-end logic to support database, file management, audit trail, backup, security, communications, shopping cart, syndication, version control, site management (to mention a few).

So an IDE needs to address the entirety of the problem...

While a WYSIWYG editor may be fine for designing page/site layout, it is of little use when writing programs to provide the back-end functions.

Someone mentioned that iTunes performs poorly when you have a large library... I suspect that this is because iTunes was not designed to use a large library... they merrily assume that you need/want to load the entire library before you (can) do anything. Instead, they could load only the playlists, etc. (left panel) and the first n items in the library (right panel).

Then you could page thru the library (if desired). But, more likely you would do a search or select a playlist and drill-down to what you want.

These are fairly common functions for a web site with a lot of content: search/sort and drill-down. A well designed site will do this in a few seconds (as opposed to waiting minutes for the Library to load).

The key to this is the back-end DB design and the programming to retrieve the data for presentation.

I used to develop web sites in the $10,000+ price-range. I have used Perl, ASP, Java. The solution I like best is ColdFusion (CF)-- a scripting language that compiles (automatically) into Java ByteCode.

With 2 easy-to-understand CF commands you can search the back-end DB, and present the results to the user.

The IDE I prefer is BBEdit.

My point in all this is that your choice of IDE may be different if you are doing web site design/programming as opposed to web page programming/layout.

Dick
 
google issue..

GregA said:
I do the same - the problem is that these pages won't come up in Google. The combination of domain redirection & iWeb coding 'errors' (as defined by the website checking bots) gives the web pages a low ranking in my experience.

Anyone who knows of some ways to avoid that... let me know :)

In the meantime - hopefully the future iWeb will generate better code, and apple will allow us to use our own domain names on .Mac :)
Click to expand...
I found the same problem initially, but after a month or two the sites come up in google no problem. I do not know the technical reasoning for this, but they do show up.
aloha
 
I had the thought not to long ago if Apple was going to start competing with adobe on other areas besides premier and lightroom. I wondered if they would develope Apple versions of photoshop and dreamweaver. This seems like it could be the start of it. I wouldn't doubt it if before to long they add a "paint-like" program to the iLife suite and then develop a photoshop competitor.

It kinda doens't seem like a smart idea for apple to start competing against a goliath of a company like adobe, but they are doing it already with FCP and Aperature. It's also somewhat of a slap in the face, because designers are the ones who kept apple in business during the "dark ages" of apple, and Adobe was the company that supplied all the programs that designers used. And you can tell its still happening because apple sales went way up once cs3 was released. So apple is essentially telling adobe, hey thanks for all the help during our hard times but now we are going to directly compete with you.

Oh well, should be interesting.
 
Mauiphoto said:
I found the same problem initially, but after a month or two the sites come up in google no problem. I do not know the technical reasoning for this, but they do show up.
aloha
Click to expand...

I submitted a link to my dot-Mac hosted iWeb site directly to Google. After a few weeks it finally showed up in searches. But now it's apparently been deleted from Google's database -- which is extremely frustrating if only because I'm the only person in the world who's writing about a particular subject, not that anyone who might be researching it will ever find out. I'm not sure who to blame, Apple or Google. I think Google has a lot to do with it, because I've seen other pages which I know exist turn up in a search one time and not after. If anybody knows how to get pages indexed by Google and keep them there (dot-Mac or otherwise), I'd be very happy to have that information.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back