Apple Working on iWeb Pro?

[GregA]

They should also work well with existing dynamic technologies like PHP, Ruby on Rails, Python, ect.

Yes... well with Ruby on Rails in the next OSX Server hopefully iWeb will play nicely eh?
(I do mean hopefully. It may not make a difference)

I would also like to see an Ajax framework that would give web applications similar affects provided by Core Animation. <snip> Let us bring innovations on the Mac desktop to the web.

Can this work? If Mac innovations are so easily duplicated on other problems, are they really innovations?

Perhaps we are talking more about a future Cocoa for Windows & Linux? Or OSX-lite for whatever (which has cocoa, corevideo, coreaudio, coreanimation).

 

[nuckinfutz]

Agreed. There's no easy way to make a consumer web authoring app powerful compared to today's tools but I would certainly love to see Apple develop a program that leverages the recent stuff. I believe this sort of Web 2.0 stuff is too important to leave "just" to 3rd parties.

Apple is promoting AJAX, Ruby and Python heavily. At WWDC they'll have the Sitepen.com guys showing off AJAX and Dojo tools. They'll be demoing Prototype's frameworks. I think the most amazing thing is going to be the blending of Web technologies with desktop applications.

Apple has to be up here with the big boys (Microsoft, Adobe) with some offerings of their own. In a few years what's expected of a superlative web app is going to vary significantly with what is expected now.

I would be all for a more professional templating application. I find the iWeb web pages to be almost too simple and amaturish. The lack of customization makes them very limited but useful for their target audiance I guess.

Some things I would like to see in a Pro version would be corporate templates for intranets, thematic templates for small businesses, and more customizable options. They should also work well with existing dynamic technologies like PHP, Ruby on Rails, Python, ect.

I would also like to see an Ajax framework that would give web applications similar affects provided by Core Animation. If RubyCocoa can let Ruby access the Cocoa framework to create desktop applicaitons, how about the reverse? Let us bring innovations on the Mac desktop to the web.

 

[belovedmonster]

I don't see the point of this Pro version. Once iWeb has matured a bit it will do everything you could possibly want as an individual or a small business. If you want more advanced stuff than that then you clearly need a professional to be designing it any ways. I don't see how some higher end app is going to allow the company secretary to generate anything more than a static web page, and that sort of thing can easily be handled by iWeb.

 

[nuckinfutz]

I don't see the point of this Pro version. Once iWeb has matured a bit it will do everything you could possibly want as an individual or a small business. If you want more advanced stuff than that then you clearly need a professional to be designing it any ways. I don't see how some higher end app is going to allow the company secretary to generate anything more than a static web page, and that sort of thing can easily be handled by iWeb.

Does iMovie handle everything that a video producer needs?
Does iDVD handle everything that a DVD Authorer needs.
Do Pro studios eschew Logic Pro for Gargageband?

You fail to realize the market "focus" for iWeb. It's never going to be a full featured app a la Dreamweaver. It's for people who want an easy web authoring app for designing simple pages. We're not trying to say Apple is to be focused on the individual or even all small business. We are saying that there is a market for an Apple web authoring app that has upscale/upmarket features that people want. The big thing now is supporting Web 2.0 with tools for Ajax/Ruby/Pythong and various frameworks. iWeb is never going to offer this sort of flexiblity.

 

[moonislune]

Does iMovie handle everything that a video producer needs?
Does iDVD handle everything that a DVD Authorer needs.
Do Pro studios eschew Logic Pro for Gargageband?

You fail to realize the market "focus" for iWeb. It's never going to be a full featured app a la Dreamweaver. It's for people who want an easy web authoring app for designing simple pages. We're not trying to say Apple is to be focused on the individual or even all small business. We are saying that there is a market for an Apple web authoring app that has upscale/upmarket features that people want. The big thing now is supporting Web 2.0 with tools for Ajax/Ruby/Pythong and various frameworks. iWeb is never going to offer this sort of flexiblity.

I don't think those people that voted PRO don't realize the iWeb market, they just want a program with the simplicity of iWeb and some of the advanced editing and plug-in capabilities of a dreamweaver app. IMO, Apple would be a fool (or many fools) if they didn't add a more serious web app to their iLife or iWork arsenal. Why wouldn't they want to overhaul iWeb?

 

[Thomas2006]

iWeb Pro does not sound good to my ears so my feelings are if ClarisWorks can become AppleWorks, why can't Claris HomePage become Apple HomePage? Since I do not create web sites for a living, I do not know what is "needed" but I want:
1 - to specify whether I am creating HTML 4.0.1, XHTML 1.0 or 1.1 content and validate it.
2 - separate content, CSS, JavaScript, PHP, etc. and have each type developed/viewed in its own tab.
3 - a way to save CSS, JavaScript, et-cetera to a repository so I can easily import it into other projects.
4 - to be able to test the site before publishing it. This includes walking through code/scripts.

 

[kingslod]

What about GoLive?

I had also read a rumor a little while ago that Apple would buy GoLive from Adobe since they seemed to be putting all of their resources into Dreamweaver. This rumor brought a big smile to my face, as I love GoLive (except for some of its annoying bugs) and it seemed like Apple could really take it to the next level.

Well... Adobe just released GoLive 9 and while it is not part of the Creative Suite, it is a new product, so the liklihood of Apple taking it over now appear slim to nil. Oh well!

 

[JFreak]

I have a copy of iLife 06 right here. It has iTunes on it... Trust me, he's not wrong.

iTunes is free, so it can be bundled with anything. If they included iTunes with iWork trial, then would it make iTunes a part of iWork? No. If they included iTunes with Wireless Mighty Mouse driver CD, then would it make iTunes a Mighty Mouse component? No. iTunes is iTunes and because it's free, it can be distributed in many different ways.

My guess: Apple is gearing up for Leopard and making .mac a free service, something that should have happened years ago.

.mac was free in the beginning when it was called "iTools" and had more users than dotmac today. How easily people do forget these things? IMO, dotmac is one of the worst things ever sold by Apple — shame on SJ!

 

[nuckinfutz]

Apple will create their own web program most likely. It'll showcase their newest API like Core Text and Core Animation.

It'll have great support for the various Javascript frameworks and AJAX. It'll handle dealing with graphic to purpose them for the web (Aperture/iPhoto support is a given)

.Mac won't be free..it'll be greatly expanded. You will have access to your home computer (already announced) but you will also be able to deliver services on your own via Wide Area Bonjour.

The web is far more important to Apple than many people realize. Prepare to be shocked at what's available a year from this date.

 

[uburoibob]

I wouldn't be surprised if it acutally IS Freeway we are talking about here...

 

[bobber205]

I don't think it's so ridiculous. Apple has the managerial and engineering savvy to do almost anything they set their mind to.

Adobe's trying to steer web development into an integrated all-Adobe set of technologies with Apollo and Flex. Microsoft is trying the same thing with Expression and Sparkle/Silverlight. Adobe's implementation will probably ignore a lot of the technologies web designers want to use (Ruby, Prototype, etc.), and Microsoft's will be half-assed as always. Many web designers still refuse to touch Dreamweaver and wouldn't consider relying on MS.

If the battle is integration, no one does it like Apple; iWeb Pro would integrate with the desktop in particular better than anything Adobe could produce. Adobe has demonstrated again and again how they don't get what makes a really good Mac app.

Plus, the folks at Apple like Ruby on Rails and clean logical mark-up; just look at the source on their own website. They like all the nifty, low-overhead animation Javascript libraries like Scriptaculous that are taking off among the web's trend-setting designers.

Want a concrete example? Compare Apple's brand-new Final Cut Studio page to Adobe's brand-new Creative Suite 3 page.

Apple's page is lean html and CSS with a very attractive implementation of Prototype and Scriptaculous effects and some custom scripts. It's the nicest software product page I've ever seen, tied with the page for Panic's Coda.

Adobe's page is a clunky, slow-loading Flash website. They're eating their own dog food, but it doesn't taste so great.

In other words, Apple gets the Web. They get how to build a website. Adobe doesn't; they got lucky buying Macromedia's Flash technology, and they simply want to push it on everyone by shoving in some Flash anywhere it will fit. Their Apollo stands a good chance of being the Java of ten years ago: full of cross-platform promise, but in reality a dud that requires special OS installation and integration.

One other thing to note: Flash is of no particular advantage for Adobe. Apple has their own implementation, both stand-alone (see Keynote export options) and as a Quicktime layer.

As an aside, I wonder what Apple is using to design their new product web pages these days. They might even have some kind of internal tool already, who knows. The Final Cut Studio page was almost certainly not done in Dreamweaver; it's too nice for that.

Good points.
On a side note, I hate website that have much flash at all in them, especially serious sites. It's good for games yes, and sometimes the occasional effect, but a little goes a long way.

 

[Lesser Evets]

Apple's iWeb or iWeb pro could conceivably conquer a HUGE market.

People who say Dreamweaver is 'it' are deluded. Who can afford OR USE that program? Great as it might be it is complex and not user friendly for most people. It takes lots and lots of effort to use. 90% of websites don;t need a highly expensive web program to help them display their intended info.

Apple realizes it needs to bring complex technology to people who don;t have the time and resources to maneuver in the ultra complex world of computer technology. It is something no other major software maker has truly understood because those are geek companies making geek software for geeks who geek out on super geeky complexity to give them SOMETHING to feel proud about. Average people want the power of access without having to don the anorak and babble endlessly about the ever shifting detail bloating code.

If Apple is making iWeb Pro, and making it to simplify building a modern, graphic, WYSIWYG web page for small businesses and regular shmoes, I think they are incredibly wise. That is a titanic market the world over. At the moment iWeb 1.0 is pretty sad, and barely functioning, so there is endless room for improvement.

 

[GregA]

Apple realizes it needs to bring complex technology to people who don;t have the time and resources to maneuver in the ultra complex world of computer technology.

Old thread eh?

I'd love to see Apple make iWeb more sophisticate, while also simpler, AND standards compliant....

However, I am wondering more and more whether Apple is more interested in providing a "multimedia distribution system".

ie: Why bother making a great iWeb to supply content on web browsers, when they can make an integrated TV/podcast/pdf/web distribution system that works (via Quicktime) for anyone who has iTunes, as well as direct to the AppleTV & iPhone.

 

[irvinegal]

iWeb Pro

I have a small business, and we publish our site through iWeb. We would buy an iWeb Pro product in a heartbeat if it were offered. We are impressed with the current ease-of-use of iWeb, but constantly frustrated by its limitations. A "Pro" product would be the answer to our needs. Simple things like ability to add metatags, improve Google searches, add stylesheets.... oh, what a dream! Please, please, please create iWeb Pro!

 

[nuckinfutz]

I have a small business, and we publish our site through iWeb. We would buy an iWeb Pro product in a heartbeat if it were offered. We are impressed with the current ease-of-use of iWeb, but constantly frustrated by its limitations. A "Pro" product would be the answer to our needs. Simple things like ability to add metatags, improve Google searches, add stylesheets.... oh, what a dream! Please, please, please create iWeb Pro!

Agree.

If Apple wants to further the scope and reach of HTML5 then they may as well create an app that serves as the vehicle for some of the fantastic new features coming. iWeb for consumers isn't going to be able to go this deep.

 

[scotty96LSC]

Although I seriously doubt this rumor, "iWeb Pro" is exactly what I need.

iWeb works great with .Mac, but just isn't fit for anything beyond a basic user's homepage. This is even more true if iWeb is used without .Mac.

Agree.
Would like to see some "meat" to the bones application.

 

[bigwig]

iTunes needs to dump Carbon and become a Cocoa app. Also, it would be a lot faster on startup if it migrated to Core Data to manage its database.

As for iWeb, one of the things I didn't like is everything must be re-uploaded when you change something. That gets really bad when you have a bunch of photos for your web page. That wouldn't be a problem if iWeb could create web pages that would add photo galleries and photos from the web page itself rather than doing so on the back end from iWeb.

 

[MrT8064]

i'm looking for an iWeb pro too!

iWeb just donest quite include the features i want, like allowing users to comment on things i've written!

adsense has to be the greatest feature of the current iWeb

 

[thunderclap]

I'd pick up iWeb Pro in a heartbeat if they offered it.