iWeb vs. RapidWeaver

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by BreuerEditor, Jan 5, 2011.

  1. BreuerEditor, Jan 5, 2011
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2011

    BreuerEditor macrumors regular

    BreuerEditor

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Location:
    New Jersey
    #1
    I'm currently using iWeb '09 for my website, but am a little annoyed at Apple's lack of updating the software in iLife '11, so I'm looking for other solutions that have more flexibility and features when I redo my site this year.

    Some things bugging me about iWeb/MobileMe:
    1) The extra directory in URL
    2) Lack of ability to edit HTML code prior to publishing
    3) Lack of ability to have true FTP upload ability (domain.com/images/book.jpg)
    4) Images and links default to overlay showing directory instead of designated name

    What have people seen in terms of pros and cons of using iWeb vs. RapidWeaver?

    I like RW's ability for editing HTML coding and add-on packs, but not sure how it's designing and coding compares to iWeb.

    FYI, my site is http://www.SeaLightEntertainment.com in case you wanted to see the examples listed above.
     
  2. jacg macrumors 6502a

    jacg

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #2
    Unless I'm totally behind the times, your site looks very un-iWeb. I guess you must have worked quite hard to get your own look. Not easy with iWeb.

    I've only used the built in templates. It's annoying how you have to duplicate pages if you want to repeat the modifications you've made to a template. Even text colour, etc. I don't do enough web design, but RW looked good and its (promising) future seems clearer.

    I wonder if iWeb will get an iOS version, maybe simultaneously with a MobileMe/iLife update? This may explain why nothing has happened recently because apparently Apple just move people onto different projects when they get a new idea rather than employing randomers.

    I agree, it is frustrating not knowing what's happening with iWeb. Good luck, whichever path you choose.
     
  3. roadbloc macrumors G3

    roadbloc

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    I think its safe to say that iWeb has been discontinued.
     
  4. chrismacguy macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #4
    Or it will be brought back as a rewritten application (Like iMovie '08) and its just taken them a long while.
     
  5. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #5
    I've used both and I currently maintain my websites in RapidWeaver.
    The only thing that sticks out for RW is #2. RapidWeaver like iWeb shields the user from editing HTML, that is you cannot edit the html generated in most pages. You can create a HTML type page, but then its up to you to create the html.

    You append, alter some the CSS, and there's apps out there that allow you to alter themes.

    Over all I've found RW to be a great product to create fairly complex websites, the depth and breath of available plugins is astonishing, and the volume of themes is mind blowing.

    One thing RW does is creat SEO compatible html code, that is fairly clean html that does impact the search engine spiders.
     
  6. Meyvn macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    #6
    Rapidweaver is not a replacement for iWeb; it's an entirely different kind of product.

    iWeb allows you to design webpages visually and does the coding for you. You start with one of their templates, but from there on out it's widely customizable.

    Rapidweaver allows you to either do 100% code or 100% template, pretty much. You can't drag things around visually and have it code for you.

    Honestly, if coding is what you want to do, Rapidweaver is a better solution. In iWeb, to do this you have to save to local folder, and modify the code from there. Not much you can do in-application.

    But if you're primarily design-minded, there's no substitute for iWeb. Rapidweaver's templates are very poor in terms of customization potential, and you can't do it by dragging and dropping. It all has to be done by clicking checkboxes, or adjusting numbers, or typing things in. And you certainly can't view your webpage as you're working on it. In order to have anything close to this, you have to purchase an additional $25 add-on, and even then, it's still not iWeb.

    I see Rapidweaver as more of a Dreamweaver competitor.
     
  7. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #7
    Actually that's not true. RW does support drag and drop and there are a number of plug-ins that extend that capability, i.e., blocks, stacks are just two plug-ins that extend that functionality. You get a feature rich drag and drop environment where all you need to do is drag and drop.

    Given the ability to use plug-ins should make the use of RW a no-brainer because it provides the ability to extend the product in a way that makes it easier for a person to make a site that want too with the minimum amount of work

    If coding is your gig then coda or textedit is better suited.

    Incorrect, iWeb has only a handful of limited templates that cannot be customized where as RW's templates are very customizable and they number in the hundreds. They're quite flexible in that you can add your own css, code, the product easily allows drag and drop which various plugins actually extend that capability. RW is an order of magnitude ahead of iWeb when it comes to flexibility, and customization.

    That's not the target market realmacsoftware is gunning for. Dreamweaver is a high end, product that gives the developer control over every aspect. Given that RW shields the user from any coding (unless they use a HTML page). RW is geared towards the person who wants more power and flexibility then iWeb but does not need the enterprise capabilities of DW nor do they have any desire to hand code.
     
  8. chikalada macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2011
    #8
    Need help making decision

    Greetings - I'm not a web designer, I'm a graphic artist, writer, publisher, artist, and freelancer who has used iWeb for my own personal website happily for several years now. The software I like the most, that seems the most intuitive for me is InDesign, which I adore. Two things have come up recently: 1) I want to be able to use PayPal on my site (have a shopping cart) and 2) I'm trying to help a nonprofit health clinic in the mountains in the somewhat remote area where I live get their website redesigned and easier to maintain (they have had a guy who would code the whole thing, but with all the budget cuts they can't afford that any more) as inexpensively as possible. I'll be volunteering much of my time.

    I could build them an iWeb site in a few days, though they want to be able to accept donations online, and my understanding is that iWeb doesn't support shopping carts. But I've visited your site, BreuerEditor, which I think is amazing, and I see that you are able to support commercial transactions on your site.

    I purchased RapidWeaver to rebuild my site, but I'm not finding the documentation to be very helpful nor the software very intuitive, but I'm willing to keep working at it (I purchased an ebook from a guy on the RealMac forum and haven't yet made my way through it; but any other resources anyone can suggest would be great).

    The IT guy at the clinic suggested DotNetNuke which I've been trying to learn, but I have to say, I'm hating it for a number of reasons.

    I humbly admit that I know no code. And I'm not, as I said, a web designer. But I don't have the $$ and neither does this clinic to hire a real web designer. What would your recommendations be for both my site and the clinic's site? iWeb (is there a way to build a shopping cart in??), Rapidweaver (any good documentation? I don't do well with video tutorials), and/or keep trying to figure out DNN?

    Thanks very much!!

    Oh--my current website for anyone who wants to look at it (nothing spectacular like SeaLightEntertainment, but I'm reasonably happy with it): www.keswickhousepublishers.com.
     

Share This Page