Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Web Designer (2013)

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 153 posts

Re: Google Web Designer (2013)

#61

Post by rl3 »

j45 wrote: post #48
vcool07 wrote: post #17

Could any expert shed any information on why we lack a professional front-end WYSIWYG kind of editor for the web ? I remember tools like dreamweaver/frontpage existed a long time ago, but don't hear about them anymore. Is it something that's too hard to make or is it just that the market doesn't exist ?

In the past creating rich experiences was in things like Flash. With it's premature flogging, the side effect was there was little to actually and reliably replace the rich experiences it was able to create 2007-08. That's one reason seeing tooling like this, and Adobe Edge is something to look forward to.

>That's one reason seeing tooling like this, and Adobe Edge is something to look forward to.

Adobe Edge is dead.

https://www.adobe.com/products/edge-animate.html

Note: As of November 2015, Edge Animate is no longer being actively developed.

Prior to cessation of development it stagnated for a few years before finally being put down. Shame, really.

Re: Google Web Designer (2013)

#62

Post by HlessClaudesman »

devoply wrote: post #22
vcool07 wrote: post #17

Could any expert shed any information on why we lack a professional front-end WYSIWYG kind of editor for the web ? I remember tools like dreamweaver/frontpage existed a long time ago, but don't hear about them anymore. Is it something that's too hard to make or is it just that the market doesn't exist ?

My thinking is that they were replaced by dynamic sites based on PHP like WordPress, which initially people were doing template conversions for but eventually they switched to using themes... then we have had a bit of a redux with static site generators, but those are all hobbyist efforts. Dreamweaver still exists, it's just that no one makes those sorts of sites on Dreamweaver any more. There is no market for it. Al…

Yeah, also being able to inspect live code in the browser drank dreamweaver's milkshake.

Re: Google Web Designer (2013)

#63

Post by elif »

vcool07 wrote: post #17

Could any expert shed any information on why we lack a professional front-end WYSIWYG kind of editor for the web ? I remember tools like dreamweaver/frontpage existed a long time ago, but don't hear about them anymore. Is it something that's too hard to make or is it just that the market doesn't exist ?

You are commenting on one..

Re: Google Web Designer (2013)

#64

Post by rl3 »

stevebmark wrote: post #5

Adobe Edge has already tried the HTML5 tooling route http://www.adobe.com/products/edge-animate.html . I don't think they got much traction and essentially abandoned it. Curious if this offers anything different.

This appears to have more (or at least different) features than Edge, though I can't help but feel it's basically tracing the same path.

Re: Google Web Designer (2013)

#66

Post by artf »

tribby wrote: post #28
vcool07 wrote: post #17

Could any expert shed any information on why we lack a professional front-end WYSIWYG kind of editor for the web ? I remember tools like dreamweaver/frontpage existed a long time ago, but don't hear about them anymore. Is it something that's too hard to make or is it just that the market doesn't exist ?

> Could any expert shed any information on why we lack a professional front-end WYSIWYG kind of editor for the web ? we don't. webflow[0] is the best I've seen. there's an OSS clone called grapejs[1], but it's still very alpha. one reason we don't see greater adoption is that WYSIWYG editors for the web occupy a sort of middle ground between template-based hosts like squarespace, weebly, etc, and opinionated low-barr…

GrapesJS's author here. Firstly, thanks for the mention tribby, appreciate (got +20 stars in few hours :)). Anyway, in this days I plan to make a big update to the site and will add also another demo/preset, the builder for newsletters[0]. The main goal of GrapesJS, indeed, is to replace the common WYSIWYG editors, which are good for content editing but inappropriate for creating HTML structures.

0. https://s30.postimg.org/bbh4gwwdt/top_secret_stuff.png

Re: Google Web Designer (2013)

#67

Post by logicallee »

username223 wrote: post #59
lstamour wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This tool was announced in 2013 by a different part of the company: https://doubleclick-advertisers.googleblog.com/2013/09/googl...

Wow, that link is a truly amazing advertiser buzzword salad; it even has an on-brand "up and to the right" graph. It makes me long for the days when disabling Flash and pop-ups got rid of most web annoyances.

I only clicked through due to your comment, I wanted to see what you were talking about. You weren't kidding! I think I handle marketing speak pretty okay, but this:

>Build beautiful HTML5 creative with ease.

creative what - repeated later, "However, even though the amount of mobile and tablet work is expected to increase, cross-screen creative can be difficult to adopt".

This just hurts so much. They don't want to call it "content" because ... it doesn't qualify as such? It's just -- "some creative."

If it were a noun instead of an adjective it would seem okay for me but this is just too marketing.

Re: Google Web Designer (2013)

#68

Post by croon »

logicallee wrote: post #67
username223 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, that link is a truly amazing advertiser buzzword salad; it even has an on-brand "up and to the right" graph. It makes me long for the days when disabling Flash and pop-ups got rid of most web annoyances.

I only clicked through due to your comment, I wanted to see what you were talking about. You weren't kidding! I think I handle marketing speak pretty okay, but this: >Build beautiful HTML5 creative with ease. creative what - repeated later, "However, even though the amount of mobile and tablet work is expected to increase, cross-screen creative can be difficult to adopt". This just hurts so much. They don't want to c…

> just too marketing

I suppose just an upvote would suffice, but I had to applaud you.

Re: Google Web Designer (2013)

#69

Post by phormula »

logicallee wrote: post #67
username223 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, that link is a truly amazing advertiser buzzword salad; it even has an on-brand "up and to the right" graph. It makes me long for the days when disabling Flash and pop-ups got rid of most web annoyances.

I only clicked through due to your comment, I wanted to see what you were talking about. You weren't kidding! I think I handle marketing speak pretty okay, but this: >Build beautiful HTML5 creative with ease. creative what - repeated later, "However, even though the amount of mobile and tablet work is expected to increase, cross-screen creative can be difficult to adopt". This just hurts so much. They don't want to c…

calling the actual ads 'creative' is common parlance in the display ad space. ( former Doubleclick employee )

Re: Google Web Designer (2013)

#70

Post by proyb2 »

moonlighter wrote: post #32
vcool07 wrote: post #17

Could any expert shed any information on why we lack a professional front-end WYSIWYG kind of editor for the web ? I remember tools like dreamweaver/frontpage existed a long time ago, but don't hear about them anymore. Is it something that's too hard to make or is it just that the market doesn't exist ?

Macaw is such a tool, runs on Mac and Windows. It's a free download at http://macaw.co (the product isn't updated anymore though; the devs have moved on).

macOS is no longer available download but I tried many way to search for it, Windows version still there.
Post reply on HN