Google Web Designer • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Web Designer

#31

Post by micampe » Mon, Sep 30, 2013, 4:39 PM UTC

Interesting that this is a desktop program and not a web application. Not even "coming soon to your Chromebook".

Re: Google Web Designer

#32

Post by electic » Mon, Sep 30, 2013, 4:42 PM UTC

stekoz wrote: post #4

"Available for Mac and PC". I'd say it doesn't sound very attractive.

Sounds pretty attractive to me.

Re: Google Web Designer

#33

Post by pajju » Mon, Sep 30, 2013, 4:42 PM UTC

simonsarris wrote: post #22

The most important feature of this (to Google(?)) is the built-in ad editor. It's the last point on the feature list page, but it's very telling that it's the first thing on the "Create New" screen. https://support.google.com/webdesigner/answer/3261498?hl=en&...

Yes, this looks as a perfect tool for ads — esp to create more appealing, eye-catching effects.

But its Branded as Google Web Designer. :)

Re: Google Web Designer

#34

Post by austenallred » Mon, Sep 30, 2013, 4:43 PM UTC

simonsarris wrote: post #22

The most important feature of this (to Google(?)) is the built-in ad editor. It's the last point on the feature list page, but it's very telling that it's the first thing on the "Create New" screen. https://support.google.com/webdesigner/answer/3261498?hl=en&...

I see it first and foremost as an Adwords/Adsense add-on. More interactive ads = more clicks = more money.

Re: Google Web Designer

#35

Post by wil421 » Mon, Sep 30, 2013, 4:43 PM UTC

Ugh, glad I have a grip on HTML/CSS now and dont have to rely on tools like this or Dreamweaver.

I think Dreamweaver actually helped me code better because after class I would always work at cleaning up the shoddy Dreamweaver auto-generated code. Kids kept wondering why I always passed validations after writing code, I stopped using Dreamweaver unlike everyone else in that class.

Re: Google Web Designer

#36

Post by topbanana » Mon, Sep 30, 2013, 4:44 PM UTC

cbhl wrote: post #24

xSwag wrote: post #2

I'm really happy that it looks like Photoshop and not like GIMP. Good UI is essential for widespread adoption.

It's necessary, but not sufficient. Look at Microsoft Blend for Visual Studio (formerly Microsoft Expression Blend), for example.

I don't think it was such a bad tool, it just targeted a dead-end platform (Silverlight)

Re: Google Web Designer

#37

Post by virtuz » Mon, Sep 30, 2013, 4:44 PM UTC

mediascreen wrote: post #18

snide wrote: post #6

Think this is mostly an alternative for Flash in display ads (which still primarily use Flash for animation). Guess is based on it being announced through Doubleclick's twitter stream. https://twitter.com/doubleclick_pub/status/38471531196005171...

It certainly looks that way. The name seems like a bit of an overreach though - "Designing the web" = creating animated ad banners?

Baby steps.

Re: Google Web Designer

#38

Post by wakkalakka » Mon, Sep 30, 2013, 4:44 PM UTC

This sounds a lot like Tumult's Hype:

http://tumult.com/hype

One of the primary complaints about Hype is that its HTML / CSS / JS output isn't very clean. I wonder if Google's tool produces better output.

EDIT: Looks like not: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6470640

Re: Google Web Designer

#39

Post by sigzero » Mon, Sep 30, 2013, 4:46 PM UTC

leishulang wrote: post #8

dougaitken wrote: post #3

Let's hope this isn't the new Dreamweaver!

Dreamweaver generates a lot of nested tables and I don't think google will do that sort of thing. (do like bootstrap though)

If the source code of that page is any indication then "no" it doesn't look like it is generating tables. It is using div etc.

Re: Google Web Designer

#40

Post by josefresco » Mon, Sep 30, 2013, 4:46 PM UTC

LandoCalrissian wrote: post #17

dougaitken wrote: post #3

Let's hope this isn't the new Dreamweaver!

Is Dreamweaver heavily used anymore? I don't honestly know, I haven't worked with anyone that used it in at least 7 years or so.

I started with DW back in 1999 as a crutch while I learned markup and styling. Gradually phasing out the visual editor over the years I got so accustomed to the code editor (highlighting/shortcuts) that I still use (and prefer) it.

DW got/gets a bad name because of it's visual editor (and therefore lower bar of entry) but it's no better/worse than any other visual editor.