Adobe GoLive 6.0 [Old Version]
Adobe has taken GoLive, its Web design and management tool, and improved its integration with other applications, adding a number of useful extras in the process. In addition to the design elements of the program, GoLive 6.0 includes sections devoted to Web site management and maintenance, as well as team collaboration. The main working area of the program deliberately looks much like other Adobe applications, making it easy to move between them. The main editing windows float on the GoL
List Price: $ 444.99
Price: $ 289.73
Adobe LiveMotion 2.0 [Old Version]
LiveMotion 2.0 gives users a broad set of tools to rapidly design and develop interactive Macromedia Flash and QuickTime content for the Web and other delivery platforms. Scripting capabilities include full ActionScript support, combined with both vector and raster tools, allowing users to create dynamic, interactive content such as Web pages, online training applications, presentations, product demos, and more. LiveMotion provides a solution that simplifies the manual process of developing inte
List Price: $ 38.45
Price: $ 38.45
Nope – it’s doesn’t match Dreamweaver,
For the type of webpages I build, the ability to handle dynamic content is a *given*. A good web page creation tool isn’t just a glorified text editor with shortcuts.
First, a few good points about GoLive. It’s got great directory managing abilities. It comes with quite a bit of jscript and other scripting ‘objects’. It’s well integrated with photoshop, with the ability to make live previews, etc.
However, it’s worst problem is that if you want to use newer web technologies, such as PHP, CSS, and other dynamic content, it isn’t any better than a text editor like vi or notepad. As a comparison to Dreamweaver, it just doesn’t cut the salt. It won’t preview external stylesheets. It won’t parse the php on your page to show you what your project would look like upon completion. It can’t even handle server side includes.
Granted, Dreamweaver isn’t perfect in it’s parsing of such things, but GoLive is an order of magnitude worse.
Was this review helpful to you?
|Solid Adobe product – but not intuitive,
I recently tried out the free download version of two web editors. Adobe GoLive 6.0 and Namo Web Editor 5.5 (also on Amazon). Of the two, I chose Namo WE5.5, as superior. While GoLive seems to offer almost all the features I wanted, it certainly wasn’t intuitive. The price was/is a bit high as well at $….
On the other hand, Namo WebEditor 5.5 had all the same features, plus more, and was more intuitive. Not to mention the $… price tag, which can’t be beat. Templates, dynamic menus, site management, dynamic content, server side scripting with ASP, JSP and PHP, yea they both have it.
As time goes on, I may use GoLive more often, but for the moment I believe Namo is superior. The fact that both output clean HTML helps, and I am actually able to switch back and forth between both editors.
Was this review helpful to you?
|Great for you OSX users,
I have used Frontpage and Dreamweaver in producing web pages over the past few years. Most of my sites have moved to dynamic webpages using PHP/MySQL on Unix based systems. Adobe GoLive has great support for PHP and MySQL on an OSX based system allowing one to develop sites locally and test them before deployment. This is a cool feature mainly found on the Mac OSX version as I have not used this program on a windows Machine. The closest I come is running Windows 98SE via Virtual PC.
If you use a work group to create webpages, the Adobe WebDEV server is great for manageing changes amoung the different designers. WebDev took a couple installs to work correctly on our MAC workstation that doubles as our development/test server, but once it was set up, it has been easy to use and stable.
The one feature that Golive lacks compared to DW is no intergration of BBedit text editing software. There are still some mac coders that can’t live without BBEdit and I am one of them. The lack of cross support with BBedit is why I gave this a 4 star rating instead of a 5.
Was this review helpful to you?
|Second to None.,
I almost couldn’t believe how easy it is to learn Flash animation until I tried Adobe LiveMotion 2! You’ve got to be a Flash MX student first to really appreciate how Adobe made a powerful, easier alternative to authoring Flash movies. This is not to put down Flash MX which has superb qualities of its own. But as far as ease of Flash animation is concerned, LiveMotion 2 is second to none!
It’s more intuitive. There are no esoteric routines to memorize, like long-winded rule on symbols convertion. In LiveMotion 2, you draw, drag, scale, or change the color of your objects to your heart’s content directly in the composition window without worrying about symbolism or motion guides. LiveMotion takes care of the behind-the-scenes routines so you can concentrate on your composition.
There are no Lilliputian timeline and frames to hurt your eyes. You would rejoice at LiveMotion’s cool, more visible object-timeline. You’ll find it laid out like a control center, so using it would feel like second nature to you. You just toggle the properties you want to appear. Dazzling effects (if that’s what you want) are just a breeze in LiveMotion 2.
Ah, but I can’t say all of it’s benefits! It’s like Adobe really listened to the pained voices of many learners who had to struggle the steep learning curve of Flash. This software spared users from having to deal with convoluted rules in Flash authoring. The result is a simple, powerful Flash composition program that is as easy to learn as it is natural! You’ve got to try LiveMotion 2 for yourself to see what I mean!
Was this review helpful to you?
|Problems with Livemotion 2,
First let’s agree that Livemotion will always be playing catch up with Flash, as Macromedia controls the SWF specification. However, I believe when SVG becomes a more important Web standard, Livemotion will transition to support that SVG as its primary format.
Primary Pro:
Superior animation timeline (compared to Flash) and ability to import motion and elements from After Effects. “Integration” with other Adobe applications.
Primary Cons:
Converts TOO MANY objects and effects into bitmaps. No line styles! Animation import from After Effects is limited, with MOST work being converted to fat bitmaps.
The limited After Effects import capability and lack of line styles can be frustrating at times (ok, most of the time). Yet even with these restrictions, I find Livemotion a more comfortable environment to work in (I am bred on Illustrator and PhotoShop) than Flash. If you use PhotoShop, Illustrator, and/or After Effects, you should really download the demo and visit the Adobe Website to utilize the freely available Livemotion streaming video tutorials.
Was this review helpful to you?
|Discontinued by Adobe,
Effective November 15, 2003, Adobe will no longer distribute LiveMotion 2.0. Though Adobe has decided to concentrate its efforts in other areas, we want to thank our loyal LiveMotion customers for their support. Adobe will maintain person-to-person technical support for LiveMotion until March 31, 2004. In addition, complimentary technical support will be available until further notice via the Adobe Support Knowledgebase and User to User Forums on the Adobe Web site.
http://www.adobe.com/products/livemotion/main.html
Was this review helpful to you?
|