Macromedia's Struggle

Posted on October 09, 2002

in Commentary & Society

by Matt Liotta (DevilM)

Rated 3.09 (Ratings: 23) (Add your rating)

Want more?

More articles in Commentary & Society
More articles by DevilM

Matt Liotta

Member info | Full bio

User since: March 11, 2002

Last login: March 11, 2002

Articles written: 6

Macromedia started out as a developer of animation products for the CD-ROM world only to find that market being quickly replaced by the burgeoning World Wide Web. Their product line was quickly changed to attack this new market. Two of the products it introduced, DreamWeaver and Flash, became the most widely used products in their respective categories. More recently, Macromedia acquired Allaire, which brought with it three important products: HomeSite, ColdFusion, and JRun. HomeSite, like DreamWeaver, was the most widely used product in its category and seemly competed with DreamWeaver. ColdFusion and JRun were both pioneers in the Web application world that had strong followings. These five products effectively guaranteed Macromedia a spot on almost every Web developer’s desktop, and in some cases, their servers as well.

However, the heady days of the dot-com boom were ending, and Macromedia’s balance sheet wasn’t pretty.

J2EE Proved to Be a Stiff Competitor

While the Flash player was having unparalleled success, sales of Flash the application and DreamWeaver were down. At the same time, the industry was standardizing on J2EE, and ColdFusion was suffering as a result. Furthermore, JRun wasn’t competing that well. This all left Macromedia with a fat payroll and suffering sales. What they needed was a way to make ColdFusion competitive, a way to generate revenue from Flash, and, of course, cut costs. The solution the company saw was the MX product line.

Their first step was to rebuild ColdFusion as an application on top of J2EE. This allowed Macromedia to maintain a single application server (JRun) instead of two as well as make ColdFusion competitive with the rest of the J2EE market. Next, they extended Flash to become a complete GUI toolkit, allowing it to emerge from its days as a simple animation plug-in. Thus, Flash fulfilled the undelivered promise of Java applets; a cross-platform browser based GUI platform.

Finally, they built support for Web services into Flash, ColdFusion, and JRun. With support for Web services, Flash developers could build GUIs for Web applications without worrying about back-end integration. Further, ColdFusion and Java developers could build back-end services with Flash as their presentation tier instead of HTML. Macromedia coined the term Rich Internet Application for applications, based on the integration of Flash with a back-end based on Web services.

Macromedia is back in the black now, but apparently without much help from their new MX product line, which to date has generated only lackluster sales. The Flash and ColdFusion communities are abuzz with excitement over the new capabilities of these products. However, all is not right at the top for Macromedia.

Why Macromedia’s Own Employees Are Squabbling

The Flash community--dominated by designers--is having a tough time adapting to the object-oriented approach of developing with Flash MX components. This leads to a realization that while the new capabilities of Flash are quite exciting, you have to be an engineer to make use of them. Worse, the ColdFusion community is having a hard time accepting ColdFusion MX. The promised backward compatibility is only superficially there; the syntax is backward compatible, but the behavior is often not. Also, to make use of Web services and integrate with Flash requires an understanding of object-oriented concepts most ColdFusion developers have been able to avoid. This is made absurdly obvious by Macromedia’s own employees; those with object-oriented backgrounds often can be seen squabbling with those who don’t on various public mailing lists.

Also of note is DreamWeaver MX, which replaced not only the previous version of DreamWeaver, but also HomeSite. Much to the chagrin of Macromedia, neither former DreamWeaver or HomeSite users have been excited by the latest offering. The complaints range from it being buggy to slow to just too much. What is clear is that people who formerly bought DreamWeaver for its Web-site design functionality aren’t too interested in a back-end development IDE, while the people who formerly bought HomeSite for its plain and simple tag-based text editing aren’t too happy with the overhead of a full-on Web site design tool.

A person might also ask what Macromedia’s true focus is these days. From all indications, it is Flash, while many might argue it should be ColdFusion, because Flash’s revenue-generating potential is significantly smaller. Their latest developer convention also shows their bias toward designers, because most of the sessions are not meant for developers.

Maybe it is simply that Allaire spent a great deal of energy on the ColdFusion community, and things just aren’t the same with Macromedia. It’s hard to say, because there does seem to be more community participation from Macromedia, but it doesn’t seem focused or well organized. In fact, a person could find one’s self both praised and criticized by different members of the company. Some have even gone as far as penalizing people who ask hard questions publicly (e.g. removal of beta access).

It’s Not Too Late for the Company to Change Direction

No one can deny that Macromedia is a significant player in the Web industry and has the attention of many Web developers. The question is whether Macromedia has climbed to the top only to fall because they are forgetting the very people who got them there.

The MX product line holds great potential, but its managers need to better take into account what the users are saying. We are excited by the promise of the MX product line, but we want good products and a company committed to them. That company could be Macromedia, or it could be the next company that wants a shot at the top.

Will Macromedia’s struggle to the top ultimately be for nothing? Only Macromedia can decide.

Matt Liotta started his development career at the age of twelve by building C applications for faculty at Emory University. He built his first web page soon after the release of Mosaic 1.0. Excited by early web applications, Matt saw the potential to replace legacy client server applications. At Emory University he built an enterprise calendaring system, the faculty poster project, a Y2K compliance tracking application, and a prototype for an electronic research administration system.

Since then he worked with an early ASP, Cignify, to build their transaction processing system for payroll time data. For this project, Matt created a message queuing system to connect significant bodies of code in C++ and VB with the main application server. He also built a code distribution system for Consumer Financial Networks, as well as the first online account management system for Grizzard Communications. Matt did consulting around San Francisco for companies such as Williams Sonoma and Yipes Communications.

Soon after, he built gMoney's Group Transaction System using an innovative XML messaging architecture for ColdFusion that matches conceptually with the now popular web services paradigm. He also wrote a C++ knapsack algorithm to realize nearly a 20-fold improvement over a similar approach written entirely in CFML. Later at TeamToolz, he designed a highly secure and scalable network architecture for ColdFusion to support N-tier transport agnostic distributed applications. He then went on to implement a cutting-edge content management system for DevX. He is now President & CEO of Montara Software, which he recently founded.

Matt is also a frequent speaker on web architecture:

Moving Legacy Applications to the Web (Emory Web Developers Users Group, Atlanta --Feb, 98)
The Benefits of Web-based Enterprise Calendaring (Emory Web Developers Users Group, Atlanta -- Aug, 98)
Monitoring and Managing Services Remotely Using TAPI (Atlanta Visual Basic Users Group, Atlanta -- Nov, 99)
Scalable, Extensible Cold Fusion Architecture (Bay Area ColdFusion Users� Group, San Francisco; Aug, 00)
Scalable, Extensible Cold Fusion Architecture II (CF_Scale Conference, Washington, D.C. -- Nov, 00)
Cold Fusion Scalability Panel (CF_Scale Conference, Washington D.C. -- Nov, 00)
Introducing CF Espresso (including white paper) (CF_South Conference, Orlando -- Feb, 01)
Utilizing Reverse Proxies (Web Services World, San Jose -- Apr, 01)
Cold Fusion on Linux (A CF Odyssey Conference, Washington, D.C. -- Jun 01)
Architecting Web Services (Web Show 2001, San Francisco -- Sep, 01)
Code Techniques in MX Panel (Bay Area ColdFusion Users' Group, San Francisco -- Jul, 02)
ColdFusion Cruise, May, 03

37 comments on this article. Log in to add your comment | Rate this article:

Dreamweaver and complexity

Submitted by JohnColby on October 10, 2002 - 04:37.

Good stuff.

Is the slow takeup of the MX range because it is now seen as too complex? Or is it because Flash written with earlier versions is still plays? To my limited exposure there�s much less of a sea change between DW4 and DWMX as there was between DW3 and DW4. Are sales suffering because not enough people are upgrading and/or because it�s a big load of money to buy outright?

Or is the code generated wrong? Is it non-compliant with modern web language trends? It can be made compliant, but at what cost of effort? And out of the box does it support XHTML 1.1? Think not, but am prepared to be corrected. And what about accessibility? I know that this is a big problem � is this adequately addressed?

So is the Dreamweaver suite now just too big with too much in?

DWMX

Submitted by grubi on October 10, 2002 - 05:34.

Actually, I quite like many of the new things in Dreamweaver MX, and I think they may be headed in the right direction. As for supporting XHTML, it does a terrific job there, giving me appropriate hell (in the built-in validator) when dealing with our programmer's ASP.NET code. Other than a couple of bugs and the not-so-great way it handles Word-created HTML (don't ask), it's a terrific piece of work. Of course, I may be idealizing DW.

really?

Submitted by carlitos on October 10, 2002 - 08:25.

Wow,

I had no idea that the sales of this product haven't been great. I come from the old school of hand coded html developers and I had stayed away from Dreamweaver because of its terrible html code (and even if that wasn't the case, I just didn't like it). I also stayed away from flash because I knew that my animation/art skills weren't that great and this program seemed to cater to the more design prone folks.

However, a couple of weeks ago I attended macromedia developer seminars in new york and was utterly impressed.

The intergration of the software is wonderful. The expandability of the applications is phenomenal (thanks to extensions). The power on all ends is amazing. And the commitment to upgrade all products as a suite (au meme temps) is commendable.

Perhaps the applications haven't found an audience or have irritated past users because they utterly change the way things have been done and focus on the way they will be done (or at least a particular way that relies on the most talked-about open technologies (XML, Web Services, OOP, vector graphics, web applications, etc) ).

I feel that macromedia knows that the only way to survive these days is to build applications that are powerful and flexible, and one might even say extensible... mx in my opinion achieves this fairly well... better than any other single product from any other single company... I think.

Asking hard questions...

Submitted by jedimaster on October 10, 2002 - 09:28.

Disclaimer: I am a Macromedia employee. You said, "Some have even gone as far as penalizing people who ask hard questions publicly (e.g. removal of beta access). " This cannot be father from the truth. No one at Macromedia "punishes" people for negative comments. You have complained about stuff for a very long time before your beta access was removed. You know why it was removed, and it had nothing to do with complaining. You chose to publish information that, while not technically under NDA, was information that any reasonable person would know was meant to be kept secret. I'm not going to argue that with you - the point is - you were NOT removed because you complained.

RE: Asking hard questions

Submitted by DevilM on October 10, 2002 - 09:58.

My article was covering general issues that I have been exposed to without getting into specifics of who did what when. I more than capable of showing how Macromedia has penalized people (myself included) for their actions, but I chose not to. I was hoping that by avoiding the specifics I could spare the various people involved from any embarrassment. However, to speak directly to your claim, I am a member of the press. It is well understood that when sharing information with members of the press that unless you explicitly ask for that information to be withheld then that information is free to be revealed. This concept applies to people in general who aren't members of the press as well. Hence why NDAs were invented in the first place.

RE: Asking hard questions (2)

Submitted by jedimaster on October 10, 2002 - 10:55.

I did not comment about the main issues brought up in your article. However you made the point that Macromedia penalizes people for complaining. You are free to make that point, but it's complete BS unless you prove it. Show me the people who have been penalized for complaining, and if you are correct, I will do everything in my power to rectify the situation. If you can't prove it, then retract it.

RE: Asking hard questions (2)

Submitted by DevilM on October 10, 2002 - 11:07.

I happy to debate any issue you like. However, this is not the forum for such debates. I would suggest instead that you make use of a public mailing list like possibly CF-Talk or thelist instead.

Isn't this what a comments system is for?

Submitted by jedimaster on October 10, 2002 - 11:14.

Why would this not be the forum? You made the statement here. Defend it here.

RE: Isn't this what a comments system is for?

Submitted by DevilM on October 10, 2002 - 11:24.

I believe the comment system is meant to allow readers to make comments in regard to the article. You have certainly done that, but now are asking for further clarification on one of my points that will most certainly result in a debate. Having that debate here would make it hard for others to comment on other points in the article since so many of the comments would be off topic. Again, I am willing to enter into the debate, but I won't do it here. As such I will be ignoring any more of your comments in regard to this particular subject unless the are done in a more appropriate forum. Of course you are free to comment on the other points raised, which I think are certainly more important anyway.

Well...

Submitted by jedimaster on October 10, 2002 - 11:36.

You are certainly free to ignore me. Therefore, I am now speaking to the other people who are reading this thread. I certainly do not speak for Macromedia as a whole, I can only give my opinion as I see things. I have worked with the ColdFusion community for a long time, long before I came to Macromedia. I have never known Macromedia, or Allaire, to 'punish' someone for complaining. Matt, you may chose to ignore this, but I hope everyone else comes away from this with at least another perspective. I hope that you consider the fact that the author refused to back up his claims with facts to be an indication of how much faith you can put in those claims.

Somewhat misleading . . .

Submitted by ndintenfass on October 10, 2002 - 12:22.

Although I agree with you that Macromedia is struggling to find a clear focus now that they are trying to embrace both designer and developer communities (each of which is fairly diverse by themselves), I think there are a few points that could be very misleading to someone unfamiliar with the situation.

First, I have to agree with jedimaster that you offer little proof for your claim that MACR is punishing people who make negative comments. Because you made a mistake in publishing information that was clearly given to you in confidence does not give you the right to express your sour grapes by bashing Macromedia's integrity.

Second, although there are certainly a few notable backwards compatibility issues with CFMX I can say that I have found VERY FEW that impact applications that I have tried porting to the new platform. To say the backwards compatibility is "superficial" is simply not true -- I have my beefs with the CFMX release, but I can say from my experience participating in the beta that the engineers who build CFMX bent over backwards to maintain backwards compatibility and succeeded in almost every area (even when the community pleaded with them to "fix" behaviors that are legacy).

Third, to say that DreamweaverMX has been generally poorly received is totally false. I don't use DreamweaverMX. I am a die-hard ColdFusion Studio user. But, almost every review I read is positive. Most of the users I have talked to are very positive. Yes, it's not CF Studio. And yes, it has some problems with performance on slower machines, but to make people believe it has been anything other than widely hailed as a success (sales aside) is disingenuous.

The unfortunate part about these issues is that your overall point is right on -- Macromedia is unfocused and not always doing a good job of channeling its energies. Too many audiences, too many different messages, too much emphasis on "Rich Internet Applications" while not not enough on supporting the developers who use each of the tools -- these are real problems, but you dilute your message in this regard.

Design and Development in One

Submitted by paulpsd7 on October 10, 2002 - 12:23.

Great points. The general theme of what has happened with Dreamweaver and Flash is that their target markets have expanded, along with the possibilities of what you can now do with those tools. The problem for Macromedia is the new target markets haven't clocked onto the new reality. DW and Flash started off as tools for designers. Now they have evolved into tools for developers as well. However, since most designers make poor programmers and vice versa, it now takes designers AND programmers working together to take DW and Flash to their full fruition. It's going to take some time for the teams and the funding to come together to enable all this. But once they do, this technology will be driving the next generation of web applications.

RE: Somewhat misleading

Submitted by DevilM on October 10, 2002 - 12:57.

In regard to your first point, let me say that it would be impossible to write an editorial that made all the points mine did and provide enough background for each of the points to make everyone happy. Additionally, to state that I was given information clearly in confidence with regard to the JRun Service Pack beta program is entirely false and I challenge anyone to show otherwise.

With regard to your second point, I am glad that you have had very few issues. Unfortunately, not everyone is finding the same thing. Looking through the archives of CF-Talk shows a number of people having issues. Also, looking through CF BugHunt shows a number of backwards compatibility issues.

Finally with regard to DreamWeaver, I find your comments very interesting. I have yet to talk with a former CF Studio (HomeSite) user that is happy with DreamWeaver. You seem to even agree with this statement as well as with the fact that DreamWeaver sales aren't very good. Yet, you think DreamWeaver has been positively received. Further, I haven't heard any positive reviews of DreamWeaver at BACFUG any BACFUG meetings -- which you run -- except for one notable exception, which was a review from a Macromedia employee.

Macromedia, then and now

Submitted by wsj3 on October 10, 2002 - 14:09.

I've been a MM developer, user and fan since I left Apple in 1990. It's a great company which makes great products. I've had a hiatus for the last two years, focused on network infrastructure development, but am now going to dive back in with the new MX product line. The concept of Rich Internet Application seems right on and is something which much needed to build out the next generation of web-based technology. I would be inclined to believe that any financial woes for MM are based on the incredibly weak economy and tech spending being slashed. Also, remember that a lot of MM customers are free-lancers and small shops, which I'm sure have been severly impacted by the economy. I believe that people who are exposed to the direction MM is heading with MX see enormous potential which is only beginning to be exposed. Ask yourself what the alternatives are for price and accessibility to an integrated IDE.

Re: Backwards Compatibility

Submitted by Jeff Howden on October 10, 2002 - 16:36.

I've ported a number of applications, some very complex, from ColdFusion 5 to ColdFusion MX and have only found two very minor/obscure problems (one of which may already have been fixed).

Using a variable reference that contains square brackets inside the PreserveSingleQuotes() function causes an error. To avoid it you must assign it to a temporary variable first and then use that temporary variable in the call to the PreserverSingleQuotes() function.
In my particular development setup, everything is piped through IIS's 404 handler. When using url tokens to maintain session, sessions break if the url tokens are the only url variables in the query string. (View thread on Macromedia's ColdFusion forum.)

I won't say that I don't have my own share of issues with CFMX, but all things considered (like the fact that this is a complete rewrite in another language), this version is amazingly similar to the previous version.

.jeff

Development of Flash

Submitted by webqs on October 11, 2002 - 05:55.

I've been a user of Flash since v3.. way back when the coding window was tiny, there were ~15 actions and you had to use Aftershock to export for the web. Back then Flash was pointed pretty much solely at the designer/animator, this continued with the release of v4. Flash 5 was the first real move to a developer based Flash version by the way of dot based sysntax allowing easier communication between instance and making tellTarget redundant. Now with MX actionscript being ECMA compliant the split is about 50/50. I think MM should be commended in the way they have marketed and sold Flash to the masses. Remember that Flash is a "bipolar" product - the editor and the player. Getting the player so widespread in the last few years is a good achievement, considering the 'fear of download' factor at play. It is difficult enough getting the general public to use a non MSIE browser let alone a third party plugin for the browsers. It is difficult selling people Flash as well... the prevailing conception is of large download size and unwanted 'flashy' animations... and this is where the development side of Flash balances the whole package out making lighter, more friendly apps for your audience to use. I love Flash - it lets me blend my architectural and programming skills in a way that other programs can't... Other than Flash I don't have much experience with other MM packages - I tend to handcode everything I do, mostly PHP - native or with Flash and/or mySql. Cheers James

MACK, Mack, mack.... What flavor is this anyway?

Submitted by FusionRatt on October 11, 2002 - 13:15.

Matt, Albeit I did find you article interesting, I could not help but notice the funky after taste it left behind

It certainly is not my intention to insinuate your writing style is in question, because it is obvious your a very intelligent and educated person. However; I was perplexed in the direction it took half way through the article. It started out objectively and quickly took on a tone of someone who was firing back for some personal reason or agenda that does not really contribute to the ethos of your argument.... When I got toward the end of your article it was kind of like drinking a glass of orange juice after brushing my teeth -- blah :(

Be that as it may, your premise did ring some truth of validity. I say this with regards to how I was treated as an Allaire CF developer vs. how I am treated as an MM CF developer. I do remember the good ole' days when I felt like Allaire considered CF developers one of there biggest assets. I knew there was something special about the group that called themselves CF developers. This was particularly solidified after the first ColdFusion Developer's Conference in Boston. Allaire actually listened to us. Today, well -- just read the boards. But that's another issue except to say that a good majority of the whinning and complaints are frivolous.

So what�s my point? I think it is important to put some perspective on the issues you discussed. First and foremost, the last couple of years we have all seen a tremendous amount of change not only with the Allaire, Macromedia and the Internet in general but with the economy. I don't think it is fair to expect that the shift in Macromedia's technology and market posture should have been transparent. These are hard times we live in and the demands of developers and designers alike are greater than ever before. Without writing an article myself, I am willing to cut MM a little slack. If the employee's are squabbling -- okay, it is an unfortunate reaction to one company being acquired by another company. If new and improved products require people to broaden their perspective skill-sets, well that�s an indication that the Internet is truly beginning to mature and the 'laissez-faire' of our industry demands it.

I do agree that on the surface, from this developers perspective, Macromedia/Allaire seams to have forgotten about the people that helped them get there. I do hope it gets better for their sake and mine. I'll look forward to reading your next article.

RE: Asking hard questions

Submitted by kwilson on October 12, 2002 - 17:35.

A quick search through the archives of CF-Talk will reveal many instances of former CF Studio users who are pleased with Dreamweaver MX. I'm sure several of them would be pleased to speak with you if you prefer to not rely on their typed comments for your next "press" article. By the way, what recognized press organization are you a member of Matt? Just curious...never seen you in that capacity. Did Montara go belly up forcing you to switch careers?

RE: Asking hard questions

Submitted by DevilM on October 12, 2002 - 23:16.

A quick search through the CF-Talk archives didn�t reveal many instances of people pleased with DreamWeaver. However, a not so quick search through the CF-Talk archives for the last 30 days revealed 9 posts about DreamWeaver with only 1 of the 9 posts being positive. If you could share the instances you refer to with me it would help me to better understand your comment.

Further, if you are interested in what organizations I participate in as a journalist you can refer to my personal web site, which has links to all of the articles I have written that are available online. I also syndicate some of my articles via a 3rd party, so I can be found in various print publications as well.

Finally, I derive great enjoyment out of contributing to the web industry in the form of speaking and writing, which I have done for the last several years in my spare time while working for various companies. To imply that someone can�t both have a fulltime job and write articles is just silly. In fact, I encourage all of my employees to write on the side as it not only helps us as a company, but the employee as well. For example, one of our employees, Luke Bayes is contributing to the Certified Macromedia Flash MX Developer Study Guide . As to the health of my company, Montara Software, we started in March of this year and have quickly grown to 7 employees. Additionally, we have customers using our products, even though our product suite is still in beta. Given the current economic conditions, I would say we are doing quite well.

RE: Asking hard questions

Submitted by kwilson on October 13, 2002 - 05:14.

Only 9 posts out of around 5,000 or so? I'll leave it to you as a member of the "press" to do more thorough research on that subject. Be careful, though, about judging a post as anti-DReamweaver when it's really just a matter of a user trying ot figure out how to replicate Studio functionality in DWMX. Lot's of that type being posted. As for the press status, you have indeed written some interesting articles. But there's a big difference between writing a few tech articles and being recognized as a member of the press. Claiming that status as a defense for revealing something you never should have leaves a bad taste. You deserve better.

RE: Asking hard questions

Submitted by DevilM on October 13, 2002 - 15:36.

Again, please share where you are finding these instance of positive reviews. I did the research and there was only 1 positive post in the last 30 days. Further, I didn't judge any posts as negative in my comment; I simply found only one positive post.

Most people consider any person who writes for a newspaper or magazine a member of the press. Some organizations like conference organizers expand on this and ask for additional criteria e.g. writing 2 or more articles for a recognized publication in the last 6 months. I'm not sure what additional criteria you feel is needed nor do I care as I am quite happy with my status as a journalist whether or not you recognize me as such. Additionally, I never claimed any status as a defense for revealing information I shouldn't. I was simply pointing out that a member of the press is more likely to share information than others. Whether I was a member of the press or not doesn't change the fact that I was under no obligation to keep the information in question secret.

No more HomeSite

Submitted by zincite on October 14, 2002 - 12:51.

I wish Macromedia would have never bought Allaire.

happy with MX so far...

Submitted by webinista on October 15, 2002 - 08:49.

for folks like me who are equal parts techie and creative (don't know if that's good or bad), dreamweaver mx is a god-send. i like being able to do it all in one program. you can see mx as a souped-up version of dreamweaver's code capabilities or a souped-up version of homesite's prototyping capabilities.

the problem (imo) is that there aren't enough technical-visual hybrids ("vistechs"?) to support macromedia's full-featured products. until more designers are required to be techies too (which i find is more common among freelancers and small firms), they'll always have that problem.

i personally am happy with dreamweaver mx. fireworks mx, however, crashes too much even with more than the recommended RAM and little else running). haven't touched flash mx just yet.

What ever happened to Studio?

Submitted by dmccaw on October 17, 2002 - 12:07.

I am a database developer that learned Coldfusion using the Studio environment and was very satisfied with the character/file based development model. Studio had a great deal of utility. I understand that DreamWeaver is ment to replace Studio but, I was happy with Studio.

My great fear when Macromedia bought Allaire, was that Macromedia would try to force me into the DW environment, and force its Flash technology on Coldfusion developers. Appears true, at this point.

I would suggest that Macromedia listen to the employees who are in disagreement and give Coldfusion programmers a new studio with enhanced utilities for working with flash, and allow the Coldfusion programmers and DreamWeaver designers to grow together. I would like to learn flash, but I need to continue ongoing CF development. It would be nice to work in my old Studio environment, but also have access to flash integration tools and help files.

I would also suggest MM hedge thier bets by fostering a non-flash developer environment for developers that do not want to invest in flash technology.

The MX Squabble

Submitted by jmiller on October 17, 2002 - 22:37.

What bothers me the most about the new MX line and the move to Macromedia is the endless squabble about how Allaire was a holy bastion of developer love and Macromedia is a big life-sucking giant who doesn't care about their developers. Frankly, neither one have been overly friendly to me as a developer - technical support for both companies sucked (and sucks, respectively) at best. Getting support from Allaire was laughable, getting support from Macromedia may be good - I don't know, they wanted $250 an hour to tell me why the CFMX product didn't support COM when released so I've not had the pleasure of speaking with a technical support rep from Macromedia. While I'm sure there may be problems with Macromedia I don't think that bringing up the beta issue was entirely appropriate or even relevant to the article, there are, I'm sure, more relevant things to discuss. It sounds like a personal grudge - I think I saw Matt's white outline on Macromedia.com's homepage for most of October talking about how great CFMX is, so obviously there's something more to that than we're getting here - honestly I don't give a crap about any of that.

That said, I have been a DWMX basher since the beta versions and no one has ever disallowed my access to the application. I even run a little FAQ about comfortably moving to another editor (JEdit and ColdFusion) and no one has said word one to me about it. Granted I'm not a "major player" in the community or even a recognizable name, but no one at Macromedia has been any different to me regardless of how loudly I yell about how much I hate DWMX. I've bitched about poor support on OSX, discarded features, technical support, application bloat, ignoring developer's wants, etc. and my status has not changed (that I know of). I have to say that the statements made here - whether groundless or not, are entirely inappropriate and irrelevant to the article and subject at hand.

Now, actually related to the meat of the article - Matt has some dead-on points about developers not accepting DWMX - even if he didn't use the most scientific of methods to report that information. As a die-hard coder I for one can say I loathe DWMX. I love Studio, I love Dreamweaver, but the two together isn't what it's played up to be. As a visual person (my background is design - I'm an art school grad) I can say that what's happened with DWMX has been to add equal parts Studio and Dreamweaver and blend. The effect is sort of like day old beer. Yeah, it's beer, but it sure tastes like shit. It's the best of neither world all packed into a footprint that Goliath would have trouble filling and it speeds along with the predictability and pace of a drunken hippo. Does it have potential? Yes, I'm sure it does - although I can't imagine how they'll make it more functional and faster both.

As a loyal Macromedia customer I can say that I'm concerned about their efforts to integrate all of their products into one big toolbox. It all sounds fabulous from the perspective of a committee made up of programmers, designers, multimedia artists and web developers, but in the real world where often one person is using all of these tools together it can be very difficult to figure out what the hell it all does. I've used Macromedia products for as long as I can remember, but the combination of Studio and Dreamweaver is beyond me. Imagine if Adobe released a PhotoIllustrator - combining the power of Photoshop and Illustrator into one program. It would sound fabulous on paper and no one would ever use it. Sure they both involve "art" as DW and Studio both involve the web, but the application would be so large and unwieldy that it would be totally unusable. Illustrators would switch to Freehand and Photoshop users would be in the same place that us coders are in now - forced to either embrace something we don't want or stick with an old version. This is what Macromedia is doing to us in essence - sticking us with DWMX because it's more cost effective to write one application.

I understand what Macromedia is doing is financially motivated, and I'll support them because I want to see ColdFusion succeed. I bought a subscription to Studio and I got DWMX as the replacement and although I feel slighted by getting an incomplete, nice-try, has-potential application as a replacement for my favorite IDE, I am still happy to support Macromedia with my wallet. I'll cherish my (expensive) DWMX coaster and anxiously await the next (hopefully improved) release in beta form. If things improve I'll buy again, if they don't, I'll stick with JEdit.

Oh, and as far as backward compatability, I think Macromedia did a fabulous job... COM was broken (a 3rd party thing I believe) and that's all I've ran into. I've got some complex CF apps running and the only thing that broke was COM support.

Pathetic..

Submitted by invictus on October 19, 2002 - 16:31.

Matt Liotta's own belligerence makes a profound enough statement without comment, however, I think I speak for many when I say, "Shut the fuck up dude."

Pretty sad...

Submitted by dkerfoot on October 21, 2002 - 08:59.

Goodness Matt, you certainly don't struggle from poor self-image, do you?

A member of the press? What a riot! It's not a term I usually use, but after reading that, the phrase that has stuck in my head is "What a complete wanker!"

You made a statement "Some have even gone as far as penalizing people who ask hard questions publicly (e.g. removal of beta access)." Now defend it.

Clearly, even if you think you deserve some sort of special privilege as a member of the press, you were not removed from beta access because you asked "hard questions publicly." So reporter boy - who HAS been removed from beta access for asking hard questions publicly?

Defend your statement or retract it.

lets stop kicking dead horses

Submitted by nagrom on October 21, 2002 - 10:22.

Alot of people seem to be focusing on specific statements in this article, but I think on the whole it is saying something important.

Macromedia does appear unfocused, which does seem a little suicidal since they just unleashed a new product line. Personally, I think it's more a result of the downward-spiraling US economy. However, it is a little unfair to not look at the complete Macromedia product line in this discussion.

Director remains a strong player in the market, and is still the number one choice for authoring complex cd/dvd/multimedia projects. Fontographer also remains a staple in every graphic designers toolkit, with good reason. Freehand is the only product on the market that competes with Illustrator, etc etc. These products may have less to do with web design, but they are major contributors to Macromedia's bottomline.

Its also worth pointing out that Macromedia has really tried to conglomerate their web development tools. I for one am glad that they dropped interdev, and drumbeat (which should never have seen the light of day). I don't use dreamweaver MX, mainly because it runs like a full-screen java app, and I prefer the hand coding enviroment of CfStudio.

I also think that FlashMX is a more naturally evolved product than it has been credited for. It has *never* been possible to create good flash movies without scripting, to say this is all new in MX shows a lack of experience working with older versions of Flash.

My CFMX 2 cents -- I've been porting sites to MX from CF4.5 with no problems (I obviously dont do any COM)...but I thnk they've really done an excellent job. One site I recently converted, I also moved from a FoxPro DB to an MsSQL one--all problems encountered were DB-related, or were really bad code that was wrong to start with.

So, let's discuss the article in the comments, and the points it addresses. Matt's personal career, and whether or not you like him, really have no place here.

OK - No Dead Horses

Submitted by dkerfoot on October 22, 2002 - 07:14.

Sure we can remove the personal comments, but I think we are still owed a defense of his comments or a retraction:

You made a statement "Some have even gone as far as penalizing people who ask hard questions publicly (e.g. removal of beta access)." Now defend it.

Clearly, you were not removed from beta access because you asked "hard questions publicly." So, who HAS been removed from beta access for asking hard questions publicly?

Defend your statement or retract it.

Homesite isn't dead.

Submitted by hereticmessiah on October 23, 2002 - 13:49.

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned Homesite+, which comes with Dreamweaver MX. I think DWMX sucks myself, but Homesite+, which incorporates the meaty goodness of Allaire's Studio variants into Homesite, pretty much rocks. It's a pity they try to hide it on the installation disc rather than telling you about it.

HomeSite+

Submitted by jmiller on October 23, 2002 - 15:15.

Yes, it's included, but it's ColdFusion Studio 5 with some features removed due to a lost lawsuit with Adobe. If you already have Studio 5 then it's not much of an upgrade. It is however an excellent editor if you don't already have a copy of Studio ... and it's cheaper (even with DWMX) than Studio was.

Indeed you're right.

Submitted by hereticmessiah on October 24, 2002 - 02:11.

I didn't bother getting CF Studio 5 myself. At the time it didn't really seem worth it. Homesite+, was a different story. MacroMedia gave free CDs with full copies of the whole MX series on them, though CFMX was the developer version, to our local CFUG. Cheap? I should say so!

Anyway, the features that were removed weren't really all that important, but serve as proof that software patents are counterproductive, but that's a discussion for a different day and a different forum.

Listening

Submitted by flybynight on October 27, 2002 - 22:41.

I have been a relatively happy owner of Dreamweaver/Fireworks Studio 3 and 4. While it has,at times, been unwieldy to use with all of its tools, it has brought our site from a "just so-so" html site to a pretty professional one (with the time I have). But, we can't afford to use MX anything. The price is just too big to swallow for people, not professionals, who are just trying to put together a nice site. Even with the upgrade it's $350 for the studio version. For new webmasters, who's willing, just starting out, to put $700 into an interface? We told them this in the surveys. We'd be glad to buy if the price was right. Also, as to the issue of focus, on some of the php sites I visit, there are quite a few comments about the php interface being pretty mediocre.

PHP and Dreamweaver

Submitted by webqs on October 28, 2002 - 06:33.

I agree, most PHP developers like myself will use a code editor such as PHPEd or Notetab etc. The PHP developers I know that use DW use it in code window mode. My question is what's the point of using a pricey wysi(n)wyg tool if it's going to be used like a freeware or shareware code editor? Do I really need a tool that adds <? to my code when I can just type in "<?".... The best PHP interface is a naked code editor. I get asked sometimes if there is drudgery in hand coding.. no, there is none - especially when I can build up my own library of includes and functions to call on in a script - and I have full control over my script and hardly ever ask the questions "What's it doing now?" and "Why did it do that?". I have only one MX tool - Flash (see my comments above)... and I recouped the outlay on the first two projects I completed after purchase. Cheers James

Studio MX is Macromedia's Most Popular Product

Submitted by carlitos on November 7, 2002 - 13:15.

Funny,

But this article seems more and more dubious when it faces the scrutiny of members and plain old facts. Here's the link:

http://www.macromedia.com/macromedia/proom/pr/2002/studiomx_popular.html

There's got to be a better way

Submitted by rainlion on November 26, 2002 - 14:34.

First, I'd have to say that a press release from the makers of the application(s) in question, inherently has as much OBJECTIVE, unbiased information as Matt's original posting. So... sorry Carlitos, but you can't really call it "plain old facts".

On the other hand, I'd much rather have read Matt's clear, coherent, documented and subjective rationales for his statements (which unfortunately I have to agree - lost whatever "journalistic" integrity they might have been granted by a gracious audience as soon as they degenerated into biased and unsupported opinion) rather than being subjected to yet another (in a long shameful tradition) "In my opinion X sucks (never mind why)." Call me Pollyanna, but I'd have though that by now we (Developers and Designers) would have learned that the only way to have a discussion/debate is with objective defendable statements... not vitriol.

Don't get me wrong - I've had a love/hate relationship going with MACR since they were Marcomind, but I still use their products (also still code in notepad...). Personally, I applaud (for the most part) the whole MX initiative... and will give a positive bias to my outlook - until they prove me wrong (which has happened in the past - eventually followed by them resolving whatever the issue is).

Matt (and everyone else) please... please take the time to carefully construct your arguments and statements. There are alot of confused and un/inexperienced users who in the middle of trying to come to grips with their own development/design burdens who are more harmed by these sort of comments than helped. Fine, tell them it sucks... but then give them objective examples of why you say that so they can then decide for themselves. Having it all degenerate into back and forth sniping certainly won't help them... and isn't going to make you or any other author/commentator seem any more knowledgable.

Anyway... typos and grammar aside, I just had to get that off my chest. Now all of you... go build something! :)

Confused Man

Submitted by indee on November 29, 2002 - 05:23.

Hmm After reading this article I am really confused. Did I invest my money in a wrong product. I recently bought the Macromedia Studio MX, after using Ultradev for two years. I am not a big time web developer but with my clients (SME's) I can deliver them the websites pretty fast using this products. I like the integration of homesite in dreamweaver because I do sometime customize the codes. I think this product is worth its penny. The studio does everything I need so my 100% with Macromedia keep it up.

Start of page header

Article Categories

Highest rated articles

Submit

Recent comments

Macromedia's Struggle

Want more?

Matt Liotta

J2EE Proved to Be a Stiff Competitor

Why Macromedia’s Own Employees Are Squabbling

It’s Not Too Late for the Company to Change Direction