- Platform: Windows 98 / 2000 / XP, Macintosh
- Media: CD-ROM
- Item Quantity: 1
I've been using MX 2004 exclusively for about a month now. Buying wasn't an easy decision. When I purchase any piece of software, I don't just fill-out some requisition form, I have to spend my own hard-earned dollars. I read and re-read the other opinions posted here at Amazon before I ventured forth and downloaded a trial copy. To be honest, I found some of the criticisms valid, but most just never materialized for me. In fact, I'm more than satisfied that it was a great decision to move up to the new Version 7.0.
Here's my take on the 'cons:'
• 2004 does take a little longer than MX to crank up, probably on the order of 5-6 seconds longer. Regardless, if you run Photoshop, Illustrator or for that matter any Adobe application, you'll find the Dreamweaver MX 2004 start up still very speedy in comparison.
• Other critics have mentioned DW MX 2004 crashes especially with other programs running. Sorry, I just haven't had an occurrence.
• The FTP is just as smooth as MX. The coding seems to work fine for me. I can't identify any sluggishness or other maladies.
But, my computer is a PC running a Pentium 4 (2.40 GHz ) with 512 MB RAM on a very stable Microsoft XP Pro OS. Yes, it is a relatively "fast" computer with enough Ram to run the applications that I need to build my websites. It should be. You can't haul 25 tons of bricks with a pickup truck. If you're investing in top-of-the-line software, you need to have the hardware to support it. (MACs?Read more ›
Also, I noticed some people complained that MX 2004 takes a REALLY long time to load. I might add taht 7.0 was the original version released and then they released an upgrade to version 7.1 for free (that you can get at macromedia.com) and it is supposed to improve "overall performance and stability" according to macromedia, but the version I bought came with v 7.1 so I never experienced 7.0. This could make a difference though.
I didn't notice a lot of improvement in version 4 over 2, so I wasn't that anxious to do the upgrade. But I have to say that I love MX 2004! I won't go into an extensive list of things that I can do in this one that I couldn't before, but suffice it to say, there are a lot of them.
The biggest improvements to me are the more integrated workplace and the ditching of the floating palets. I hated the floating palets! I used the drop-down menues instead because they bugged me so much! I also love the improved FTP/Site Management interface. Secure FTP, people!
The tool is slick and powerfull. Well worth the cost to upgraders. The bad thing: It doesn't like my Amazon Associates code! It tags them as invalid HTML and ignores them when it uploads the site. As a result, I still have to edit those pages in FrontPage and uplaod the site using a traditional FTP client. Not good (this is why it only gets 4 stars).
Also, in the next version Macormedia should add an "as you go" spell checker or at least put a button for spell check on one of the button bars. This is another thing I use FrontPage for. I edit my more text intensive pages in FP and then import them into Dreamweaver.
Don't waste your money on the full suite, though. With the exception of DreamWeaver, none of them are worth the money. I'm glad I qualified for the Academic version (and discount).
The tools are overrated and over priced. If you're a web designer there are free or inexpensive tools that do what you need from Freehand and Fireworx.Read more ›
Web design is something very new for me. I'm a novice if there ever was one, to be sure. Read more