Rapidweaver vs sandvox vs freeway how to#
Rapidweaver vs sandvox vs freeway mp4#
Rapidweaver vs sandvox vs freeway software#
Rapidweaver vs sandvox vs freeway trial#

Rapidweaver vs sandvox vs freeway software#

I know it´s best practice to resize pictures before adding them to a project, but then why I need a software like RW. This scaling in % while not seeing the real size in px is driving me crazy. Implement a better way to resize pictures.

Rapidweaver vs sandvox vs freeway trial#

If I think about “Bigger” ,“Smaller”, “Ignore Formating”, 'Clear Formating'and the HTML folder it reminds me of endless trial & error sessions and a GUI that has huge space for improvements. You got mails from me already with some more detailed explanations some month ago. This functionality was inherited from version to version and it´s basically still the same as in RW 2 where I started.

Rapidweaver vs sandvox vs freeway how to#

Take a look at the Format menu, delete the complete code behind and do some brainstorming how to implement the same or more functionality in a completely different intuitive and visual way. Then let the expert addon developers focus efforts on the more specialist or advanced areas. I’d far rather see the core RapidWeaver product improved and broadened for the benefit of complete novice users. For example, 95% of average RapidWeaver users would probably never have need for CMS capabilities. I do not want to see RapidWeaver 8 become a jack-of-all-trades. On the other hand, platforms with drag-and-drop capabilities and the promise of more instantaneous results have continued to thrive.

The demise of Freeway, Macaw and Dreamweaver has been the result of the build process being too convoluted or expensive for the average person. It’s important to note where RapidWeaver currently stands amongst the competition and what the most successful web publishing platforms are doing right - which ultimately RapidWeaver could borrow from. The currently ‘single line’ plain text footer box is frustratingly small. It could also be useful to provide the option for RapidWeaver to automatically detect and convert common links like YouTube, Vimeo and DailyMotion into small embedded media players.Īny further improvements to speed, stability and publishing reliability would be hugely appreciated by all.Ĭan we have a bigger styled text box for website footer content? Frequently people need to create links to website terms and conditions, privacy policies and sitemaps.

Rapidweaver vs sandvox vs freeway mp4#

I agree that RapidWeaver 8 needs better support for SVG, MP3 and MP4 files dragged and dropped into webpages.

Perhaps also a simple guestbook page type that could piggy-back Muut or Disqus. An HTML5 media gallery, columns page, YouTube, Vimeo, and social networking ‘wall’ would add significant value to RapidWeaver. There would certainly be no harm in adding some more basic page types to RapidWeaver 8 - again to help novice users do more without venturing near code or having to invest into lots of additional addons. I think this is something Sandvox has offered for many years. Basically small components (like Google Maps, a simple contact form or embedded video) which complete novice users can drag and drop into any page type with minimal customisability. A method to compete more strongly would be added support for drag-and-drop ‘widgets’ which would fill the gap between code snippets and Stacks. RapidWeaver 8 needs to align itself better and compete directly with platforms like Wix, 1&1 and SquareSpace. And we certainly need more options built into the blog for end users to easily bookmark or share individual articles to social media platforms. text, markdown, image, video or sound) like Tumblr does would be nice to have. The summaries page should provide the option of a masonry grid layout and pagination. I agree with others that the RapidWeaver blog needs some more love.

A prime example would be letting users choose their own theme widths, breadcrumb separators or mobile breakpoints - instead of relying on a limited number of preset options or hard-coding everything into a theme. Then developers can provide themes with significantly more flexibility, but with a fraction of the codebase. Basically bringing the theme API up to the same level as the Stacks API. I’d like support for more input types in theme style settings please - like number boxes, text inputs, link select buttons and styled text.