Hi,
Before I start, I am a huge fan of Freeway but just wanted to see what the differences between the two apps are together with pros and cons.
Are there any people out there that have extensively used RW and have resorted back to FW - if so, why?
When it comes to coding, i.e CSS/Javascript/Ajax - which of the two does it better.
Which has the bigger customer base?
Thanks.
Tony.
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
The main thing right off the bat I didn’t like about RW was it’s strickly template based.
Seem restrictive to me.
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Sometime around 28/5/08 (at 10:29 -0400) Tonsils said:
Are there any people out there that have extensively used RW and
have resorted back to FW - if so, why?
I’m afraid that I can’t answer as someone who has spent significant
time as a RapidWeaver user - but that’s because its basic approach to
site creation isn’t one that fits with my desire to build custom page
and site designs.
RapidWeaver is a very well made tool, one that presents the user with
a pre-built abstract of a site structure that is waiting for content.
Freeway is also a very well-made tool, and it is one that presents
the user with a blank page and the tools of a professional designer.
Which approach works best for you really depends on which approach you prefer.
When it comes to coding, i.e CSS/Javascript/Ajax - which of the two
does it better.
In terms of the code that is produced, they both do a great job…
RapidWeaver does so because that’s how the templates and the core
engine work: as long as you use a well-made template, the engine will
deliver well-made code.
Freeway does so because that’s how its sophisticated code generation
engine is designed to work: you create your own layouts and pick the
settings you want, and it works out the optimal standards-based code
that will produce your efforts in HTML form.
Each allows the user to screw things up if they try hard enough, but
in both cases that will involve adding invalid or simply incorrect
custom code by hand; the stuff the tools themselves made is fine.
Okay, it isn’t entirely down to plain end-user error: in Freeway, a
buggy third-party action could produce problems in the output. In
RapidWeaver a buggy third-party template could produce problems in
the output. But same difference really, and still the same
conclusion: the tools themselves work well.
Which has the bigger customer base?
An interesting question, but I’m not sure how relevant it is. The
customer base for Microsoft Word is massively larger than the
customer base for Adobe InDesign - but other than the fact that both
are used to assemble content on pages they are two massively
different products and are used for rather different jobs.
Freeway and RapidWeaver aren’t quite as dramatically different, I’ll
grant, but they are designed to satisfy quite different publishing
needs.
Also, I’ve no idea which has the biggest customer base. 
Any help?
k
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Thanks to you both for your replies. Just wanted to get an indication of what the differences are between the two apps.
Keith - you have explained this perfectly and from the sounds of it, FW is more flexible when it comes to creating your own custom websites whereas it sounds like RW is somewhat purely template driven.
Just one further question on this as I myself haven’t actually used RapidWeaver, but have had a squiz at it - can you not create a website from scratch where the user/developer can design there own websites/templates, like you can in FW?
With regards to “Which has the bigger customer base” - I guess what I mean is more with regards to popular as a web site designer app and from what I can see, there seem to be a few books out there on RW as well as alot of RW YouTube and screencast clips - something I wish FW had more of.
I guess what I can say is that I think that FW is an excellent product - just wished Softpress promoted it more.
Tony.
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
Sometime around 29/5/08 (at 10:39 -0400) Tonsils said:
can you not create a website from scratch where the user/developer
can design there own websites/templates, like you can in FW?
Absolutely. But be aware that creating templates is a major step up
and requires careful planning and technical work. Not to mention
practise.
As a template-focused site production tool it is quite sophisticated.
And that means there is also a level of sophistication that needs to
be allowed for and built into the templates.
k
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
You can, but it’s a mighty tall first step to do so. As I understand
it, RW Templates are simply XHTML files and associated resources. If
you want to break out a text editor and a fat book, you can create a
template from scratch or by modifying an existing one. It would be
nice (kind of funny, in fact) if you could use Freeway to generate
that. Perhaps there’s an Action in there somewhere.
Walter
On May 29, 2008, at 10:39 AM, Tonsils wrote:
Just one further question on this as I myself haven’t actually used
RapidWeaver, but have had a squiz at it - can you not create a
website from scratch where the user/developer can design there own
websites/templates, like you can in FW?
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
For its target (template) audience RW is great; well-designed, modern, nice to use, good price. It seems to be quite popular because it’s easy to use and is probably all that a casual user will need, but like most things it depends on how much work you’re willing (or need) to do to build a site. The right tool for the job as it were.
I don’t know which has the larger user base but if I were to bet I would say RW. However, it seems that RW certainly has greater name recognition, generally speaking.
Todd
On May 29, 2008, at 9:39 AM, Tonsils wrote:
With regards to “Which has the bigger customer base” - I guess what I mean is more with regards to popular as a web site designer app and from what I can see, there seem to be a few books out there on RW as well as alot of RW YouTube and screencast clips - something I wish FW had more of.
I guess what I can say is that I think that FW is an excellent product - just wished Softpress promoted it more.
Quoting Tonsils email@hidden:
With regards to “Which has the bigger customer base” - I guess what I mean is
more with regards to popular as a web site designer app and from what I can
see, there seem to be a few books out there on RW as well as alot of RW
YouTube and screencast clips - something I wish FW had more of.
I suspect RapidWeaver does have the bigger user base although not because it is
a better product than Freeway or created by a better company but simply because
of it’s target market. Freeway is aimed at the hobbyist (Express) to
professional (Pro) web designer whereas RW is more aimed at the content creator
(users who want to get their content online without having to worry about the
site structure and baggage that goes with it). There are exceptions to all the
rules as FW can also work from templates as well as RW can create WYSIWYG
layouts using the Blocks plug-in.
I guess what I can say is that I think that FW is an excellent product - just
wished Softpress promoted it more.
I would imagine that the content you see on YouTube (and generally online) for
RapidWeaver isn’t created by RealMac but by their users (I would need to go and
check this!). As such there isn’t anything to stop anyone here posting their own
tips, tricks, bugs, Easter Eggs, whatever on YouTube and starting the ball
rolling.
I like to think that promoting a product as good as Freeway is as much a job of
it’s users as it is of the parent company. I know I like to evangelize whenever
I can to whoever will listen!
Regards,
Tim.
–
Extend Freeway the way you want with FreewayActions.com
http://www.freewayactions.com
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
On 29 May 2008, at 17:05, email@hidden wrote:
There are exceptions to all the rules as FW can also work from
templates as well as RW can create WYSIWYG layouts using the Blocks
plug-in.
In a limited fashion though. The Blocks plugin is often seen as being
the answer as far as ‘free-form’ WYSIWYG design is concerned, but it
has the same drawbacks as any other system that allows you to put
blocks wherever you want, then have them expand all over each other
as soon as you enlarge the text in the browser. It has other
drawbacks too; whereas you can easily make a Freeway page grow to
contain any content at any text size, the same is not true of Blocks.
Blocks is unable to set a new page height if the content expands
bigger than the current one will hold. I speak as one with some
experience
I would imagine that the content you see on YouTube (and generally
online) for
RapidWeaver isn’t created by RealMac but by their users (I would
need to go and
check this!)
Spot on, Tim. RapidWeaver has an absolutely awesome forum where help
is forthcoming in buckets, very quickly, whenever you need it. It’s
as good as this forum, and that’s saying something. But actual
support from Realmac is sparse to non-existent - they depend on the
forum and the users almost totally. Oddly enough, it works; there are
some really knowledgeable people there, some Walters and Ernies and
Keiths, if you will, and they give of their time and knowledge
unstintingly. The tutorials and YouTube bits are all done by third
parties, enthusiasts.
best wishes
Paul Bradforth
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options
