as a subscriber to my screencasts - I expect you to build them yourself. I know that it’s not complete - but I’ve first to figure out which way we go further.
as a subscriber to my screencasts - I expect you to build them yourself. I know that it’s not complete - but I’ve first to figure out which way we go further.
Cheers
Thomas
LOL
I appreciate your vote of confidence. Unfortunately, I haven’t viewed that Screencast yet, but I certainly will.
I been asked loads but at the moment I can only other a different version for smart phones - I think tablets are fine for normal websites as long as the tech you use is friendly.
So far they have agreed but soon the client will demand it, no matter what I say - just hope FW will del soon either with templates but better still Actions.
Just wanted to say that I was really looking forward to upgrading to version 6 in anticipation of good support for Responsive design creation.
Having read every “responsive” containing post here, I get the clear impression that there is a great deal of specialist code knowledge, under the Freeway hood experience and skill needed to create a responsive website with Freeway. I just don’t have those skills or the time to build them and that is really why I chose Freeway in the first place. I want a tick box and a “follow these few design guides” approach to creating a responsive site.
The Big Erns example at http://cssway.thebigerns.com/products/context-responsive/ is truly impressive and gives me hope that a good looking (partially created Freeway) responsive site is possible and that 3rd party templates will hopefully appear to add the missing functionality.
There is obviously a big hole in the market for a responsive web Freeway type program. Maybe I’m being a bit harsh and premature here but many sites today are already responsive sites so we have already arrived at the point where there is an established and growing demand for them.
I feel your frustration. I am holding out hope in another application suite, let’s call it ‘bedobe cuse’. They are in beta with an app called adobe edge reflow, where you create the responsive layout and then you will be able to import this into bedobe muse, I mean ‘cuse’.
I use both apps for different reasons and you need to see other pieces of software as tools in your toolbox.
What scared me was yesterday I saw a website one of my competitors designed using a Joomla template from RocketTheme that was responsive. I’ve also read that Adobe is working on that feature with Muse. Although many people have criticized Adobe for creating a subscription app service, $14.99 a month is not that expensive if it saves you time and frustration, and enables you to offer your clients better features.
The primary reason I moved from a PC to a Mac some two decades ago was because the technology was getting in the way. I hope that’s not the case here.
The primary issue I can think of here is that a true responsive layout requires a philosophical divorce between layout qua layout and presentation-on-many-screen-sizes. Freeway is a completely brilliant layout tool for fixed static Web sites. I would argue that no other application can write this quality of code and have it presented so identically across platforms and browsers. It maps perfectly between the DTP skills and instincts of a traditional print designer and the Web.
Responsive layouts are more of a mind-game for the designer, no matter what their initial training or experience base. Depending on your methodology, you either use a fixed grid tool like Skeleton or Bootstrap to set up your design and then allow the fixed breakpoints of that tool to do the magic for you, or you follow the “mobile-first” method of building a set of blocks that are free to re-align themselves to larger and larger screens. Of the two, the first technique could more nearly map to Freeway, but it would remove the free-will of the design, and force the designer to follow a limited set of precepts. (Is this a 4-column element, or a 6-column element?) Freeway has never forced you to choose those sorts of “template” designs the way RapidWeaver and its cousins do.
I have built two responsive sites so far, using Skeleton and Bootstrap. These were hand-coding exercises, so I can’t leverage that experience to tell you how Freeway might interact with these kits. But if you were willing to accept some rather huge trade-offs and non-WYSIWYG design environment, it might be possible to make a Freeway layout behave in that manner. It’s not a good fit, though.
Walter
On Feb 7, 2013, at 9:44 AM, Justin Easthall wrote:
Yes! That would be nice. I really don’t know why they haven’t already. It’s like people are scared or something…
But if you were willing to accept some rather huge trade-offs and non-WYSIWYG design environment, it might be possible to make a Freeway layout behave in that manner. It’s not a good fit, though.
Walter
At this point, I’d have to say having some type of solution, albeit limiting, versus no solution is a better option, at least for me.
Heres a four column responsive add-on see the options right bottom column - you simply tell it when to become 2 or 1 columns by choosing a device, orientation or by pixels
I would be quite happy to create a site such as http://bltthemes.com/preview/rapidweaver/gallant/ with Freeway and would accept a reduced functionality in terms of Freeways ability to create great fixed width static sites.
Alternatively I would be happy to use a good responsive theme which would also reduce functionality.
It’s all about having the right set of tools in your bag and reluctance to have to invest in a new tool, learning curve, etc., to keep pace with demand from customers.
Justin, you did that with RapidWeaver? That’s all I want too.
Come on softpress. Please have one of your engineers design us a responsive template. Valentine’s Day is fast approaching and your loyal customers could really use some love.
I would be quite happy to create a site such as Gallant - A Responsive RapidWeaver Theme with Freeway and would accept a reduced functionality in terms of Freeways ability to create great fixed width static sites.
Alternatively I would be happy to use a good responsive theme which would also reduce functionality.
It’s all about having the right set of tools in your bag and reluctance to have to invest in a new tool, learning curve, etc., to keep pace with demand from customers.
I’m starting to get the same feeling I did when I picked Betamax over VHS. I sure hope I’m wrong.