In order to create HTML websites the traditional designers can make use of the tool Adobe Muse (now in beta) without dealing with code.
In a few words, if your time is consumed in Design and Photoshop then you continue on the Internet, Muse (the code name for Adobe’s shall be officially-launched shortly) might be a blessing for you. And if you feel a little bit more fit in the aforesaid tools than in a code editor, Muse is yet something you’ll want to test out.
WYSIWYG editors have been looking into the matter for fairly some time; commonly speaking, they have a tendency to make fair to middling-looking websites and spaghetti code that would give any developer a migraine. So how is Muse different from others?
To begin with, designers can use known tools such as Photoshop and Fireworks during the formation process rather than hacking jointly. JPEGs and CSS snippets in a WYSIWYG editor. In fact, one can import whole .PSD files into Muse.
Secondly, Muse makes amalgamating web-friendly content easy. For organizing page navigation there’s a flowchart-like, drag-and-drop interface. Designers can put together videos, maps and other interactive web content with the “Insert HTML” menu option. There’s also a complete documentation of widgets for interactive stuffs such as menus, slideshows and more.
Most notably, though, designers are well-known with print production will welcome the familiarity of Muse’s design interface. The layout and tools of the screen itself are just so Adobe. One will precisely find typography tools, smart guidelines for alignment and all the other positive features that go for a efficient-grade design work.
And print designers will find this fresh software a lot convenient to operate than Dream weaver which is Adobe’s other web/design hybrid tool. While forming a new site, you don’t have to confront instantly with bewildering terminology that are not concerned to your profession; just pick a page width, number of columns and gutters, and the task is done.
The only thing that’s absent from Muse is website templates. And that’s on purpose, as Muse product manager Danielle Beaumont told Cnet. “I’ll be really honest — templates sometimes really insult visual designers,” she said. In its place, Adobe reflects a motivating gallery online. “Examples of Web sites that [designers] might want to emulate? Sure that makes a lot of sense.”
This is not just some WYSIWYG tool for hacks who require a website. This is a smart tool for specialized innovative experts who need to reach the web but lack the time or endurance to become skilled at how to code. These particular designers know they by no means will be able to code well enough to understand their best designs in digital layout, and they perhaps don’t want to patch up for a slapdash estimation of their visions via consumer website-building tools.
Approved, the code Muse generates is not going to be the victor, but primarily, a designer’s clients (and those clients’ customers) are not that concerned if the final result is a super slick, magazine-like website that completely matches their signage and other print collateral.
Adobe grants site hosting, or sites can be exported and hosted elsewhere. Trial sites can be shaped and hosted without charge for your or your clients’ assessment.
Muse will be in free beta until it is officially out in early 2012. Unlike other Creative Suite products, Muse will be obtainable on a subscription basis because of the need for frequently updated functionality and features for online substance. The anticipated price varies from $15 to $20 per month.
Some of the main features of Muse are:
Sketch your project – its very easy to use sitemaps, master pages, and a host of supple, site-wide tools make it fast and automatic to get your website anticipated and geared up for design.
Get your pages designed – fuse imagery, graphics and text with total control, flexibility and command.
Try to add interactivity – You need to drag and drop entirely customizable widgets like navigation menus and slide shows, set in HTML code snippets to incorporate things like enable tool tips, rollovers, Google maps and even more.
Make your site known – Preview your website with Muse to watch how it appears and experiment how it is functioning. Then convert to a live website with Adobe for hosting, you can send overseas the HTML code for hosting with a source of your liking.
Muse operates more like InDesign than Dreamweaver, Adobe’s proficient web-authoring program, but is a high-quality hybrid of the programs.
The large menu bar plainly points to the steps to bring out a website: a grid-style planning section, a design segment that mimics In Design, a preview section where one can amuse oneself with his site without the need to load it in a browser and a publishing section where everything will be uploaded for you. At the moment, publishing a site needs an Adobe Business Catalyst report, however one can export the files and upload them to his personal server using FTP.
When you make a new site, you can swiftly scheme out the pages using the planning part. Plus (+) buttons to the left and right of the page thumbnail will allow you create individual pages or sub-pages. One can rename these pages by double-clicking on the name. Just clicking the thumbnail on it will show that page in design performa.
Design view is parallel to InDesign, Photoshop or Illustrator. A floating menu palette on the right paves the way towards several characteristics. As a replacement for of a floating toolbar to the left, it’s incorporated with the menu bar. Unlike InDesign and Photoshop, the menu palettes cannot be anchored to the border of the page. They can be shrunken into a single, thin bar showing icons, but when one selects one item it shows the total palette.
If you produce exquisite designing in InDesign, then you’ll feel comfortable in using Muse. I swiftly created a basic layout, though there were some InDesign-specific characteristics I failed to spot a text box more than one column and the align palette. There is no line tool, which I hope is set right very quickly.
However, in addition to these there are things used to web design. For example, when you select text from the dropdown box, Adobe identifies a web-safe font and which fonts will be exported as images. The color picker will let you key in RGB numbers and return the hexadecimal for that color. The eyedropper tool will run over any image and provides the hexadecimal and RGB values in the color picket. There are palettes for wrapping text around images and spacing.
While Muse doesn’t have any premade templates, it does come with fundamental widgets that allow you to add galleries, slideshows, menu bars and only some more options. One will also find web-related palettes such as states, where he can apply an aspect to essentials like rollovers, action upon clicking a mouse, etc.
Preview mode is fine. By dint of it one can test links to external websites from within Muse, and you can also preview by means of external browsers. The publish section is futile if not you have an Adobe Business Catalyst account. I hope that Muse gains fixed FTP client like Dream weaver has.
Muse necessitates installing Adobe AIR, which can be a turnoff for some people. While the fans kicked on, I’ve surely heard them make more noise then they did while operating Muse. The first time I used Muse was excellent, but the next time it locked up upon launch and a force quit was vital at this point. Once it effectively launches, it hasn’t gone down.
Muse needs an Intel Core Duo or quicker processor, OS X 10.6 or higher, at least 512 MB of RAM (1 GB recommended) and Adobe AIR 2.7 or higher.
It’s worth giving the beta a shot as an iWeb substitution. One can view some screenshots in the gallery on top. However, it is absolutely a beta product, and I look forward to a number of features to appear over the next few months as testers think about it.
Adobe Muse – Wrong direction? Yes! (negative points)
It seems August is ‘new product month’ for Adobe. A couple of weeks ago they released the public beta of Edge; a few time ago, it was Muse. Both apps seem to be inspired by similar motivations: The objective of Edge is to make CSS animations simple for Flash developers and Muse aims to make website-building trouble-free for print designers.
I am very skeptical about this.
Don’t misunderstand me: on one hand, I give a round of applause to Adobe for this progress, as it is at least an effort to bring in print designers to the web, and the project aspires to output standards-based code. In addition, a lot of engineers from the InDesign team are occupied on the advancement scheme of Muse, which is hopeful, as? InDesign is Adobe’s top app without a doubt. An InDesign-esque style sheet for a website-authoring UI seems to be a grand idea.
However, caution signs are here in this public beta that recommend Muse is very much an incorrect step.
I’ve only occupied myself around with the app for a few minutes, but right from the commencement, it’s obvious that site formation is nothing but fixed dimensions.
Anyone who has made use of InDesign will feel at ease with a screen like that. But fixed dimensions are not the end of web! We’re to conclude at a stage where we’re moving towards a fluid, responsive web (yes, even this site will be once I finish the redesign!), and focusing it as something that uses fixed measurements just to simplify the conversion for print designers is, undoubtedly, a step backwards. At this particular point the InDesign engineers concerned does not make sense: this app should not be shaped by a print panel.
For a portion of software declaring that it renders standards-based code, its analysis of the term is somewhat liberal. I speedily knocked together a simple page to test the export, and found that the code was?. To judge for yourself, download my test export, which incorporates all of the associated files. Be certain to open index.html in your browser foremost to see how uncomplicated it is, and then recoil in horror as you scroll through the huge CSS files.
Don’t even get me started on typography. We’re in terrible need of a design device that provides type as browsers do and helps web font delivery system. In its place, as Seb reflects, the actual web preview is rendered using the Webkit and displays a file of the user’s installed, non-web-safe fonts below the web-safe list, thus advising the designer that basically any installed font can be made use of.
It does not matter that non-web-safe type will render as images; rendering type as images is a hack that we possess only just drifted away from. To pull this kind of crap is paying no attention to days of tough effort from we web designers who have vigorously struggled to promote things ahead.
A gross misconception
I could go on through out the day registering causes why Muse is a march in the wrong way, but I will leave you with just one final point:
In the opening video, there is an instant at 01:43 where Quality Engineer Jason Prozora-Plein says, “there are people who are passionate about code and there are people who are passionate about design. There are some common characteristics between the two, but it’s very small.” Oh, Jason. You seem like a very pleasant man, but you are incorrect. Many print designers might be scared of HTML and CSS, but there isn’t one world-class web designer operating right now who is unaware of the process of coding.