iWeb future: Apple, do you want to ruin my digital life?

Sweeping generalization or not it addresses the user's concern: An iWeb user not sure about the added functionality [server-side] and content of their site with the iCloud transition. Wouldn't a true 'solution' or answer then be to suggest open-source or paid commenting platforms or WordPress integration? RapidWeaver at least has a clear and easy to use commenting implementation..

Flux is really cool. I've looked at it, the site, and the videos. It's a momentus achievement-- for someone who wants a hip, cool, savvy and sophisticated web-authoring tool. By all means download the trial if you want something to learn. I'm a human being; I like simple. I like something that does what i want to do. If I can do it without having to learn more and acclimate myself to a new paradigm, then all the better. That is Apple, this is Apple. If i can save someone some time, energy and money then I think that's great.

I've looked at ALL of these, ALL the alternatives. Downloaded ALL the trials, watched the videos, built [fairly basic/non-coding] sites with all of them, and purchased and like RapidWeaver. Freeway's means of manipulating graphics is clunky and i don't care for the icons etc. It is non-aesthetically pleasing. SandVox is very neat but isn't worth the money to me with, as you as you say, iWeb still being functional and relevent. You can't even reposition a picture in RW without buying a $24.95 add-on (at the time) which puts it's price well over the entire iLife suite. And yes, Flux is not the solution for many iWeb users, despite being well-made, powerful, and not expensive.

Flux is very good at that. The HTML it makes is super-streamlined and is full CSS. That i totally agree and i'm not expert by ANY means. I actually enjoyed using the trial as a learning tool, as it generates it on the fly. Great 'reverse engineering tool'. I could definately see where it's a good 'best of both world's' comprimise, but honestly i'm not ready to 'comprimise'. I see no rush whatsoever given that Apple has not said iWeb is discontinued outright, or that they don't have something else in the works. Maybe whatever new means they come up with will allow your iWeb domain file import. Regardless the real issue here is to preserve the blog comments. Those are more important, and those he KNOWS will be gone. POOF. Again, copy-paste, download the contents of your "Web" folder from iDisk, expand the comment threads and do a "Save as Web Archive" from Safari?

I have recommended the open source Content Management Systems on these forums a lot where people are look for blog alternatives and commenting alternatives. If folks want to keep iWeb blogs then I have recommended both IntenseDebate and Disqus as alternatives, but have also recommended WordPress, the .com or .org version.

I personally like WordPress and have created a new website myself using WordPress loaded onto the HostExcellence server when I registered a new domain name with them. I have two further blogs using WordPress that I have linked to from my iWeb designed websites.

Currently completing my first new site with Flux 3.

I am still using iWeb to build web sites and maintain about 6 others, i am quietly hoping that Apple are not going to leave us "High and Dry" However i have been doing some investigations into a couple of alternatives and in particular Rapid Weaver, i have the following comments on this product.

The initial cost is reasonable but you have to spend more on add-on's like stacks 2 and others like Blocks etc to get any form of functionality and control and then when you compare the cost of Rapid Weaver with the add on's it mounts up and can be very expensive. The other issue i have discovered is that their level of support is of concern, on average it take about 2 days for them to respond to a post on their forum/Discussion group.

And to me, rather worrying the activity on their forum/discussion group does not seem that great , which would seem to indicate lack of inerested users.....i also noticed that some of my questions were forced into "Private" mode, so there were limited numbers of people viewing them, ie if you just view their forum you will not get a true extent of the questions raised.

But of greater concern is the issue associated with the fact that to get any reasonable functionality you must buy the add on's, and when you come to report an issue with your site, where is the problem??? the add on or in Rapid Weaver??? you may not know, so you post a problem and after 2 days they come back with a response that it maybe with one of my add ons....... is this passing the buck?????

It is up to each individual to make their minds up but for me i have wasted a lot of money on the Rapid Weaver solution, that could be technically very good, but the support is rubbish and i do not think i have the patience to wait and find out.

My advice to anyone looking for an iWeb alternative is seriously to look else were.

Thx

John

I guess RapidWeaver has a positive side in that it does encourage developers to expand its functions and the most important one of these is the ability to create responsive designs since these are rapidly replacing conventional designs for obvious reasons. However, $25 for a template is rather steep!

http://bltthemes.com/preview/rapidweaver/gallant/

There is a huge choice of free CSS templates on the internet complete with HTML layouts. All you need is an HTML editor app to take advantages of these.

I use Rage WebDesign. Taco is a really good, cheaper alternative and Fraise and BlueGriffon are free.

Some examples of different ways to achieve a responsive design...

http://www.ezmacwebdesign.com/showcase.html

Just to note it: I moved on from iWeb and got Sandvox. I'm not a fan of any of the 'template' website designing applications. Too limiting, as compared to iWeb. However...

Two together work pretty darn well. What I mean is.. I create quite a few things with iWeb that Sandvox won't allow me to do within the application itself... then 'cut and paste' into Sandvox with no problems... or almost none.

I would think the same would work with RapidWeaver... or any of the others.