@Roger: Rapidweaver and Sandvox won't even allow you to edit its own CSS or HTML
I don't think those apps are really aimed at the same sort of user. Many users really want visual editing, it's just that there's a certain class of user that this is not useful for.
@J Nozzi: Well, that and a nice database browser for at least MySQL and PostgreSQL databases
I agree.
@DTNick: From my limited time playing with Coda, it is very similar to CSSEdit
By this I assume you mean the CSS component of Coda? Obviously CSSEdit is much more specialized, whereas Coda is more of an IDE.
@Norbert: I'd like to know, how they did the Site view
It's probably mostly just Quartz, but I don't know for sure.
@David: The 5 point scale mentioned above may apply to static HTML/CSS developers, but not true programmers
I really think people are getting too stuck on the idea that it's going to be a better CSS editor than CSSEdit, a better text editor than TextMate (or what have you), and so on. It's not.
As far as I can see, it's an 80% solution in the middle of all of the tools. For some, the features in dedicated apps are more important. For others, the sanity of having everything together is worth sacrificing some features. Or you can use it in conjunction with other apps, which is what I can see myself doing.
@immts: But personally, I need a visual editing mode. I usually code in DW+BBedit roundtripping in splitscreen. I know you savants can see the visual in your heads as you write code but a lot of us can't.
I believe Coda is at least partially designed for the people that design in Photoshop/Illstrator and move to text editors for the production phase. Certainly there's a market for visual editors, but that model can get in the way if you're used to doing that portion in Photoshop.
by Scott Stevenson — Apr 26
I don't think those apps are really aimed at the same sort of user. Many users really want visual editing, it's just that there's a certain class of user that this is not useful for.
@J Nozzi: Well, that and a nice database browser for at least MySQL and PostgreSQL databases
I agree.
@DTNick: From my limited time playing with Coda, it is very similar to CSSEdit
By this I assume you mean the CSS component of Coda? Obviously CSSEdit is much more specialized, whereas Coda is more of an IDE.
@Norbert: I'd like to know, how they did the Site view
It's probably mostly just Quartz, but I don't know for sure.
@David: The 5 point scale mentioned above may apply to static HTML/CSS developers, but not true programmers
I really think people are getting too stuck on the idea that it's going to be a better CSS editor than CSSEdit, a better text editor than TextMate (or what have you), and so on. It's not.
As far as I can see, it's an 80% solution in the middle of all of the tools. For some, the features in dedicated apps are more important. For others, the sanity of having everything together is worth sacrificing some features. Or you can use it in conjunction with other apps, which is what I can see myself doing.
@immts: But personally, I need a visual editing mode. I usually code in DW+BBedit roundtripping in splitscreen. I know you savants can see the visual in your heads as you write code but a lot of us can't.
I believe Coda is at least partially designed for the people that design in Photoshop/Illstrator and move to text editors for the production phase. Certainly there's a market for visual editors, but that model can get in the way if you're used to doing that portion in Photoshop.