6 months gone and still no fix for Version 12.

On 19/06/2011 20:03, Twayne wrote:
> In news:stevec5375.4vl5l0@no-mx.forums.netobjects.com,
> stevec5375<stevec5375.4vl5l0@no-mx.forums.netobjects.com> typed:
>>
>> I was over in that WYSIWYG 7 forum taking a look and that
>> product sounds interesting. It's only $45 !! It might
>> be worth taking a look at.
>
> I'm surprised it's still available at that price; it was $50 for a long
> time. I'd say go for it as it is actually a great product; just don't expect
> fast bug fixes or any real support except for this newsgroup.

Pay attention Twayne <g> - Steve's talking about a completely different
product (hint - it's called WYSIWYG - not NOF).

If somebody really, really wanted to buy a copy of NOF12 then it's
available on eBay for less than NOF themselves charge - there was a
discussion on this newsgroup a couple of months back. The eBay seller
also doesn't rip non-USA folks off with their exchange rate.

Adrian

Well, here's one person that bough wysiwyg (for $45 why not?). Well, I've tried to do one site in it, given up and did the site in NoF (v11 - I still won't use v12 for production sites) because I couldn't easily and intuitively do something as simple as set a background colour and image, and then place a layout region to hold my content with a different colour/image as background, something I do routinely in NoF. Now I'm sure wysiwy(don't actually)g can do this, but I stuffed around for quite a long time trying to find out how.

wysiwyg is a pretty good product for and html generator, as good as many of the others out there like serif webplus and coffee cup's whatever it's called, but I don't think it's any better; certainly it isn't a" one thing does all for beginners who don't actually know anything about coding for the web". It certainly isn't any better than NoF 11 and once the bugs are out of v12 it will be streets ahead of anything else (and people here seem to think that fixing bugs in complex code it something that's really quick and easy to do. It isn't).

Read my lips - there simply isn't one program that will build complex, interactive web sites for you. You need a number of programs. You need to learn code. You need to learn graphics. Or focus on developing great content and contract your site development out to somethone who has the tools and the knowledge.

Hi Franko.

My gripe is not with any functionality limitations of the NOF 12 product as offered for sale.

My gripe is that I bought the product in good faith only to find that the basic graphics handling features that it still promotes in its marketing doesn't work.

Yes , complex code takes time to debug. Surely that is what happens BEFORE you release the product for sale. It is now almost 7 months and still the transparency problem exists. This isn't a strange wee bug that only appears under odd circumstances. It is a fundamental part of the product.

In January, when NOF did reply in this forum, we were told an update would resolve the issue "soon". Since then there has been a l-o-n-g silence.

Ritch

HI Franko

It seems that discussions about alternative software are not welcomed
here - but, suffice it to say, what you were wanting to do in 'a certain
alternative web design program' is pretty straightforward.
The Manual's not all that clear, but the designer himself answers
questions in the various Forums, and he would have put you on the right
track in minutes.

Personally, I don't need a tool for building 'complex interactive websites'.
I _do_ want something that's quick, easy, reliable, (relatively)
bug-free, updated with fixes, supported by the designers and doesn't
screw up my graphics or crash in flames and trash my sites.
I don't need a built-in graphics editor either - just want something
that does what it says on the tin.

I may be unusual in my requirements - perhaps everybody else here is
into database-driven sites and complex applications....? - and is
prepared to put up with the general flakyness of NOF12 because of this...

Adrian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevec5375

I'm going to go out on a limb here and conjecture that one reason NOF doesn't fix all the bugs in the software is because it helps drive sales of upgrades. I know for me, that I thought by upgrading that many of the bugs would probably be fixed. However, as we've seen, there are still bugs in the application that have been around for many years and still not addressed. I would love to see the definitive list of what is considered a bug.

---

From Tomorrow Never Dies:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pPYNb9uYNc

Elliot Carver:
"Mr Jones are we ready to release our new software?"
Mr Jones:
"Yes sir, as requested it's full of bugs, which will mean people will be forced to upgrade for years"
Elliot Carver:
"Outstanding"

In news:itlk2v$7t9$1@DailyPlanet.news.netobjects.com,
Adrian <adrian@inspired-glass.com> typed:
> On 19/06/2011 20:03, Twayne wrote:
>> In news:stevec5375.4vl5l0@no-mx.forums.netobjects.com,
>> stevec5375<stevec5375.4vl5l0@no-mx.forums.netobjects.com>
>> typed:
>>>
>>> I was over in that WYSIWYG 7 forum taking a look and
>>> that product sounds interesting. It's only $45 !! It
>>> might be worth taking a look at.
>>
>> I'm surprised it's still available at that price; it was
>> $50 for a long time. I'd say go for it as it is actually
>> a great product; just don't expect fast bug fixes or any
>> real support except for this newsgroup.
>
> Pay attention Twayne <g> - Steve's talking about a
> completely different product (hint - it's called WYSIWYG
> - not NOF).

Hmm, too much clipping and fast reading caught me unawares there; sorry
'bout that folks! I -thought- that wording was a little strange<g>!

HTH,

Twayne`

> If somebody really, really wanted to buy a copy of NOF12
> then it's available on eBay for less than NOF themselves
> charge - there was a discussion on this newsgroup a
> couple of months back. The eBay seller also doesn't rip
> non-USA folks off with their exchange rate.
> Adrian

Adrian, I'm not saying "that other html generator" isn't any good. I'm saying that all of them are much of a muchness, and all of them have different ways of working and once you get used to one of them it's a pain to learn another way, especially under pressure. Most of my sites are fairly simple brochureware sites also and for that NoF is entirely adequate. As is "that other one", webPlus, coffee cup and all the others. Incidentally, one of the reasons you don't see me complaining a lot here is because I simply don't have any issues with NoF. I don't see the graphics transparency issue as a major problem because I use a graphics editing program to do all my graphics. And I must say I've never seen any reason to use PNGs instead of Gifs - Gifs have worked just fine for me for the last nearly 20 years so why would I not continue to use them?

When I have time I'll work through a dummy site or 2 with "that other program" and see if it becomes as intuitive for me as NoF is, in which case I may use it to create graphic front ends. But until somebody (anybody) comes up with a truly integrated, "all in one" program that lets me design and create interactive custom sites I'll continue to use the suite of applications that I currently use (and have for the last 15 or so years).

HI Franko

On 21/06/2011 01:09, franko wrote:
> Adrian, I'm not saying "that other html generator" isn't any good. I'm
> saying that all of them are much of a muchness, and all of them have
> different ways of working and once you get used to one of them it's a
> pain to learn another way, especially under pressure.


Absolutely
When you're up against a deadline, that's the last moment you want to be
doing the RTFM bit!
I guess I was kind of lucky - in that I had a paying client who insisted
I use 'the website authoring package that shall not be named' -
so I had every incentive to throw myself in @ the deep end!

> Most of my sites
> are fairly simple brochureware sites also and for that NoF is entirely
> adequate.

I've found V12 to be flaky & unstable on my 'simple sites' - it was
particularly prone to falling over its feet when faced with long tables
(where you want to lay out lists of names / addresses / phone numbers in
a tidy fashion - and 'yes' _ I do know about database-driven content <g>)

> As is "that other one", webPlus, coffee cup and all the
> others. Incidentally, one of the reasons you don't see me complaining a
> lot here is because I simply don't have any issues with NoF. I don't see
> the graphics transparency issue as a major problem because I use a
> graphics editing program to do all my graphics. And I must say I've
> never seen any reason to use PNGs instead of Gifs - Gifs have worked
> just fine for me for the last nearly 20 years so why would I not
> continue to use them?

Understood.
Gifs & JPGs here 99.99% of the time. ISTR that NOF12 has trouble with
displaying its own-generated banners due to the PNG transparency issue -
but I might be wrong.
It's annoying that NOF12 won't obey default settings and refrain from
re-optimising images that have been generated/processed/optimised in
another program. These are probably tiny things to fix, but (for me)
major irritations - as is the company's apparent indifference to this
situation. Maybe folks are right, and nobody works for NO anymore -
and everything is subcontracted out to some place where the wages are
cheap? Who knows ?

>
> When I have time I'll work through a dummy site or 2 with "that other
> program" and see if it becomes as intuitive for me as NoF is, in which
> case I may use it to create graphic front ends.

Try it - you'll like it!<g>

> But until somebody
> (anybody) comes up with a truly integrated, "all in one" program that
> lets me design and create interactive custom sites I'll continue to use
> the suite of applications that I currently use (and have for the last 15
> or so years).
>
>
Definitely. There was no _technical_ need for NOF12 to attempt to be all
things to all men - and, in doing so (presumably to please the Marketing
people) they've broken what they had... - again, all in my humble opinion.

Still - we mustn't go on like this - we'll be accused of insurrection!

Adrian

I fully understand that complex bugs takes time to fix, but what NO is NOT doing is to come up with a list of reported and known bugs, prioritise them and set a release date. This is a basic software development lifecycle process.

Almost all active open source projects have this facility. NO is not open source, we pay for it and I expect at least some form of communication.

NO are not communicating at all, and I think that is what a lot of people on this forum really pi..es them off.

Quote:

---

NO are not communicating at all, and I think that is what a lot of people on this forum really pi..es them off.

---

And it also makes long term users - like me - very reluctant to move to NOF12. No response AT ALL is at the very least bad manners, as a business model it seems like suicide.
Unless of course it's dead already.... :confused:

I personally have multiple sites currently in NOF 11, but I have no intention of starting new projects in it. For these I am looking at (i.e. I have already purchased) WYSIWYG7 - very cheap and capable - and Dreamweaver. The latter is a difficult move for me (expensive plus a vertical learning curve might be a better description) but even though I am only a "small business" user I do not want to have websites locked in to a product with no future.

Ken