June 25, 201412 yr Hey, I was just reading the latest edition of NET magazine, which features an overview of a new web design tool called Macaw. Have you heard of it, or even used it? It's not freeware, it'll cost you an arm and a leg, but apparently it's worth it for the modern designer. According to the NET article, it substitutes coding a responsive site for 'drawing' one. It uses a Photoshop-esque layout, on which you drag, drop and generally fiddle with elements and the program automatically calculates dimensions relative to screen widths and whatnot. Now, I recently went to a job interview where I was criticised for "reinventing the wheel", by choosing to create things, like layouts and scripts, by hand, instead of using tools just like Macaw. So what do you think? Is it something you could see benefiting your workflow? Personally, I'd prefer to so wrongly continue "reinventing the wheel" - this whiffs of Dreamweaver and its web designing tools. I could be old-fashioned, electing to continue coding by hand instead of having a program work for me. I certainly wouldn't pay for it - learning code and typing it with my fingers costs me nothing. Thoughts? Their site: http://www.macaw.co Edited June 25, 201412 yr by throzen
June 26, 201412 yr It's been around for a while but is only just getting some limelight It's really a prototyping tool, not a substitute for creating production sites (unless they are static simple sites). According to their docs: "It was developed to create wireframes, prototypes and mock-ups rapidly and to provide the static HTML, CSS and JavaScript needed to quickly get your designs on the web." Personally I wouldn't use it as it would slow down my workflow, I already have dozens of prototypes, templates and assets that can be setup in minutes
June 26, 201412 yr I use it at work quite often to mainly prototype stuff. I've used the code generation tool to create demos for clients, so they can get a true feel for how their website will appear across different devices. It's been useful because sometimes there are obvious issues or improvements that could be implemented, that something static like Photoshop would miss.
July 7, 201412 yr Aha, found the thread. I've been playing around with this and think it's great. Whether it will replace my workflow? Doubtful but I'll give anything a try that simplifies things. I think it's a better prototyping tool for my needs than say something like Foundation, but I haven't used that in over a year or so. I suppose it's dependent on the person you're speaking to as well as I don't think it's reinventing the wheel to code from scratch, though I see the argument where if there are methods in place... then again, if they don't work for you I don't think you should be limited to someone else's workflow. If you saw some of the methods I use for 'making stuff' and how archaic they are, you'd fill your pants.
July 7, 201412 yr Ah but @@4li4s archaic isn't always bad ... find a new responsive bootslap grit thumper version of font-size: or <head> lol
July 7, 201412 yr I posted a thread about Macaw before, too. I got the software, but never got round to using it... I guess I am too much used to my way of work which is Photoshop first. Agree with @@4li4s, I don't think it will replace my workflow, not because it's not a good software, it's great, but I am used to my "archaic" ways
July 7, 201412 yr Author I'd prefer to stick to archaic methods. If I used as many tools and script generators as others do, or as some employers have encouraged me to (sigh), I wouldn't be true to my nature, I guess, heh.
July 8, 201412 yr I'd prefer to stick to archaic methods. If I used as many tools and script generators as others do, or as some employers have encouraged me to (sigh), I wouldn't be true to my nature, I guess, heh. I agree it's all down to whether you are comfortable letting a piece of software write for you without knowing really what's going on behind the scenes. Remember the javascript mess of early dreamweaver rollover effect or the over eager slice mess from Fireworks? Edit: Bring back the '5k' awards I say Edited July 8, 201412 yr by BrowserBugs
July 8, 201412 yr Edit: Bring back the '5k' awards I say Absolutely! Every web designer should learn how to do that - good discipline
July 8, 201412 yr I agree in some cases, but the Macaw generator produces pretty solid modular HTML & CSS if you use the tool correctly. It certainly isn't the Dreamweaver style code we're used to seeing. I've used Macaw since beta, mainly for wireframes, prototypes and UI work. It has been a massive time saver in some cases, and allows the client to accurately see how their site will work in the browser before we go ahead and build it. This helps us manage expectations between the designer and client, and that's where Photoshop falls short, it's not an accurate representation of a design for either party. That said, I don't use the generator on the main build, because I prefer to write that myself. There's often a fair amount of planning required to structure something correctly, especially on larger sites where architecture is extremely important. This is something that requires human input and can't be handled by a click of a button. Designing in the browser was something that I struggled with previously. Typically, designers would have a library of pre-written components to assist with this, but I found that all their sites looked the same (sort of like when see an obvious bootstrap site), or they just lacked any design at all. In Macaw, I can go from a wireframe, to a full working demo with interactive elements and media queries in no time. It means that any amendments and changes don't require a huge sigh whilst I re-open Sublime Text. This was my main decision to buy the software in the first place, and probably Macaws biggest asset.
July 8, 201412 yr @@Jack I'll give it a spin on Macaw, I like trying new things which build on existing knowledge, that's why I use PhotoShop over any similar product, I've used it for years and it's kind of like a favourite pair of shoes. For the record I've nothing against new toys, I just find more and more that the questions on here are ending up about plugins and pre-built systems which if the user had an understanding of the language they could answer it themselves. I suppose I'm old skool, "back in my day lad we had bgcolor, 56kbs and my father beat us to sleep with an H1 tag" ...
July 8, 201412 yr back in my day lad we had bgcolor, 56kbs and my father beat us to sleep with an H1 tag" ... 56kbs is considered groundbreaking over here.
Create an account or sign in to comment