Rating: 
Summary: easy to use, not a RAM hog
Review: I first developed my web site using Yahoo Sitebuilder, and when I reached 300 pages or so, I began migrating to Dreamweaver MX 2004. The installation is simple (on XP Professional SP2). This software is very easy to use and runs very fast on my 512 MB desktop. The tables resize easily as add or delete images of various sizes. The templates are very handy. My web site (www.somestamps.com) is based on showing thousands of stamp images. Dreamweaver has enabled me to work faster and to design a web site that looks very professional.
Rating:
Summary: Best Web design software ever - www.bahamasissues.com
Review: I have been using Dream Weaver for years now and I have not changed it yet. I have used fron page before and I am telling you that Dreamweaver beats them all hands down.
Delroy Meadows.
Nassau, Bahamas
www.bahamasissues.com
Rating:
Summary: No problems
Review: I have been using MX2004 for close to 6 months now and I never have had any problems. I am running WinXP Pro and always have several other applications open at the same time (such as iTunes, Visual Basic 6 Pro, Flash MX2004) and I don't have any problems. I have used it for websites with both PHP MySQL, and ASP/Access and it connects quickly everytime. I would buy this product again.
Rating:
Summary: No problems
Review: I have been using MX2004 for close to 6 months now and I never have had any problems. I am running WinXP Pro and always have several other applications open at the same time (such as iTunes, Visual Basic 6 Pro, Flash MX2004) and I don't have any problems. I have used it for websites with both PHP MySQL, and ASP/Access and it connects quickly everytime. I would buy this product again.
Rating:
Summary: PC version review
Review: I have used (not owned though) every version of Dreamweaver. Yes, 2004 MX is slower to load, but once I get into actually using it, I notice no speed drop. I can't speak on the Apple version, but the PC one is very stable. I've only had it crash once. The interface is killer, I have always liked DW's interface, I think 2004 MX's is the most refined and best looking visually. It's also pretty easy to get use to, nothing is hidden to deep in the menus.I love the Halo CSS template they added. It's a very nice skeleton to use on a new site. It's clean, easy to navigate and appealing on the eye. I'm not really too knowledgable with CSS now. But, everything I read about 2004's CSS support, is Macromedia has done a really good job implimenting useage for it. 2004 is not leaps and bounds above last years offering, in any catagory. But, if you've never used Dreamweaver and are interested, it would be a very smart purchase. Upgrading? If you use CSS extensively it could come in handy. Personally, I cannot wait to see what they bring into the picture for MX 2005.
Rating:
Summary: A heavy duty application for serious web developers
Review: I have used Dreamweaver 4 and MX. MX is certainly good enough to keep using, especially if your client websites are mostly maintenance projects. If you're still into DW4, you may be falling behind the proverbial power curve. I've been using MX 2004 exclusively for about a month now. Buying wasn't an easy decision. When I purchase any piece of software, I don't just fill-out some requisition form, I have to spend my own hard-earned dollars. I read and re-read the other opinions posted here at Amazon before I ventured forth and downloaded a trial copy. To be honest, I found some of the criticisms valid, but most just never materialized for me. In fact, I'm more than satisfied that it was a great decision to move up to the new Version 7.0. Here's my take on the 'cons:'
• 2004 does take a little longer than MX to crank up, probably on the order of 5-6 seconds longer. Regardless, if you run Photoshop, Illustrator or for that matter any Adobe application, you'll find the Dreamweaver MX 2004 start up still very speedy in comparison.
• Other critics have mentioned DW MX 2004 crashes especially with other programs running. Sorry, I just haven't had an occurrence.
• The FTP is just as smooth as MX. The coding seems to work fine for me. I can't identify any sluggishness or other maladies. But, my computer is a PC running a Pentium 4 (2.40 GHz ) with 512 MB RAM on a very stable Microsoft XP Pro OS. Yes, it is a relatively "fast" computer with enough Ram to run the applications that I need to build my websites. It should be. You can't haul 25 tons of bricks with a pickup truck. If you're investing in top-of-the-line software, you need to have the hardware to support it. (MACs? I retired my MAC several years ago when I realized the Internet isn't part of the print media industry.) Here's why this software is worth the investment:
• First and foremost is the unparalleled support for CSS. Let's face it, CSS is an integral part of the future for web development. It's time to buy your ticket and ride.
• Very important is the support for ASP.NET, PHP, XML, XHTML and other emerging technologies.
• Really cool for me is the new customization capabilities for the work environment, especially the Inserts Bar "Favorites" tab.
• There's a totally new integration capability for Word and Excel files that gets really exciting when you realize how easy it is to post documents straight to live with very little effort.
• If you're obsessive-compulsive for details the new cross browser validation rule checker is right up your ally. If you're not, this new feature will drive you crazy.
• Finally, the enhanced coding tools help make the everyday web page building experience go a lot easier. Today's web developers need to use heavy duty applications that are capable of employing new technologies like PHP, ASP.NET and new standards like CSS in order to build the first-class websites their clients expect. Dreamweaver MX 2004 fits that bill perfectly. Moral: if web development is your profession, it's a given that you will make wise business investments that allow you to keep up with the rapidly evolving Internet. And, Dreamweaver MX 2004 will insure an excellent ROI.
Rating: 
Summary: Upgrade? What upgrade? Just problems
Review: I owned Dreamweaver MX, and then bought MX 2004. Overall I'm glad I did, but I could see how some people might not need to upgrade. I mostly like the changes in CSS. It's added some wysiwyg functionally for certain CSS stuff. It does seem slower to load though. I run it on a 1.0GHz Pentium M Tablet PC with 512 MB of RAM and it takes a bit to come up but after it does performance is fine. Then it also takes a while to close. I really enjoy using macromedia though and would DEFINITELY recommend it over Frontpage which I used before I switched a couple years ago. Also, I noticed some people complained that MX 2004 takes a REALLY long time to load. I might add taht 7.0 was the original version released and then they released an upgrade to version 7.1 for free (that you can get at macromedia.com) and it is supposed to improve "overall performance and stability" according to macromedia, but the version I bought came with v 7.1 so I never experienced 7.0. This could make a difference though.
Rating: 
Summary: It's what I use
Review: I owned Dreamweaver MX, and then bought MX 2004. Overall I'm glad I did, but I could see how some people might not need to upgrade. I mostly like the changes in CSS. It's added some wysiwyg functionally for certain CSS stuff. It does seem slower to load though. I run it on a 1.0GHz Pentium M Tablet PC with 512 MB of RAM and it takes a bit to come up but after it does performance is fine. Then it also takes a while to close. I really enjoy using macromedia though and would DEFINITELY recommend it over Frontpage which I used before I switched a couple years ago.
Rating:
Summary: Great product
Review: I personally use dreamweaver in my web design class at school, and i think its an exceptional piece of software. It's easy to learn, fun to use, and has great acess to the control panels you would need to build a basic or professional web site. Ihave not yet bought a copy of this for my home computer, but i'm looking to purchase this piece of software in the next couppl of weeks.
Rating: 
Summary: Two words - slow and crash
Review: I thought it was just me but I see others have the same problem. I usually end up using the earlier version of DW because I just can't take the slowness. And it crashes - not a lot - but the fact that it crashes at all is bothersome. At work I have a workstation and I rarely, and I mean RARELY, crash. With Dreamweaver MX I crash at least once a day!
| 
