FreewayTalk
52 replies to this thread. Most Recent
Still no multiple undo
I asked for it and I’m sure others did too. Of all the apps I now use, Freeway is the only one that only has one level of undo. It’s time this changed.
Michael
Freeway5beta mailing list email@hidden
I’m a new user still finding my way around version 4, but multiple undo was something I expected to have and was surprised to find it wasn’t there!
If it’s not in v5 by now, it probably won’t be, but certainly one for the wish list. - Maybe not needed for advanced users, but starting out, one can do things that have the most confounding results at times - having no way to “undo” it can be frustrating and very discouraging especially to those who have the free trial version (which is probably where most of the sales are generated from). <br>Frustrated/discouraged trial users = less sales, as the potential customer moves on to “friendlier” applications.
Pretty simple really, so we can only hope the sales & marketing folks have an open dialog with the engineers and they can find their way to implement this sometime in the future!
Freeway5beta mailing list email@hidden
‘09 Mac Mini 2.0, 2010 MacBook, G5 PPC OSX.4.11 Freeway Pro v5.5
Have to admit, I would welcome this too. As a matter of habit I Save extremely frequently with whatever application I’m using, so sometimes I have to Revert only to find out I haven’t Saved as frequently as I thought…pah.
K.
Freeway5beta mailing list email@hidden
I’ll never forget what’s his name…
Sometime around 27/1/08 (at 07:19 -0500) Kryten said:
Have to admit, I would welcome this too.
Yep, that would be nice. ‘Course, as an occasional software developer I have some understanding of how hard this can be in an app with this much object inter-dependency and complexity. I’m sure this is on the Secret Softpress To-Do List, so I’m still hoping. :-)
k
Freeway5beta mailing list email@hidden
Here’s another vote for multiple undo. I can, however, see there may be a problem in the way in which Freeway interacts with Actions - especially third party - and inserted code. Photoshop was a latecomer to the party, which it solved with it’s history palette. Perhaps something similar, to start?
Colin
On 27 Jan 2008, at 12:19, Kryten wrote:
Have to admit, I would welcome this too.
Freeway5beta mailing list email@hidden
And I would like to cast 153,000 votes for it (on behalf of so many out there who use Freeway, want multiple undos, but who simply don’t frequent this forum enough to cast their vote). :-)
Freeway5beta mailing list email@hidden
and me to :-) i’m sometimes finding myself, backing up a file, “just in case” with a different name, so that when i do make a stupid, or unwanted mistake, i won’t lose my files! very unhandy!
Freeway5beta mailing list email@hidden
i’m on a 2.7 quad and loving every moment…
Yes we too get the “Website V1”, “Website V2”, “Web site V3” syndrome with Freeway. Using the latest version to experiment with, mainly because of only 1 undo.
Freeway5beta mailing list email@hidden
I vote YES too! That is extremely hard to go back and click undo and it still doesn’t correct whatever I just did!! If there was a way to state what action would be undone from the menu - it would be helpful too.
Freeway5beta mailing list email@hidden
Please, Please, Please - multiple undos. An absolute MUST HAVE in this day and age. I thought FOR SURE that would be the NUMBER ONE PRIORITY.
Sorry for shouting, but I am just assuming that perhaps no one was able to hear everyone asking simultaneously.
Bob
Freeway5beta mailing list email@hidden
My guess is that saving is often a significant bit of work for Freeway and to continually save states would add to processor overhead in an unacceptable way.
But I totally agree that if there was a way that Freeway could offer more undos it would really help a lot.
But if it were easy to add to the feature list I bet it would have been ther a long time ago.
regards Brian
Bob Martin said recently:
Please, Please, Please - multiple undos. An absolute MUST HAVE in this day and age. I thought FOR SURE that would be the NUMBER ONE PRIORITY.
Sorry for shouting, but I am just assuming that perhaps no one was able to hear everyone asking simultaneously.
Bob
Freeway5beta mailing list email@hidden
Freeway5beta mailing list email@hidden
Another ‘Yes please’ from me. I find myself saving after almost every action, just so that I can revert to saved if needed.
Freeway5beta mailing list email@hidden
I’m a brand new user, downloaded the trial and about to pay-up. Except … no multiple undos? I feel like I’ve been transported back to the early 1990s.
Across the Mac, I’m used to be able to experiment: sling an element here, move an attribute there, just ‘to see’ … safe in the knowledge that once I’ve made a pig’s ear of it, I can quickly roll back.
Having to carefully think about a change and save each time breaks my work rhythm and slows me down. Moreover since virtually all other apps support multiple undos, I simply forget and lose work. Come one chaps, even iWeb does better than this.
I have to agree with thatKeith in the sense that tracking multiple states in an app as complicated as FW could be a pretty tall order. Many developers can (and do) get this for free with Core Data but there may be very good reasons why FW engineers wish to use a less opaque file spec.
I think there are a lot of advantages we get from FW’s centralized file structure (master pages, graphics management, etc.) but granularity in site management and revision history is not one of them. This is one of the main things that has put me off FW for many years, but with the death of GoLive (and the only other real choice being DW) I have come to accept its shortcomings in this regard and to embrace its advantages.
Archive often.
-ss
I started using Freeway 2 weeks ago and couldn’t believe there was no multiple undo. I haven’t used a program that hasn’t had it in 10 years.
For me, and I’m pretty sure anyone else, learning a new program is frustrating and having multiple undo is essential for undoing accidents.
There’s just no excusing this for version 6.
This has been requested for a very long while.
My guess is that the saving process for Freeway is extremely processor intensive and if it were going on in the background it would seriously detract from usefulness. At least on most sites of any size I have to wait a while without being able to do anything else while saving the file.
But who doesn’t feel the lack of even a few states of undo!! I’d love to be proved wrong - and as processors become multiple and fast maybe it will come - for those who have the specs.
Softpress are very helpful in the main - as many here will testify but they have never entered any discussion of their software in such terms as its probably disadvantageous to them.
But yes it does feel like a handicap - and even saving often feels like a handicap because it takes a while. I’m on a twin 1.25G4 so maybe its snappier on the newer Intel Macs (?)
all the best Brian
bdkennedy1 said recently:
I started using Freeway 2 weeks ago and couldn’t believe there was no multiple undo. I haven’t used a program that hasn’t had it in 10 years.
For me, and I’m pretty sure anyone else, learning a new program is frustrating and having multiple undo is essential for undoing accidents.
There’s just no excusing this for version 6.
Softpress are very helpful in the main - as many here will testify but they have never entered any discussion of their software in such terms as its probably disadvantageous to them.
I’d be interested in seeing how it could possibly be disadvantageous. I’ve bought several bits of slightly-flawed software simply because of the way that the company kept the user-base informed via online forums. All it takes is a: “yes, this is very poor, it is something we are working on actively, but there is no ETA”
I think Softpress’ opinion was that you just couldn’t go wrong with Freeway 5. So why undo anything :D
27” iMac 2.66 GHz Intel Core i5 / 17” MacBook Pro 2.5 GHz Intel Core i5 / Mac OSX 10.6.3 / Freeway Pro 5.4
Well anything they say can be picked up by press or competitors or perhaps opens to a loss of goodwill with customers who can become irate and difficult if they are set up with expectations that are not met.
But whatever … I expect it is simply company policy to not discuss whatever features are in the pipeline or indeed .. are not.
I know that they know that we want multiple undo.
all the best Brian
Christopher Noble said recently:
Softpress are very helpful in the main - as many here will testify but they have never entered any discussion of their software in such terms as its probably disadvantageous to them.
I’d be interested in seeing how it could possibly be disadvantageous. I’ve bought several bits of slightly-flawed software simply because of the way that the company kept the user-base informed via online forums. All it takes is a: “yes, this is very poor, it is something we are working on actively, but there is no ETA”
“Company policy not to discuss future features”? Give me a break. More companies use that as a cop-out for complacency than I care to think about. And I do not make this statement as an attack on SoftPress or a personal attack on anyone. I say these words as an attack on “all defensive remarks” (or “excuses”) about why we do NOT have Multiple Undos.
I’ve been a FW user and lover since 1999 (FW2). I am friends with some at SoftPress, and I honestly must say that I love them dearly. SoftPress is an Macintosh software innovator and the company will continue to innovate. But the fact remains that we do not have multiple Undos (or a History feature like Adobe apps) yet, despite the requests make over the last 9 years or so. Hence our need to pound even harder at the door of SoftPress until the feature is implemented. No, not pound “until we are heard.” For SoftPress hears us loud and clear now and has heard us for years. They simply need to hear “more voices” to make them bump the feature up higher on their priority list. And yes, I have no doubts whatsoever that there is such a priority list.
The single most important feature of Freeway at this point, aside from making CSS Layout sensible and easy to use as table layout for “the rest of us,” is Multiple Undos (or a History feature). Those of you who want it, keep this thread alive!
I agree that this is long overdue. But I also know that there are aspects of this problem that cry out for a wholesale rewrite of the application. For an application as large and full of legacy code as Freeway, that is an investment not to be trifled with.
Don’t get me wrong, I want this feature as much as the next person. And I know that Freeway “hears” us and knows how embarrassing it is in this day and age not to have this. Especially when there are applications being written left and right in Cocoa (by 15-year-old kids) that have this feature.
Walter
On Oct 8, 2008, at 8:18 PM, JDW wrote:
“Company policy not to discuss future features”? Give me a break. More companies use that as a cop-out for complacency than I care to think about. And I do not make this statement as an attack on SoftPress or a personal attack on anyone. I say these words as an attack on “all defensive remarks” (or “excuses”) about why we do NOT have Multiple Undos.
I’ve been a FW user and lover since 1999 (FW2). I am friends with some at SoftPress, and I honestly must say that I love them dearly. SoftPress is an Macintosh software innovator and the company will continue to innovate. But the fact remains that we do not have multiple Undos (or a History feature like Adobe apps) yet, despite the requests make over the last 9 years or so. Hence our need to pound even harder at the door of SoftPress until the feature is implemented. No, not pound “until we are heard.” For SoftPress hears us loud and clear now and has heard us for years. They simply need to hear “more voices” to make them bump the feature up higher on their priority list. And yes, I have no doubts whatsoever that there is such a priority list.
The single most important feature of Freeway at this point, aside from making CSS Layout sensible and easy to use as table layout for “the rest of us,” is Multiple Undos (or a History feature). Those of you who want it, keep this thread alive!
Freeway user since 1997
Be that as it may, Walter, the fact remains that FW4 was a major change to FW above and beyond the GUI tweaks. Yet, multiple Undos was not implemented. Why? Obviously due to the lack of time in light of the need to get FW4 out the door and into the hands of FW lovers worldwide in a reasonable time.
So yes, I am aware of the work involved. But looking at the big picture again, we have been asking for this for at least 9 years. Major rewrite or no, that is N-I-N-E Y-E-A-R-S!
Hmmm,
My day job involves helping companies use Web tech to support their customers and build community interaction.
Press and competitors will already be well aware of the product’s weakness. Any acknowledgement that the company is working on it is not going make competitors suddenly rush to implement multiple undo, or make the press suddenly leap on a problem that is well documented. Neither is it going to make existing customers irate to know that they are looking at this (even without the promise of delivery date).
All it would do would make the company look interested in its customers’ and potential customers’ requirements.
But anyway, I’ve yattered on enough.
On 8 Oct 2008, 11:16 pm, Bin-Ra wrote:
Well anything they say can be picked up by press or competitors or perhaps opens to a loss of goodwill with customers who can become irate and difficult if they are set up with expectations that are not met.
But whatever … I expect it is simply company policy to not discuss whatever features are in the pipeline or indeed .. are not.
I know that they know that we want multiple undo.
all the best Brian
No there isn’t and there probably won’t be for some time, unfortunately. Hopefully I’ll be proven wrong, though. There are major logistical issues with implementing this feature because of FW’s unique design model. It’s not a simple procedure as it is with most apps or they would have implemented it ages ago.
Todd
On Mar 5, 2009, at 8:11 AM, Christopher Noble wrote:
Anyone know whether the new version has multiple undo yet?
I want to ‘bump’ this thread as well…
I realize that it’s not an easy code change to make, but then again, this isn’t just a request for an aesthetic change. This is a very important, seriously needed feature, particularly when a couple accidental changes are made or when you make a couple changes to ‘try’ something and realize the changes aren’t going to work.
If nothing else, even an ‘autosave’ feature that would allow you to save, at certain intervals, so you can go back 5 minutes or 10 or more to a previous version of the site.
Surely that wouldn’t require a major recoding.
Ron
Another Bump..
While I am still in ‘Trial’ mode with this software, it is an absolutely stunning omission. I want to jump ship from another app I have been working in for 10+ years (their code is out of date), but a “1 undo” software package is like flipping a coin to see if you’re going to get tasered.
No serious pro-quality app has only one undo (that I know of).
Bump Bump Bump…
Totally agree…..one slip and Boommmm!!!!! Come on Softpress, it’s like working in photoshop 3.
On 1 Sep 2010, at 06:53, Bruce Colgate wrote:
Another Bump..
While I am still in ‘Trial’ mode with this software, it is an absolutely stunning omission. I want to jump ship from another app I have been working in for 10+ years (their code is out of date), but a “1 undo” software package is like flipping a coin to see if you’re going to get tasered.
No serious pro-quality app has only one undo (that I know of).
Bump Bump Bump…
Not that I want to disrupt your nice list here, but it’s not the first and won’t be the last to this problem. The last list had a link tipp that I wan’t to refresh here, called forever save.
http://www.tool-forcesw.com/foreversave/
I know it wont will change anything on basics here, but I stopped to invest more than 5 Minutes of time in things that can’t be changed in timescale we wish.
Walter and Keith in that list already declared, that the basics (the core) have to be rewritten and that’s enough to me personal (and I know nothing much), to understand what this will mean - seek a workaround and to say very, very later:
“Do you remember these times?”
Thomas
PS: Ask Walter, he started in somewhere Verision 2.
On 1 Sep 2010, at 10:24, Thomas Kimmich wrote:
PS: Ask Walter, he started in somewhere Verision 2.
Walter, like me, started with the first public beta. I think it was 0.97 or something!
We’ve lived with the one-save issue since 1997. As Thomas said, Softpress have already stated a few times here and there, getting multiple saves into the foundations of something started when OS X wasn’t even a glint in Apple’s eye is no simple undertaking.
As the saying goes, to get there you wouldn’t start from here.
Heather
^-^
iFlickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/snaptophobic/
Blather and bluster about photography http://snaptophobic.posterous.com/
¬_¬
I’d like the chance to prove that money doesn’t make me happy. - S. Milligan.
Interesting. Lack of undo’s doesn’t bother me at all. Maybe because, as a completely independent freelancer who’s been working in a rural-home-office support-community-vacuum for 15 years, I’m accustomed to having to figure things out as I go?
I can’t afford “playing with it” time when on the clock. My billing would be astronomical! I use late night personal projects as my self-tutorials. Then attempt, fairly successfully, to implement those techniques when on the clock.
Years of the now-dreaded XPress corrupting its own files taught me to make and save multiple recursive Versions of any large projects. My last client project got up to v7.0.4. No big deal. At that rate, my client enjoyed seeing multiple versions online, to compare design concept changes. (Not that all versions stayed online throughout.)
There are plenty of insufficiencies in FW that I would like to see corrected / improved before worrying about multiple undo’s for those who work by experiment.
Very pious, who says we are all working in experiment, single undo is not good enough however you work unless we all become as good as you!
On 1 Sep 2010, at 13:45, Bucky Edgett wrote:
Interesting. Lack of undo’s doesn’t bother me at all. Maybe because, as a completely independent freelancer who’s been working in a rural-home-office support-community-vacuum for 15 years, I’m accustomed to having to figure things out as I go?
I can’t afford “playing with it” time when on the clock. My billing would be astronomical! I use late night personal projects as my self-tutorials. Then attempt, fairly successfully, to implement those techniques when on the clock.
Years of the now-dreaded XPress corrupting its own files taught me to make and save multiple recursive Versions of any large projects. My last client project got up to v7.0.4. No big deal. At that rate, my client enjoyed seeing multiple versions online, to compare design concept changes. (Not that all versions stayed online throughout.)
There are plenty of insufficiencies in FW that I would like to see corrected / improved before worrying about multiple undo’s for those who work by experiment.
Oh, please don’t misunderstand. I’m not good, I’m ignorant and timid. So I don’t go any further than one baby step at a time, testing each step!
I’d much rather see, for instance, the Temp Styles and their poor CSS implementation addressed. Just a case of each for each, with some oddballs like me having different opinions.
Bingo! Saving multiple revisions is the safest way to work.
You can then always roll back past any multiple undo. Or recover bits of files from past versions
The Printline site is on v028 of the latest build.
David
On 1 Sep 2010, at 13:45, “Bucky Edgett” <email@hidden> wrote:
taught me to make and save multiple recursive Versions of any large projects. My last client project got up to v7.0.4. No big deal.
www.ineedwebhosting.co.uk | Twitter Offers and Web Design News
Freeway Friendly web hosting and Domain Names. (Create an account it’s Free!)
PrintlineAdvertising.co.uk | The Printline Advertising Blog
Print Design, Digital and Litho Printers, Promotional Merchandise and Corporate Gifts.
Saving multiple version is definitely the way to go as David has said. Version 1, Version 2 etc. etc. saving a version often safeguards against corrupt files and especially when a client says “Actually, can we have the homepage how it was before!”
Nathan Garner
http://www.austinwellsdesign.co.uk
FW5 Pro | MacBook Pro | Snow Leopard
On 1 Sep 2010, at 20:27, David Owen wrote:
Bingo! Saving multiple revisions is the safest way to work.
You can then always roll back past any multiple undo. Or recover bits of files from past versions
The Printline site is on v028 of the latest build.
David
On 1 Sep 2010, at 13:45, “Bucky Edgett” <email@hidden> wrote:
taught me to make and save multiple recursive Versions of any large projects. My last client project got up to v7.0.4. No big deal.
Nathan Garner
Something I’ve used in the past with large projects is to place the Freeway file in my synced DropBox folder (http://www.dropbox.com). Every time I save the Freeway file a version is automatically backed up to DropBox’s cloud storage (they use Amazon’s S3 service) so I can roll back to any of my previous revisions quickly and easily. The basic account is free and gives you 2GB of storage. Regards, Tim.
FreewayActions.com - Freeware and commercial actions for Freeway Express & Pro. ………………………………………………………………………… Protect your mailto links from being harvested by spambots with Anti Spam. Only available at FreewayActions.com ………………………………………………………………………… http://www.freewayactions.com
AND WHAT IF YOU ARE EXPERIMENTING OR DESIGNING ON THE FLY AND YOU WANT TO STEP BACK FREQUENTLY MORE THAN ONE STEP, HOW IS SAVING VERSIONS EVERY TWO COMMANDS PLAUSIBLE, AS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY IN THE THREAD, MOST OTHER PROGRAMS HAVE THIS, WHY NOT FW?
On 1 Sep 2010, at 20:32, Nathan Garner wrote:
Saving multiple version is definitely the way to go as David has said. Version 1, Version 2 etc. etc. saving a version often safeguards against corrupt files and especially when a client says “Actually, can we have the homepage how it was before!”
Nathan Garner
http://www.austinwellsdesign.co.uk
FW5 Pro | MacBook Pro | Snow Leopard
On 1 Sep 2010, at 20:27, David Owen wrote:
Bingo! Saving multiple revisions is the safest way to work.
You can then always roll back past any multiple undo. Or recover bits of files from past versions
The Printline site is on v028 of the latest build.
David
On 1 Sep 2010, at 13:45, “Bucky Edgett” <email@hidden> wrote:
taught me to make and save multiple recursive Versions of any large projects. My last client project got up to v7.0.4. No big deal.
On 1 Sep 2010, at 21:24, Steven Hughes wrote:
MOST OTHER PROGRAMS HAVE THIS, WHY NOT FW?
That’s been explained a couple of times now. Harping on about it won’t make it appear any quicker, though. =o(
Don’t think Softpress don’t hear you. I worked with the engineers on documentation for Freeway 4 for a time, so I’ve seen the game from both sides of the fence. They care passionately about Freeway, and you can bet your bottom dollar they’d have coded for multiple undo if it was something simple to implement.
The bald fact of the matter is it’s not a simple matter due to legacy code from over a decade of development. It takes a lot of effort to re- engineer something with a long pedigree like Freeway, especially if you don’t have the resources of some of the bigger players in the game.
Multiple undo is always near the top of the list of features that the engineers want, as well as the users. It will appear at some point down the road, but for now we just have to put up with the workarounds.
Heather
^-^
iFlickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/snaptophobic/
Blather and bluster about photography http://snaptophobic.posterous.com/
¬_¬
I’d like the chance to prove that money doesn’t make me happy. - S. Milligan.
Try using some spare pages for experiments. When your done, copy and paste back these items into your live pages.
Create a folder in your document called for example doodles, and create pages in that for your experiments.
I agree it’s not an excuse for not having multiple undos, but it is making the best of what you’ve got.
David
On 1 Sep 2010, at 21:24, Steven Hughes <email@hidden> wrote:
AND WHAT IF YOU ARE EXPERIMENTING OR DESIGNING ON THE FLY
www.ineedwebhosting.co.uk | Twitter Offers and Web Design News
Freeway Friendly web hosting and Domain Names. (Create an account it’s Free!)
PrintlineAdvertising.co.uk | The Printline Advertising Blog
Print Design, Digital and Litho Printers, Promotional Merchandise and Corporate Gifts.
As long as we’re on it, I’ve never myself really liked multiple undo’s. What always happens for me is that I type command-z too many times. And wipe out something I should have preserved.
So for me, multiple undo’s are more danger than they’re worth! Trial projects, trial pages, multiple versions and the like turn out to be more productive in the end for slow codgers like me.
Who’s harping on about it? Just voicing a popular opinion in the hope the shouts will be heard if enough support the need for it.
I Didn’t buy into freeway to have to understand the heritage and problems they have, we all have problems in our business, it’s how you deal with them and from the amount of people asking for it I’d say it should be higher up the list and might be a bigger priority than a new chargeable upgrade!
As to resources, if some of the smaller players charging less than FW are then why not???
On 1 Sep 2010, at 21:33, Heather Kavanagh wrote:
On 1 Sep 2010, at 21:24, Steven Hughes wrote:
MOST OTHER PROGRAMS HAVE THIS, WHY NOT FW?
That’s been explained a couple of times now. Harping on about it won’t make it appear any quicker, though. =o(
Don’t think Softpress don’t hear you. I worked with the engineers on documentation for Freeway 4 for a time, so I’ve seen the game from both sides of the fence. They care passionately about Freeway, and you can bet your bottom dollar they’d have coded for multiple undo if it was something simple to implement.
The bald fact of the matter is it’s not a simple matter due to legacy code from over a decade of development. It takes a lot of effort to re-engineer something with a long pedigree like Freeway, especially if you don’t have the resources of some of the bigger players in the game.
Multiple undo is always near the top of the list of features that the engineers want, as well as the users. It will appear at some point down the road, but for now we just have to put up with the workarounds.
Heather
^-^
iFlickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/snaptophobic/
Blather and bluster about photography http://snaptophobic.posterous.com/
¬_¬
Sounds a good idea but still feel a bit unsure as to why this should be worked around having paid reasonable money for the software.
Thanks anyway for the tips.
On 1 Sep 2010, at 21:50, David Owen wrote:
Try using some spare pages for experiments. When your done, copy and paste back these items into your live pages.
Create a folder in your document called for example doodles, and create pages in that for your experiments.
I agree it’s not an excuse for not having multiple undos, but it is making the best of what you’ve got.
David
On 1 Sep 2010, at 21:24, Steven Hughes <email@hidden> wrote:
AND WHAT IF YOU ARE EXPERIMENTING OR DESIGNING ON THE FLY
Yeah, I’d like have it too but not by screwing up the great tool FW already is!
The costs to implement a capability like this needs to be weighed against the benefit.
I’m sure Softpress would do it if it was easy.
My opinion as a long time user.
Bill Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
——-Original Message——- From: Steven Hughes <email@hidden> Sender: email@hidden Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 22:44:59 To: <email@hidden> Reply-to: email@hidden Subject: Re: Still no multiple undo
Sounds a good idea but still feel a bit unsure as to why this should be worked around having paid reasonable money for the software.
Thanks anyway for the tips.
On 1 Sep 2010, at 21:50, David Owen wrote:
Try using some spare pages for experiments. When your done, copy and paste back these items into your live pages.
Create a folder in your document called for example doodles, and create pages in that for your experiments.
I agree it’s not an excuse for not having multiple undos, but it is making the best of what you’ve got.
David
On 1 Sep 2010, at 21:24, Steven Hughes <email@hidden> wrote:
AND WHAT IF YOU ARE EXPERIMENTING OR DESIGNING ON THE FLY
Bill McCarroll
Freeway 5.5 Pro
… and totally agree to this WilliamMac,
to hang up the “undo” higher as it should be, I’d never been so far as I am. And I thank softpress for it and I thank all the people here that brought me so far.
I’d like to name them, but by doing so, I’ll forget the rest. And I say this with proud and wiTHOUT SHOUTING IT OUT LOud (sorry, seems to hit the wrong key).
Thomas
On 1 Sep 2010, at 22:42, Steven Hughes wrote:
Who’s harping on about it? Just voicing a popular opinion in the hope the shouts will be heard if enough support the need for it.
Every major update comes round, and so does the call for multiple undo. I guess I’ve heard it so many times now, it’s beginning to wear thin.
What I was trying to say, perhaps rather tetchily for which I apologise, is Softpress has heard, understands and wants to do something about it. It’s just it’s not as simple as checking the “multiple undo/redo” box in the code, and this is why it’s not appeared yet.
If you like, I’m an apologist for Softpress, but then - like I said - I’ve seen the situation on both sides of the fence. I make no apologies for being an apologist! =oD
Even with a single level of undo, I’d rather be using Freeway than most of the other web development and design software out there.
Heather
I’d like the chance to prove that money doesn’t make me happy. - S. Milligan.
Uh huh. I think I touched a nerve when I posted this Wednesday.
To all who replied, thanks. It confirms for me that there is, in fact, just One Undo.
I get it, that it’s work to add a feature. I used to write code for apps a LONG time ago. And no one likes to un-sew a garment, or start over.
But I have to pass on this software, and I wonder how many other Trial downloaders do the same, for the same reason, but don’t speak up.
I REALLY like this software, and I would love to make it a staple for all my web work, but I can easily see me becoming violent and dangerous over the the One Undo “feature”.
Back to Windows for me.
Honestly will never relate to this kind of logic.
Freeway has its faults but compared to other web solutions this ain’t one of them.
To dump such an elegant piece of software that makes web design infinitely more simple because of this one admittedly nice to have enhancement is a bit like throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Oh well, enjoy your windows solution but you’re always welcome to rejoin the great community here when you’re ready.
Bill ———Original Message——— From: Bruce Colgate Sender: email@hidden To: email@hidden ReplyTo: email@hidden Subject: Re: Still no multiple undo Sent: Sep 2, 2010 17:22
Uh huh. I think I touched a nerve when I posted this Wednesday.
To all who replied, thanks. It confirms for me that there is, in fact, just One Undo.
I get it, that it’s work to add a feature. I used to write code for apps a LONG time ago. And no one likes to un-sew a garment, or start over.
But I have to pass on this software, and I wonder how many other Trial downloaders do the same, for the same reason, but don’t speak up.
I REALLY like this software, and I would love to make it a staple for all my web work, but I can easily see me becoming violent and dangerous over the the One Undo “feature”.
Back to Windows for me.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
Bill McCarroll
Freeway 5.5 Pro
Bruce,
It drove me nuts at first… I have a Jersey / Irish temper -so i understand. But I will tell you, hands down this is the best software, support, group of gurus out there.
I save after each change I do.. if I like it.. JUST IN CASE. I have learned that. But I will tell you, you will never find a more amazing group of people, support for a product or the quality of the product itself. People here know it has taken me a long time to do what I now know what to do - but am still learning. - trust me still learning. I would never switch to another program.
Reconsider that thought.. adapt like most have to use this program. Price wise, I felt it was very reasonable for this program with all the support, actions etc.. compared to DW and some of the others.
I hope you reconsider
Julie On Sep 2, 2010, at 8:22 PM, Bruce Colgate wrote:
Uh huh. I think I touched a nerve when I posted this Wednesday.
To all who replied, thanks. It confirms for me that there is, in fact, just One Undo.
I get it, that it’s work to add a feature. I used to write code for apps a LONG time ago. And no one likes to un-sew a garment, or start over.
But I have to pass on this software, and I wonder how many other Trial downloaders do the same, for the same reason, but don’t speak up.
I REALLY like this software, and I would love to make it a staple for all my web work, but I can easily see me becoming violent and dangerous over the the One Undo “feature”.
Back to Windows for me.
On Sep 2, 2010, at 7:51 PM, email@hidden wrote:
Honestly will never relate to this kind of logic.
Some things are just deal-breakers. I get it. It’s not a one-size-fits- all world.
Todd
Some things are just deal-breakers. I get it. It’s not a one-size-fits- all world.
True and if Softpress doesn’t want to do the work on it then losing customers is inevitable trial or not. I don’t speak for the company, but just gathering from their response on this issue this is what it appears to be okay to them.
I think the answer that Softpress has given so far is a good deal more nuanced than that. Freeway is built on a framework (MacApp) that does not support multiple undo. In order to provide that service, Freeway would have to be re-written from the ground up using a different framework. I don’t know for sure if they are planning to do that, but I believe that it is necessary for them to move off of the current framework in order to remain compatible with Mac OS X as it evolves. The current framework has been on life-support for some time now, and it’s quite remarkable that Softpress’s ace engineers have managed to keep it running as long as they have.
Walter
Freeway user since 1997
I think the answer that Softpress has given so far is a good deal more nuanced than that.
I rescind my comment tone above as I didn’t want to come off as saying that Softpress is “oh well” about the situation. I don’t speak for them nor do I imply anything by my comment.
I see the issue as “if they currently could, they totally would..” Perhaps a kick in the pants update to Cocoa for Freeway 6 would bring the features users have been hoping for.
Also I’m really hoping that Freeway, someday, will be 64-bit.
