Ouch! WF not for pros?!

Publishing help General
23

@Blaise_Posmyouck You must remember that Webflow is constantly evolving. Alone in 2015 Webflow got so many cool features. As well as flex box and other small details in 2016.

I think the longer Webflow is around the more features we have. I still remember 2 years back when I first started and everything was different and basic. Now I am struggling to keep up and learn all the new features that are being constantly released. (Not because it’s hard to learn… I have just been too lazy) but the point is Webflow is constantly evolving and I am excited to see what will Webflow look in 10 years, 1 year, in a month, and maybe even next week. :wink::blush:

Be sure to ask me any questions if all that I said does not make sense. :wink::blush:

24

An experienced full-stack web developer has a different set of goals in mind that WebFlow’s target audience. You’re right, they have optimized their workflow to generate all of the necessary components pretty quickly. But I know from experience that the quality of the DESIGN executed by that person is almost always far below a top-tier standard.

The reason? The cost of rapid iteration, despite their optimized process, is often too high to incentivize trying 20-30 different options for a design. With WebFlow, the iteration cycle is undoubtedly faster. Even if the seasoned full-stack developer has a ridiculously quick rebuild and auto-refresh in place, you’re still jumping between code and the end-result in a dance that just takes a little bit longer than having it all happen immediately in one place.

Of course, the seasoned full-stack web developer theoretically has better code at the end of this process. It’s more modular and easier to make huge changes. There’s no debating that.

They’re just different tools with different pros and cons. But we at least need to acknowledge that WebFlow is better at some parts of that process.

2 Likes
25

Uh, I never said that.

26

Nah, you’re not. Code editor on the left, browser on the right, live code away. There’s no more switch/refresh to check progress. That being said, I think Webflow is a wonderful tool, but I get tired of hearing how people think they can design/develop sites faster then experienced developers, designers, etc. Then they fall back on the claim that because they use Webflow they’re somehow better designers because they don’t code, which is just silly.

Webflow is just a tool, it’s not your identity.

27

@jwburkhard That was the message I got. But everybody has there own opinions so that’s fine with me that you don’t necessarily agree with me.

I just don’t understand why people should bring up that a developer has better variety in terms of development then someone who is using Webflow.

Not to be rude, but isn’t this more than obvious?

To sum it up, I haven’t heard of a lot developers using Webflow but rather designers, such as myself… Who has not one clue about coding and therefore is very thankful for Webflow. Just like a lot of people here.

So I guess it really doesn’t matter to me what a developer can do… I’m not a developer so couldn’t care less.

But if you are, sure try it out, see which option is best for you. In my case it’s Webflow. In yours from your expectations it might be to code it.

I’m not here to argue with you but rather to help those in the Forum who need help. And if you feel as coding is the better option for you. Go for it. It would be cool to see what cool techniques you will be able to accomplish. :wink::blush::grinning::+1:

28

Hi @jwburkhard, thanks for your comments, the feedback is always welcome. I thought I would add my opinion :slightly_smiling:

Sorry but a strong front end developer can run circles around a tool like Webflow.

I think that statement is a little vague, I am sure there are some strong front end developers out there, but I am not sure exactly how they would “run circles” around Webflow, if that could be quantified, I would love to those figures. For this point though, I will concede, there is probably is some guru’s out there.

A lot of you don’t seem to understand development in the first place and really don’t know what a modern workflow looks like. With a few commands a developer can build their libraries, scaffold up a site, and automate their site deployment.

When it comes to styling the site and including interactions, developers have more control over what goes on and what can happen versus using Webflow. A developer will already know what CSS framework (bourbon, foundation, skel3, bootstrap, uikit) they will be using and likely already have a customized version of said framework they go to when starting a project.

Most of the time it’s a simple git clone and gulp to get things started. Then with packages like browsersync, a developer can write semantic DRY CSS on the fly and create a robust, interactive and performant site faster then any WYSIWG tool on the market.

Yes, there are different methods and workflows that one could setup, to help automate the site design, publishing and distribution. If a developer has the chops and the resources, they can do it.

Let’s not even get into interactivity because the very small library that is offered with Webflow doesn’t come close to what can be accomplished by a developer.

If you mean, can a developer utilize any code ever written, or create new code and employ that to their own non-webflow projects without any functional, technical or platform constraints, you have a point there.

Webflow does not have every kind of interactive widget that is possible to create built in, but Webflow does not limit what can be done using front scripting like jQuery to add plugins etc to the site.

It is possible to use javascript front end scripting to integrate many kinds of jQuery plugins, custom scripts, third party services etc.

Webflow is a great tool, but it’s limited in scope and constrains the creative process outside of its own framework, so stop kidding yourself over how great you are compared to actual developers.

I agree, Webflow is a great tool :slight_smile:

I think to say that it is limited in scope and constrains the creative process outside of it’s own framework is a little like saying it is Webflow’s fault that we do not support every possible feature so we are somehow limiting the creative design process.

I think that Webflow helps to boost the creative process for developers. Developers can quickly prototype design layouts, without having to worry about the hosting for staging sites, they can integrate custom code, export quickly for testing on external servers, have options to minify code or not, and easy site management.

I would not expect all developers to drop everything and use Webflow exclusively, that’s on Webflow to continue to produce new features, that give developers more tools and more reasons for them to use Webflow. Keep in mind too, Webflow is an excellent tool, to bridge the gap between designer and developer, because in the end, can’t we all just get along ? :slight_smile:

4 Likes
29

The problem with your premise is that you are missing the element of design sense. Sure a coder can do all that stuff, but the reason why webflow users create such amazing looking sites is because it opens up the web to amazing designers that didn’t used to have the ability to design for the web. You can code a site perfectly, but still have it look pretty awful. You can also write the cleanest code you’ve ever seen, but everyday people don’t see code, do they?

It’s like comparing the best painting technique vs an incredible artist. The person with the technique will know all the ways to use paint but won’t know what they’re painting. But the artist can visualize the entire project and find ways of creating that vision.

5 Likes
30

but I get tired of hearing how people think they can design/develop sites faster then experienced developers, designers, etc.

It depends on the complexity of those sites. Generally, " A vs B" discussions lead to heated yet meaningless debates, because they miss details such as the context of use.

For relatively simple sites, without much glitter and special effects, Webflow does perform quite well for professional purposes and is definitely far more efficient than Wordpress, for example.

Regarding more complex sites, you are most probably correct. What is fascinating in that case, though, is Webflow’s potential. So far, it does show potential to become the tool of choice for bigger web sites, as well.

I pray that Webflow keep its direction of delivering great features and excellent usability. I double pray it does not get acquired by some bigger enterprise, as this is usually the demise of any good product.

1 Like
31

[Mod Removal. No need to resurrect a weeks-old thread to point out a small grammatical error from 10 posts up. That’s what a private message is for. :sunglasses:]

1 Like