About Us

Bulletpoint StarImulus® is a technology focused design + interactive agency.

In addition to our client services we also have a few products in the works. Our office is always filled with chatter and this blog is an outlet for our creative energy, rants and ideas.

Podium

StacksStacks ®
A group task management solution that finally makes sense.

Sign Up For A Free Trial »

Featured Project

Mar5

I’m not so sure about this ‘Coda’ revolution.

coda-devNote: I wrote this post on a personal blog a few years ago, but I think it still pertains to developers using Coda or any all-in-one application.

…Panic software (the makers of Transmit FTP) have released a new “all in one” web site management application called Coda. The basic goal of this app is to take a bunch of things needed to build websites and place them all together in one application. Now, pardon my skepticism and negativity, but the best part about using an operating system, particularly one like Mac OS X, is that I can easily use multiple simple or complex applications in a quick fashion to complete projects. And to put it in short, I just don’t get the point of putting everything together in one app, even if it is developed by some of the best software makers around.

In fact, the whole idea seems to go against all the benefits of running OS X, much less running multiple applications targeted to exactly what I need. Granted, some apps get a little intense and do more than I may need. For example, I can’t say I use scripting in many apps that support it, but that’s because I don’t have to. An application like TextMate gives me the opportunity to pick and choose exactly what I want from a text editor. It isn’t trying to do too much, particularly because if it did it would interrupt the way I work. The things I don’t use don’t get in my way, and the things I do use are easy to get to. Sure, there are applications out there .. iTunes .. hut…hum.. that do handle tons of tasks all under one umbrella. But guess what, advanced music creators probably don’t use iTunes to do the majority of their composing, editing, and refining. Even though it may have the capability to do some of these tasks. This is why Apple created iWeb for novice web builders, because it allows them to do what they need without getting drug into the depths of web development. The problem is, Coda is iWeb for pros, which is a paradox in and of itself.

Here’s the gist of what I am getting at — the ideal application should be great at handling everything you need to do and shouldn’t get in the way if you don’t use every feature it offers.

Coda, to me, doesn’t seem to follow this line of logic. Rather, it forces the developer to use everything it provides and it doesn’t give much leeway in one direction or the other. For instance, Coda comes with Transmit FTP built in. Which sounds great until you want to connect to a client’s site to update one tiny PDF file. Suddenly you find yourself launching the entire client web project just to make one tiny update, an update that won’t even require 80% of the tools that Coda brings up. It’s like using photoshop to casually view pictures, no one wants to do it! Having an application that does too much is like having a beautiful piece of jewelry that weighs too much to wear. It may look great but dealing with it first hand just seems like a waste of time and comfort.

posted in: Apple, software, tools, web development

This post was published on Friday, March 5, 2010 at 12:48 pm

Leave a comment


Comments

1

Jesse Schutt

March 5, 2010 at 2:45 pm

I’m not so sure I agree with this assessment. Granted, I am a Coda user…

I love the fact that I can fire up one application and have almost all of the tools I need right in one window. To me, I’d rather not have to open a text editor, ftp program, and css helper in separate programs.

What you seem to be suggesting is a program that does everything you want without doing anything you don’t. That’s very subjective.

And, occasionally I do open Photoshop to view images. Because, IF I see the need to correct some colors or fix elements of an image, the tool is open and ready to perform.

2

Michael Puhala

March 5, 2010 at 2:58 pm

With all due respect, I’m not sure I follow your line of logic either. In the above example, when you simply want to update one ‘tiny’ PDF file, Coda does not prevent you from using your FTP client of choice.

Even if Coda is a swiss army knife, that doesn’t mean I can’t pull out my hammer or my drill to get the job done. It just so happens that the swiss army knife comes in handy in a lot of applications. The same is true with Coda. It’s great to have a terminal, text/code editor and FTP in a single app. But that does not preclude me from using FileZilla when I have a simple FTP task.

3

Chris McCorkle

March 5, 2010 at 3:52 pm

I respect your opinion and humbly disagree.

Having used Coda to develop a crapload of websites, I have never felt “violated” or “invaded” by its extras.

They provide a very nice UI for web development, complete with (the now very common and almost necessary) syntax highlighting and passive FTP.

I’m not very sure about Coda coming “with Transmit FTP built in.” Yes, you can import your Transmit favorites, but I never feel like I’m running two apps at once when I save a file to my web server. When you bring up your issue about updating a PDF file (assuming you’re simply overwriting a copy that exists on the server), I personally would not launch a web development app with FTP built in to upload a single file; I’d launch Transmit or FileZilla to handle a simple file transfer.

Ultimately, I don’t feel like Coda is an “all in one” application. Yes, there are many, many improvements they could make to the UI and overall file handling, but I still don’t feel like I’m being forced to use anything I don’t want to.

4

Bruce

March 9, 2010 at 10:13 am

Thanks for the comments.

I do think that all-in-one setups can work satisfactorily, it’s just that there’s a trade off you have to be willing to make. Here at Imulus we have a few developers that use Visual Studio, and by definition this means that the majority of the time those programmers live strictly in Visual Studio.

The point I’m making is that once you’re in the Coda world you’re locked in for all of your web development unless you want to change your entire process. Where as I have the option to rotate in and out individual applications that best fit my process. If I want to use a new text editor instead of TextMate I can swap that in and the rest of the process is unchanged. If I want to try a different FTP application I can. This is what’s great about having niche applications, you have the ability to always use what’s best and not re-adapt your entire workflow.

If you stick to an all-in-one solution you have to commit to that solution. I’m sure for some people (obviously a few who have written comments here) this is the easiest and cleanest solution. I’m simply making the case that I wouldn’t want to work like that.