Maybe since it’s the offspring of Pinegrow, it should be called Pinecone?
Anyway, the one feature I would like to see in this new program more than anything else is multi-monitor support.
1 Like
Branding / Naming:
Hi @matjaz,
I wouldn’t recommend trying to get cutesy with the name (Sapling, Seedling, Squirrel, Pinecone) or try to over think it. Sure its fun for this thread, but these types of names add no value for marketing throughout the industry. Even less regarding organic discovery with searches by potential would be customers.
Instead stay the course and build the brand upward on it’s existing foundations. I would personally remove the “Standard” offering, streamlining and segmenting things into the following three distinct categories.
Keeping the names simple, unified and specifically targeted:
- “Pinegrow Web Designer”
- “Pinegrow Web Developer”
- “Pinegrow WordPress Theme Builder”
Resulting in a concise, targeted and unified Pinegrow product line.
I would likewise keep all three under the existing umbrella of “Pinegrow Web Editor”, but change it to be plural Editor”s”, signifying the existence of different versions targeted towards different groups of users (Designers, Developers, WP Theme Builders). This would allow the distinct differentiation of products tailored towards different users and needs, but also keep the brand solidly unified under the existing Pinegrow brand umbrella of web tools.
Ideally the newly named “Developer” version (formerly Pro), would require more features for successfully appealing towards a wider range of developer needs and requirements throughout the industry.
By following this logical and strategic approach via targeted segmentation of the apps while keeping the brand unified it would allow direct marketing opportunities towards each group of users. All the while showcasing the congruency of the product line and emphasizing the entire product family while it relates to each specific segment of users.
Its a branding and marketing windfall, with all the opportunities and possibilities such an approach would offer the company moving forward, while still leaving further room to grow if needed.
3 Likes
@matjaz I also would advise you to choose for this solution.
Totally agree with @Pinegrow_User, this is the best option to go for !!! 
- That way it’s clear which version is intended for which category/purpose.
- Every product is put under the Pinegrow flag/branding.
- You don’t have to choose another name, which you have to market.
I can say more about it, but I’m going to repeat what @Pinegrow_User already said. He described it very good.
Regarding Bootstrap I am a bit skeptical to use this as a foundation for designers. Even with custom written code it is a challenging task to break out of the typical Bootstrap looking website style.
Some sarcastic websites and articles have already discussed this topic.
There are several things I love to use PG to build a static site (before transforming it into dynamic templates). Robustness and interoperability have already been mentioned. Another point is the big freedom to jump into the code and clean some lines up whenever I want.
But before I even open PG I draw some sketches in a visual design app. (Sketch and XD)
The simplicity to draw in a visual design app without worrying about structure and code at this point is great. These apps have some nice and easy to use prototyping features, which help a lot to visualize the goal for yourself and the people you design it for.
Of course there are so many different ways to build a website and I think this is great. And PGS might be one of these ways.
Maybe some day machine learning will bridge the visual design vs. structure gap in an elegant way. In the mean time I will probably stick to PG Pro 
In the early days, the web was all over the place, and while it certainly made it diverse, it also came off as extremely amateurish. Websites were comparable to photocopied newsletters made by “that one person” in the company who knew how to use Microsoft Publisher, as opposed to professionally printed magazines made by a staff of editors, designers, writers, etc…
Go to the newsstand and pick up any magazine, and there are certain expectations regarding the layout… we don’t expect pieces of the page to fold out or pop up. We don’t expect type to change directions, or the table of contents to be on the last page. Even though magazines can look extremely different, there are certain standards that are followed throughout the industry. Cars are the same way. We expect the steering wheel to be on one side. We expect the gas pedal to be on the right, the brake pedal on the left.
The web desperately needed a professional revamping… it needed expert people who understood design, UI and UX to get involved and say, “all this uniqueness is making it very hard to use this amazing tool we’ve created.” This is why frameworks have become so popular. What has been given up in terms of “uniqueness”, has made the web far more accessible, quicker and easier to use for many more people.
There is still a place for novel design, flashiness and boundary-pushing, but not at the expense of usability or content. The web is no longer a gigantic arts & crafts project, and thankfully so!
1 Like
Boooo… (Maybe that’s my issue with the web nowadays…sooo much code…! )
My early (pre-responsive) sites were very “graphically oriented.” I put a lot of time into the designs and “uniqueness” of them. I sort of considered each site its own little “work of art.” (examples…
http://bayshoremartialarts.com
http://perfectcolortanning.com
But when I look at them now, after a couple of years building responsive sites with Bootstrap, they feel (to me) kinda amateurish and over the top. Too much random skeuomorphism, but that’s what the web was like 10 years ago. Smaller 4:3 monitors were still common, mobile hadn’t caught on yet. It was still the “wild west.”
At first I thought we really lost something special with the big switch over to material/flat design and frameworks. Where was the “creativity?” But with the popularity of smart phones and their small screens, things simply had to become simplified. There needed to be a semblance of uniformity and consistency. I see the wisdom in it now.
Well! I like 'em!
The first one sways a little towards that 90’s web design that we know and love,
but gah!
that "100% satisfaction* … symbol.
that put them into the land of *Get your snake oil here * 
But yeah I like those.
they were classy for their time, the tanning one wears it better than the purple one,
but they are BOTH really good! individual and nicely/well done.
I’d be chuffed to come up with them right now as they DONT look like all the same template stuff which is knocking around
just my half a (none)Cents
oh.and this reminds me of something…
" The carrot went in strong, hard, and unrelenting. However, after being subjected to the boiling water, it softened and became weak"
mmmm, cant quite put my…finger…on it!.
but I enjoyed reading the whole bit from here
http://bayshoremartialarts.com/enlightenment.html
And do you know what I like about these sites and the others here
The PROMINENCE of …Content!
Even with Skeumorphic resonance factors built it, its the CONTENT, which is so easy to see!
not HUGE JUMBOTRON (read *Pointless waste of CONTENT real estate) before the ENDLESSS Scrolling down until WOO HOO 3 Columns of buy the middle one promotions (yep, been guilty of that myself) and more damned scrolling through standard BOOTSTRAP esque blocks…just because… there were available >
And have been rammed with generic bumf.
I like your old sites. They have swagger. poise, (superflous 100% satisfaction symbols) and
Easily accesible content, that’s easy to view.
Nice.
ah the 90’s!
Fun web design… shame about the hair do’s… and the music (well, it was better than the 80’s…mmm in fact the music was improving, we had the dance scene)
mmm I’ve definitley gone off piste
Sorry 
1 Like
Indeed concerning your accessibility comment, once the internet was heading into everyones pocket many things had to change regardless. People just have a hard time accepting that certain uniformity (UI/UX) allow(ed)(s) the web to move forward, we would not be were we are today concerning mobile and e-commerce without it.
The internet sure was a whole lot more fun back then though, long before it became the mainstream business model and entry point for virtually every business across the planet.
Before everyone became mobile, social and busy going into debt as merchandise arrived on their doorsteps from the palm of their hand as they sat on their couch. Back in those days it was exciting as people fired up their trusty TCP/IP and Mosaic Netscape. They just sat and waited as the rest of some simple page downloaded and enjoyed the animated gifs across the top of the page. Those were some truly exciting times of the internet, years before Steve Jobs ever got his job back at Apple.
Back then times were tough, not only were we fighting HTML tables for layout, but coffee came in a tiny cup with no froth or flavors, ah the horror. The 24 hour global news cycle was thankfully absent and you just looked outside yourself for up to the minute weather reports, while you read an actual paper map to plan a road trip.
While people these days act as if they are forced to use the Apollo Guidance Computer verse the mobile phone in their pocket. Designers working in todays web are missing out on all the fun times of years past, while supposedly having it so tough compared to back then. I can’t see why its so hard for so many to be creative with todays web and tools? :—)
Back to the Rabbit and Squirrel (choose wisely between each varmint and be safe out there):
Or does anyone enjoy potatoes ?
^ (ha, ha) Fortunately some people are still having some fun out there on the www and partying like its 1999, until the party was over and everyone had to rethink, regroup and worry about web standards and accessibility. Long before they could make their first duck face and share it with their newly found thousands of virtual friends. :—)
I am sure this new “Web Designer app by Pinegrow” will amply help people reach the web, before the next bubble occurs and we all need to rethink, regroup and look for the next party.
Quack Quack. No matter what I do, which expression I choose. It always looks like a duck face…
1 Like
@matjaz, ok brace yourself once more, here goes. :—)
As I don’t fully yet understand the concept of this coming app, or what it may offer regarding features and workflow, its then hard to really say and I will need to generalize.
But I would push and suggest towards a more vanilla HTML5 semantic approach even when gleaning from Bootstrap, coupled with general Flexbox, CSS Grid, etc. So while Bootstrap does easily offer layout, content, components, utilities, mixins, extends, responsiveness, etc., its all just seen as vanilla from most designers points of view. So the ability for lots of creative styling and user adaptations need to occur past this foundation in their minds right from the beginning regardless of components used.
Even though the majority of things occur in this underlying component scaffolding, in designers minds its only after this stage where most of them begin their thinking. They want to just freely and creatively build and “style” things based upon their design criteria’s and imaginations.
So lets run through some of it …
In doing so they want to easily be able to style the Navbar allowing for any configuration (Mega menus included) and then re-style as they need across breakpoints and mobile. Along with all the other page content items such as Cards, Tabs, Accordions, Forms, Carousels, Sliders, Lightboxes, Filterable and Sortable Portfolios, Scroll Effects, Element Animations and Transitions (CSS/JS), etc. With easy access to Text, Fonts, Icon Sets, responsive Media format inclusions, Images, SVG, Video, Audio, Lazy Loading, Media Players.
Then come the input Forms, Logins, Newsletter signups, etc., which they expect to be working with associated backend files upon export. Along with easy opportunities to connect to and use various required 3rd party integrations and services from across the web. With all the needed access to entry points for doing so along with adding other CSS and JS Plugins and Libraries, with needed wrappers, data-attributes, etc.
Then comes needing to include and offer various Analytics, Location Maps, Site Search, XML Site Maps, CMS solutions, Blogs, E-Commerce, full Social Media integrations, SEO, Local Schema, Localization, WCAG Accessibility, GDPR, Favicon and Touch Icons, etc. While easily being able to upload their finished creations via built in FTP. With the ability to easily share live remote design reviews with clients during the design process.
Basically most features which they encounter across the web themselves is where their expectations begin and I am sure I easily forgot some others which they likewise expect. ;—) Those are some of the things I was referring towards above (in the last bullet point seen again below). So as stated the entry list when designing for the modern web, even at a basic level is vast even for designers.
But if you are speaking of a more semantic approach when using Bootstrap such as this example article and avoiding the general “divitis” which Bootstrap tends to bring. Then yes it would be much better than a purely Bootstrap approach, if that is what you are saying and planning?
Regardless much more needs to occur above any base framework concerning workflow. As I tried to summarize above and which is demonstrated by the mentioned online competition - they and their users have proven most of that and they are working towards even more. Which is not to say it all could not be done and likewise provided in a “Pinegrow desktop app for Web Designers”. Certainly it can, much of the core is already in place with Pinegrow as was previously mentioned and you certainly know. :–)
In the end, from what I have witnessed designers want to quickly begin above this draft vanilla scaffolding. They simply want to begin designing, styling, creating and deploying – albeit with a vast needed feature criteria to work with & build upon with their design skills.
From the few pine needles you have supplied throughout this thread as descriptions of this new Pinegrow designer centric product, perhaps thats the direction you are headed?
PS: How about the team finally also provides the Pinegrow API Documentation to the public. So others can likewise extend this new Designer product in ways if that would be possible. But at least it would offer a more easy and transparent opportunity for people to extend Pinegrow, much more than has been done to this point.
Your turn.
2 Likes
PinegowUser filter engaged …
1 Like
Huh ?
Your reminiscence about the early days of the web reminds me of how I would tell people about the early days of computers, and how we’d dial up BBS’s on our 1200 baud modems, hoping to not get a busy signal. I share your fondness for those simpler, early days on the web, before the hoards of masses arrived via a billion America Online accounts.
1 Like
Webflow is ticking the pace in this new kind of hybrid pro designers apps world, and I think matjaz knows this, so this is a good thing because wf is a great peace of software imo, both for visual designers and coders as well.
The following is a personal opinion.
A tool, however powerful and visual it may be, will not give anything really good without a little talent (and solid technical knowledge).
Whatever the application used (Pinegrow, Webflow, Bootstrap Studio etc…) I had the opportunity to see creations as awesome as others were insipid.
Very often, the best creations come from the predefined templates available in the above-mentioned applications and which, unsurprisingly, are made by professional web designers.
In the end, whatever the application used, all too often, beginners or webdesigner apprentices are reduced to cloning (which may be satisfactory to some extent but does not really reflect - in my opinion - “professional” work) or producing sites with a disappointing visual.
Note: This type of situation is not limited to web design. Give me the best tools in the world, it won’t make me a talented interior decorator capable of creating wonders as I saw in the ads… (to the great regret of my wife:))
4 Likes
totally agree, but when that little talent and solid technical knowledge is in your baggage then that tool make a huge difference.
1 Like
At this point, I reiterate the prerequisites I was talking about earlier in this discussion: If you select modern, robust, very efficient and interoperable tools for any of your particular needs, as long as they can work independently and natively on any of your desktop computers, communicate each other, are able to read/write any genuine HTML/CSS/JS documents and don’t leave you trapped in proprietary formats or processes that does not correspond to standard practices, your pro life will be fine.
To my knowledge, and I’m proud of this, in the list of available visual webdesign applications, there are few candidates who meet all these criteria but Pinegrow is definitely part of my/the perfect mix
3 Likes
Exactly, that is why PG must keep evolving in order to be there in that tool belt of powerful apps but while keeping an eye on the market if you want to compete. Said this imo PG is among the most versatile tools out there. to be honest I still have not have the chance to complete a whole project with it. Slowly migrating away from WF and DW. Thanks