Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > RIP Creative Suite

RIP Creative Suite (Page 2)
Thread Tools
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2013, 03:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by Phileas View Post
If you trust google to supply mission critical services then you're making a huge mistake. With google you never know what offering will fall out of favour next.
A customer of ours had based his company workflow on Google Docs. At one point, due to a simple error made during bookkeeping, the monthly fee didn't go through. Google responded by immediately cutting off services. For a business customer.
Google didn't have a physical office that could be visited, only a phone support center in Ireland. He told us that he would have *immediately* jumped on the next business flight and personally deposited a check on the appropriate desk, had there been an address where this would have been possible.

As it was, his company was literally working off telephone and paper for three business days until the situation was rectified, and services reinstated.

He got his company the hell off ANYTHING Google related as soon as ****ing possible.

I have no idea how much that cost him in lost business, but three days is a hell of a long time.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2013, 05:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
google doc horror story
Which is one of the reasons why we elected to work with dropbox instead - their core business model is built around supplying file sharing services.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2013, 05:18 PM
 
     
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 9, 2013, 08:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by Phileas View Post
Which is one of the reasons why we elected to work with dropbox instead - their core business model is built around supplying file sharing services.
Bingo.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 10, 2013, 03:29 PM
 
The only reason I was forced to upgrade was because CS didn't run on Intel. I'm still running CS3, even with Illustrator's god awful annoying "trace path" bug. CS3 was actually a downgrade from CS because of that stupid bug, but I had to "upgrade" because it would no longer run on my computer.

I'm now getting CS6, and hopefully it'll last me a decade like Photoshop 5.5 + Illustrator 7 did.
"â€ĶI contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 10:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by Phileas View Post
Which is one of the reasons why we elected to work with dropbox instead - their core business model is built around supplying file sharing services.
You may want to look at BitTorrent Sync.

BitTorrent Labs

This way it's 100% under your control.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 01:55 PM
 
Too much geek.

I rather pay the experts for this.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Oakland, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 03:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
You may want to look at BitTorrent Sync.

BitTorrent Labs

This way it's 100% under your control.
This looks pretty good. I am going to give this a shot.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 03:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by Phileas View Post
If you trust google to supply mission critical services then you're making a huge mistake. With google you never know what offering will fall out of favour next.

I have mixed feelings about this.

There are products that people subscribe to because they provide a lot of value and there isn't really something similar - something like Basecamp comes to mind. There are "free" products that people use because they provide some value and people either don't care about the hidden costs, or they figure they'll worry about the future later. There are some commercial products that fall by the wayside, start to suck, whatever, although usually if you stick with a big company and a major product it is usually a good bet.

With all of these sorts of scenarios I think the key is simply avoiding lock in, and being able to switch when/if necessary. This is tough for some users, but many of these users don't think too carefully about these ramifications anyway, they usually just go for whatever is easiest right now. Since many people operate in the here and now, maybe it's just a matter of having a plan B?

Trying to get these people to future proof everything is often fruitless, and some things can't really be future proofed anyway without a crystal ball. What guarantees do we have that GMail, iCloud, Google Drive, Dropbox, Flickr, Instagram, Facebook, etc. will exist in perpetuity? For many years it seemed like Microsoft wasn't going anywhere, though while I would never predict Microsoft's demise at this point, is it an absolute given that MS Office will not diminish in relevance in the coming years?

Point being, there are never any guarantees with anything. You either base decisions around probability, or just have a strong plan B, or both. I tend to suggest both, but I'm not opposed to Google products in general based on what they might do in the future. I also don't discourage people from using iCloud, yet since this has evolved so many times and some services have been discontinued along the way, I realize that there is some danger in iOS users not having their own backups...
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 03:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by Phileas View Post
GIMP is going nowhere. Pixelmator on the other hand, and similar offerings, already do what 90% of all casual users need to do. For $14.99.
I'd wager that for those who really NEED Adobe's big guns, price is not an issue.

It is foolish to think of GIMP as simply an application. GIMP could also be a bunch of screws and nails that could build another thing. Years ago you would have said that Konqueror was going nowhere, and you would have been right if you were only referring to the Linux/Unix web browser application itself.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 04:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
We are not talking about Google Drive.

We are talking about taking an existing mess of functionality and horrific interface and turning it into an industry-grade professional tool, and then possibly selling it AS A SERVICE (because Google doesn't sell products) to what amounts to ambitioned hobbyists and occasional professionals.
I don't see it this way.

Wasn't the idea of ImageReady marketing towards people that need a Photoshop-lite? For starters, I believe there is a market for a Photoshop-lite (whether it is big enough to build a business strategy around I don't know).

Secondly, you have to start somewhere, right? The first versions of Android paled in comparison to iOS, but Google kept on plugging away at it and have gotten much closer to iOS (some would say surpassing, although that is not necessarily my opinion since I don't generally mess around with all of the Android releases).

Anything is possible. Likely is a different story, you could make a strong argument that it isn't likely, but companies being vulnerable tend to have a strong impact on these probabilities.

Seriously?
Please cease the shitty tone and keep your emotions under control.

Adobe has spent the past 25 years making themselves inescapable, eliminating competition and becoming effectively an industry monopoly that has whole markets completely by the balls, and you see them not lasting five years on that?
It depends on how you define "lasting". Microsoft has lasted, but is it as relevant as it once was? I don't know what the timeframe, if any, would be for Adobe to become irrelevant or cease to exist, but their being vulnerable provides opportunities for competition.

Even if Google were to pick up GIMP and run with it (why on earth would they? how is this relevant to their interests? This sounds a lot like "Apple should by Adobe because, um, they can. And secure a market, or something.") it would take years for them to get it up to snuff.

In the meantime, the hobbyists and prosumers can use the Google solution until it no longer sucks, but Google is supposed to somehow make money off them. How?

"Some other product" presumably being an Adobe product, leaving everybody exactly where they started, except with five years' worth of growing pains, incomplete products, and stress.
Monetization is a whole other conversation, I'm not claiming that there is a good way, but one possibility that comes to mind is Google building this as an Android app, perhaps with a web service component to it.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 04:17 PM
 
Wait, I was thinking of Photoshop Elements, and it still exists... Sorry, I was confused. Ignore the bit about Photoshop-lite.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 06:58 PM
 
Adobe's and Microsoft's existence can be measured in decades, and the products that are central to their business can be fairly sensibly relied upon to exist for some realistic timeframe into the future, even if their relevance diminishes over time.

Google's services, on the other hand have a record of not lasting half a decade on average — in total, from teething rough initial release, through growing pains, to being taken outside and drowned in the water barrel.

I see absolutely no incentive whatsoever for Google to pick up the mess that is GIMP and do anything with it. And even if they were to do so, if there is no convincing way to tie it into their core business, it is guaranteed to be a toy project that might get developed for a little while and then dropped at short notice, because that is how Google has always operated.

Anybody looking for a long-term career investment (and getting up to speed with a professional workflow with *any* tool is a huge investment) will — and needs to — stay the hell away from any Google side-project.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 07:11 PM
 
You can't think of any abandoned Microsoft or Adobe project? Perhaps more Google projects are abandoned, but it all depends on what your options are at the time and the importance and nature of your need.

Also, you don't know that the Gimp is a mess. You tend to equate a product to its GUI - you need to stop doing that.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 07:30 PM
 
I tend to evaluate products by how they work for the people using them.

I know we differ on this.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 07:36 PM
 
Adobe abandons things when they are redundant/superceded: Freehand vs Illustrator, Pagemaker vs Indesign. (sniff, freehand).

However, as opposed to a google online solution, if I had owned Freehand I could still run it. The fact that it's abandonware wouldn't matter. I could even keep a dedicated old G5 just for that purpose. It would fit right in with my underground bunker retro theme.

Apps in the cloud just seem like vapor to me.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 07:53 PM
 
The question I ask myself is "what's the business model?"

Google: Organize and sell access to information.
Adobe: Sell software that helps creators create.
Dropbox: Sell a service that allows users to synch files.
Microsoft: Rule the desktop.

To quote Sesame Street: "One Of These Things (is Not Like The Others)"
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 07:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
I tend to evaluate products by how they work for the people using them.
Which is all that matters in the end.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 09:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
I tend to evaluate products by how they work for the people using them.

I know we differ on this.

When it comes to end user support, no we don't, but you can't look at everything through this prism in a thread that takes as broad a look at the computer industry as we are here.

It could be that Gimp's algorithms for blurring something, or whatever its equivalent of the magic wand tool is is magical, and performs much better than Photoshop (and this is just a hypothetical example). If this is the case, in terms of development effort and investment I would bet that the GUI is a small percentage of what goes into pieces this complex. The GUI is profoundly significant in terms of the success of these products, but in this specific case it would be much easier to change the GUI than it would be to have the perfect GUI and no magic wand or blur code (or whatever).
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 09:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by Phileas View Post
Which is all that matters in the end.

True, but these successful outcomes involve strategies to get you there.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 09:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
True, but these successful outcomes involve strategies to get you there.
GIMP had how many years now to get there?
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 09:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by Phileas View Post
GIMP had how many years now to get there?

I'm not defending the merits of the GIMP as an application, I never have and never will.

I'm just saying that we don't know the GIMP to be an utter mess based solely on its GUI. It could be that its GUI is an utter mess while the rest of the app is quite good. It could be that Photoshop is an utter mess while the GUI is decent.

I know this doesn't really matter to end users and to them a bad GUI is a bad app, and I would agree with that, but this conversation is about the possibilities of the GIMP (or most likely pieces of it) being an ingredient or some sort of factor into something that would compete against Photoshop, hypothetically speaking.
     
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 11, 2013, 09:46 PM
 
GIMP is capable of making a layered multisize favicon, which AFAIK, Photoshop cannot... the interface was easy enough to use.
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:09 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2