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 > Enthusiast Zone > Art & Graphic Design > Adobe buys Macromedia...

Adobe buys Macromedia...
Thread Tools
siMac
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2005, 07:28 AM
 
I for one have never particularly liked Macromedia's apps, but I can't help but feel that this is still bad news...

http://macnn.com/rd.php?id=28831

How this one got past the antitrust/monopoly laws is beyond me. That just leaves Adobe vs. Corel - place your bets now!
|\|0\/\/ 15 7|-|3 71|\/|3
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2005, 07:45 AM
 
I feel the same way. I hope it's a good thing, but I don't see how it will be.

Adobe is becoming ever less Mac friendly IMHO.
     
Lucidwray
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Great State of Texas
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2005, 11:11 AM
 
I have used both their apps for years. Im a Macromedia MX nut, and this is not good news. Fireworks blows away ImageReady every day of the week and now there is no way its going to survive this.

I truly hope they dont screw up Dreamweaver.
nolo contendere: A legal term meaning: "I didn't do it, judge, and I'll never do it again."
     
eggman
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2005, 11:18 AM
 
I do like Macromedia apps, and I'm very distressed. I prefer FreeHand to Illustrator, and I can't see how FreeHand will survive this. I vastly prefer Fireworks to ImageReady for slicing web graphics, and I fear that the UI consistancy and shared codebase of PhotoShop and ImageReady will make Fireworks seem superfluous.

So, already, two of my favorite bread and butter apps now appear endangered and the many, many hours I've spent accumulating power-user level skills with them - not to mention the money I've spent on umpteen upgrades, seem to be endangered.

I suspect that Flash and Dreamweaver won't be significantly hurt by this acquisition... but you never know. It really creates a lot of uncertainty for those of us who consider these essential tools.
     
iMOTOR
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2005, 11:58 AM
 
This is very
     
eyevaan
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2005, 12:28 PM
 
Sounds like it falls deep into "Anti-Trust" so we will have to see if it gets final approval. CNN-money makes it seem like the deal is not locked down.
     
kaboom
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2005, 05:30 PM
 
I agree. I have no idea how this can go through without some sort of inquiry.
That being said, I really hope Freehand dies a horrible, fiery death! That piece of crap is the bane of my existence.
     
art_director
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2005, 06:30 PM
 
It will go through and the best of both worlds will finally be brought together. I don't think this is bad, I think it's good. If Quark was buying them I'd quit advertising and go into real estate.
     
eggman
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2005, 07:07 PM
 
Best of both worlds? Not. Bloody. Likely.

The best software results when you have competition. You don't get something better than Illustrator or FreeHand by mating Illustrator and FreeHand.

You get something better than Illustrator and FreeHand when Adobe is worried that the next revision of FreeHand will have a killer feature that their designers hadn't thought of yet... and Macromedia has the same concerns about Illustrator.

That way, you can be pretty certain that next year FreeHand will get better and Illustrator will get better.

Consolidation will reduce labor costs... by laying off some folks. And that could improve profitability for Adobe/Macromedia shareholders.

But it's not good news for us, their customers.
     
art_director
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2005, 11:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by eggman
Best of both worlds? Not. Bloody. Likely.

The best software results when you have competition. You don't get something better than Illustrator or FreeHand by mating Illustrator and FreeHand.

You get something better than Illustrator and FreeHand when Adobe is worried that the next revision of FreeHand will have a killer feature that their designers hadn't thought of yet... and Macromedia has the same concerns about Illustrator.

That way, you can be pretty certain that next year FreeHand will get better and Illustrator will get better.

Consolidation will reduce labor costs... by laying off some folks. And that could improve profitability for Adobe/Macromedia shareholders.

But it's not good news for us, their customers.


In most cases I would agree, not this one.

I believe both companies have truly talented developers that, in concert, can make amazing applications. And, unlike Quark, Adobe tends to drive themselves mighty hard. For example, that's how Photoshop became the powerhouse it is today. They didn't do it because anyone else was nipping at their heels.
     
eggman
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2005, 07:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by art_director
In most cases I would agree, not this one.

I believe both companies have truly talented developers that, in concert, can make amazing applications. And, unlike Quark, Adobe tends to drive themselves mighty hard. For example, that's how Photoshop became the powerhouse it is today. They didn't do it because anyone else was nipping at their heels.
Actually, during the most innovative period of Photoshop's history, they did have competitors nipping at their heels. PhotoStyler. PixelPaint Professional. Lumena. LivePicture. xRes.

Since Photoshop became dominent, each successive release of the product has had fewer and fewer "killer features". It used to be that it was a "no-brainer" to upgrade to the new version of Photoshop... but the last few releases have been increasingly less compelling to me.
     
art_director
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2005, 08:08 AM
 
Not one of those applications ever posed a challenge to Pshop. Gimp poses a greater challenge than all of them put together.
     
Mac Guru
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2005, 11:02 AM
 
Sounds like it falls deep into "Anti-Trust"
Keep in mind there are STILL alternatives... Corel and GiMP still exist... Paint Shop Pro anyone?
     
PiperH
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2005, 02:42 PM
 
This merger has to be bad news for everyone except the directors of Macromedia. Without getting bogged down in one of those fun but pointless "xx is great and xx is a load of rubbish" debates, its simply logical that you must make a better application if someone else is making a good one. Look how Quark stagnated until InDesign gave them a kicking.

Adobe will have the design field to itself (apart perhaps from the irritation of Quark's installed base). I predict that the only Macromedia application to survive, maybe, will be Dreamweaver. The merger will give Adobe a massive captive market who'll have no choice but buy whatever they decide to release.

I console myself by remembering that pretty much all the software around is so good, and will do more or less everything I want, that I don't really care if there are more upgrades. I'll spend the money instead on things I need more.
     
eyevaan
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2005, 03:04 PM
 
have to agree with you PiperH. Adobe will choose the endusers options, and we will have to deal with it. There is only one exception that I would make, not to be difficult just an addition, and that is ColdFusion and Flash. Particularly CF does not have a good Adobe equal and thus they will keep that one - and Flash kind of speaks for itself. Personally I would love to see them keep the Suite intact and make CF, Mac compatible instead of having to work on the PC everytime I want to use CF...
     
art_director
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2005, 03:05 PM
 
Your rationale doesn't explain GIMP.
     
PiperH
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2005, 03:09 PM
 
No, its true, nor does my rationale explain why Photoshop got to be so good without any serious competition. But I still think that broadly the merger will be bad for users
     
art_director
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2005, 03:20 PM
 
Time will tell.
     
art_director
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2005, 03:21 PM
 
Again, unlike Quark, Adobe is a smart company. They understand that in time indolence kills corporations. They'll keep it fresh and forward moving.
     
PiperH
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2005, 03:51 PM
 
art director, just out of curiosity, do you work for the PR dept of Adobe?
     
York911
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: oHIo
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2005, 03:52 PM
 
God how I wish Adobe would just buy Quark and make my life a whole lot easier.
I have unexpectedly quit.

Dual G5 2Ghz :: 4 GB :: OSX 10.4.x
     
budster101
Baninated
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Illinois might be cold and flat, but at least it's ugly.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2005, 03:58 PM
 
I wish someone would buy Quark and then shelf that POS.
     
York911
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: oHIo
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2005, 04:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by budster101
I wish someone would buy Quark and then shelf that POS.
exactly.
I have unexpectedly quit.

Dual G5 2Ghz :: 4 GB :: OSX 10.4.x
     
art_director
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2005, 04:02 PM
 
PiperH:

No, I'm just able to recgnize and credit a corporation that's always done right by me. As an art director I've been using their products for many years and, while not perfect, they've done better than all their competitors in my opinion.

Take Quark, for example. Their application has been consistently inconsistent, their customer service a complete effing joke and their "upgrades" nearly non-existent.
     
godzookie2k
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 23, 2005, 11:17 AM
 
I predict that the only Macromedia application to survive, maybe, will be Dreamweaver. The merger will give Adobe a massive captive market who'll have no choice but buy whatever they decide to release.

Say what? Flash will stay with the plugin incorporating PDF somehow (god help us), golive will eat it, dreamweaver will stay, freehand will eat it, illustrator will stay, director will stay, cold fusion will stay, Flash paper will probably die in favor of some sort of pdf hybrid. Homesite will stay, contribute will probably stay. Actually most of Macromedias application lineup will probably remain the same with the exception of fireworks and freehand. Both applications I have no problems seeing put to the grave.

In general I don't like the thought of Adobe the bloatware kings taking over flash (what pays my bills) but aside from that I think they'll do a good job with everything else. It'd be nice to get a decent flash, dreamweaver and director UI, but I don't look forward to the 30 meg PDFlash plugin.
     
Weyland-Yutani
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: LV-426
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 23, 2005, 11:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by art_director
Again, unlike Quark, Adobe is a smart company. They understand that in time indolence kills corporations. They'll keep it fresh and forward moving.
La mierda.

Adobe has become completely stagnated of late. Photoshop 5 to CS 2 .. Illustrator 8 to CS 2.. Distiller.. GoLive.. Realistically we are at PS 5.4, Illustrator 8.6 - it was funny when the first version of GoLive from Adobe was released it was a version number higher than the GoLive Cyberstudio before it but almost identical in features Except it was from Adobe now. InDesign should be at version 1.3 now.

Actions speak louder than words. Since the late 90s Microsoft has been more innovative than Adobe. I don't mind so much, Adobe makes good products that work and are solid enough but to trying to convince people who actually use their products for a living that they are trying to "keep it fresh and moving forward" is a waste of breath.

By the Macromedia aqcuistition Adobe seems to have understood that it isn't indolence that kills companies (Quark still lives) rather the lack of total dominance of the market (again looking at Quark and Microsoft).

Apple is <said with some bias> the most innovative software company on Earth but they have only a fraction of the market.

“Building Better Worlds”
     
godzookie2k
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 23, 2005, 02:04 PM
 
Adobe has become completely stagnated of late. Photoshop 5 to CS 2 .. Illustrator 8 to CS 2.. Distiller.. GoLive.. Realistically we are at PS 5.4, Illustrator 8.6

Are you kidding? CS is light years beyond what photoshop 5 and illustrator 8 were. I think you're jaded adobe outlook is fogging up your memory.
     
Weyland-Yutani
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: LV-426
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 24, 2005, 10:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by godzookie2k
Adobe has become completely stagnated of late. Photoshop 5 to CS 2 .. Illustrator 8 to CS 2.. Distiller.. GoLive.. Realistically we are at PS 5.4, Illustrator 8.6

Are you kidding? CS is light years beyond what photoshop 5 and illustrator 8 were. I think you're jaded adobe outlook is fogging up your memory.
Maybe

“Building Better Worlds”
     
MacDog
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 24, 2005, 11:12 AM
 
Given that not only has the deal not been approved yet, but nobody here knows what will happen to all the apps � and yet the bragging, speculation, b!tching and complaining is in high gear.

Some of you may not even be old enough to remember when Adobe purchased Aldus many years ago � Aldus owned Freehand at the time. Everyone was complaining that Freehand would die. Well, the SEC made Adobe sell off Freehand � which resulted in Macromedia coming into existence.

I don't know what will happen with all the apps after the merger, but I'm fairly certain that:

1) Freehand will (unfortunately) not die (probably get sold)
2) Dreamweaver will not die
3) GoLive will not die (probably drop to a consumer-level app or get sold)
4 Fireworks & ImageReady will most likely get merged into one app
5 Flash isn't going anywhere
6 Cold Fusion isn't going anywhere
7 We will all complain about something, even if nothing at all changes
The Graphic Mac: Tips, tricks and commentary for design, Adobe and Mac OSX.
     
Demonhood
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Land of the Easily Amused
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 24, 2005, 07:12 PM
 
     
PiperH
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 25, 2005, 06:09 AM
 
why all the snidey sideswipes at FreeHand? I think its time to take sides. FreeHand is usable and wonderful and Illustrator is obscurantist and hateful. There now, I've said it.
And another thing: art_director, I don't think that you're an art director at all. There now, I've said that, too.
     
godzookie2k
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 25, 2005, 08:32 AM
 
lol@taking software choice personally
     
iREZ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Los Angeles of the East
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 25, 2005, 03:54 PM
 
illustrator>freehand
NOW YOU SEE ME! 2.4 MBP and 2.0 MBP (running ubuntu)
     
Phil Sherry
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 25, 2005, 06:55 PM
 
If they kill Fireworks and keep Image Ready, then there is something very wrong in the minds of those people.
     
loki74
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 25, 2005, 11:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by art_director
Again, unlike Quark, Adobe is a smart company. They understand that in time indolence kills corporations. They'll keep it fresh and forward moving.
Does being smart place someone outside of the bounds of economic laws? I think not. (actually its being smart that binds us to the economic laws) Lets just ask ourselves: WHY does Adobe make and sell software, and continue to improve it? So that people can create cool stuff, and make the world a better place? Sure, partly, but thats not the main reason. They do it TO MAKE MONEY. If they can still make a dividend, then they have very little reason to make drastic improvements. Why do you think that MS SUCKS and Apple IS the most innovative software company? Because--MS has the marketshare and the low prices. SO Apple has to either: slash prices, or use nonprice competition: innovation of its software. They cheifly do the latter.

Anyone whos spent half a minute in ANY economics class should know and understand this. It has nothing to do with "I like [Adobe or MM] better" or "[Adobe or MM] are smart people" or "app x is better than app y." Its simply fact. Adam Smith figures most of this stuff out AGES AGO. Why we are debating it in a forum today... I don't know.

The only way that Adobe will drastcly improve in its software upgrades is if some other company either magically comes out with a better project (fat chance there, eh?) OR they have a more consumer/entry level pro app with a lower price and they undersell Adobe to an alarming degree.

Indolence only kills companies if there is another product from another company to beat it. So until GiMP, PSP, Painter, etc. can do everything Photoshop can, and just as easily, well, dont expect some huge upgrade.

The power of money, and the desire and ease of its acquisition, FAR exceed any intrisic reward for making better software.

Regarding PSP... I used to use it, until I switched to Mac. But I must say, it comes nowhere close to Photoshop, especially since there is no Mac version (last I checked there wasnt).

As for my prediction on the lineup? The MM Web Apps stay, Flash marries PDF, everything else is Adobe. But who knows?

Competition + Self Interest = Progress and Innovation.
Welcome to the capitalist world. There ain't nothing better.
     
godzookie2k
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2005, 08:28 AM
 
its not against the law for adobe to have a monopoly (which they don't) so stop harping on it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly

Also, photoshop has had virtually no competition for this long and its quite a viable application, explain that. What about flash? Flash has had virtually no (serious) competition for eons and its remained quite viable. Same with director, unmatched.
     
loki74
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 26, 2005, 11:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by godzookie2k
its not against the law for adobe to have a monopoly (which they don't) so stop harping on it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly

Also, photoshop has had virtually no competition for this long and its quite a viable application, explain that. What about flash? Flash has had virtually no (serious) competition for eons and its remained quite viable. Same with director, unmatched.
cool down.

I think you misundertand, and I apologize for my apparent lack of clarity, but it occurs to me that such a confustion as yours would happen most likely if you read nothing but the first line of my post. Or maybe im just crazy.

By economic "law" I mean, not a legal issue, but what happens in a system; laws of physics, etc, except in economics. The laws I was referring to, I guess you could just call them "natural predictable happenstace" but.. whatever.

All Im trying to say is that self interest (aka the "Invisible Hand") is stronger than the instict that maybe we will fail if we dont improve. And they probably wont fail even IF they dont improve their apps, just because everyone else is so far behind.

Out of the 4 economic factors: land, labor, capital, and entreprenurship, entrepreneurship is the most important. Both Adobe and MM realized this from the start, and thats why there is nothing as good as Photoshop and nothing quite like Flash.

Apple realized this also, and thats why theres nothing like a Mac.

I know you read my post in the other thread, (about 1/2 hour earlier to be precise) and I even said, Adobe has done nothing wrong. I've read your posts thouroughly, and I think I deserve the same respect from you. So like I said, chill. Afterall, you are the one who laughs at people taking software choice personally. Taking the first line of someone elses post personally without even considering the rest is even more ridiculous.

Once again, if the miscommunication was my fault, unlikely as it seems, you have my apology.
     
D3SIGN3R
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2005
Location: columbus ohio
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 25, 2005, 04:28 PM
 
adobe bought macromedia to advance work on a flash pdf; they are trying to cut micrsoft off at the pass on this one. i highly doubt they will merge illustrator and freehand. i do agree with you on your point about competition and getting better software. and yes...it all comes down to money.


Originally Posted by eggman
Best of both worlds? Not. Bloody. Likely.

The best software results when you have competition. You don't get something better than Illustrator or FreeHand by mating Illustrator and FreeHand.

You get something better than Illustrator and FreeHand when Adobe is worried that the next revision of FreeHand will have a killer feature that their designers hadn't thought of yet... and Macromedia has the same concerns about Illustrator.

That way, you can be pretty certain that next year FreeHand will get better and Illustrator will get better.

Consolidation will reduce labor costs... by laying off some folks. And that could improve profitability for Adobe/Macromedia shareholders.

But it's not good news for us, their customers.
     
   
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
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:53 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,