Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

drissa · Apr 21, 2005, 06:55 PM

I have Studio MX - I use Flash and DW but haven't ever really used Freehand or Fireworks.

I am in a position to buy Adobe CS at work, but this doesn't seem like the best time. What might happen with the Macro/Adobe merge? Will we see a combined package and how soon might it happen?

If, in 6 months, we might see an uber-suite, with PS, Illustrator, Indesign, Flash and DW, somehow woven together, then I'll hold the horses...

iMOTOR · Apr 21, 2005, 07:29 PM

I'd at least wait till CS2 is on the shelves. Nobody really knows what Adobe is planning with Studio MX, but if something good does pan out in six months, they will probably offer a special upgrade price from CS. Or the next version of CS could suck big time and then I'll be glad I still have an "un-adobed" version of Studio MX

iDaver · Apr 22, 2005, 01:44 AM

I suspect InDesign, Photoshop and Illustrator will be relatively unaffected by the merger. GoLive, however, might be discontinued in favor of Dreamweaver. We'll see. I think it's likely that any changes to CS will take a year or more. Do you want to do without in the meantime?

drissa · Apr 22, 2005, 04:35 AM

Originally Posted by iDaver

I suspect InDesign, Photoshop and Illustrator will be relatively unaffected by the merger.

I agree. I guess my hope is for a better version of DW, which is very clunky under OS X.

mitchell_pgh · Apr 22, 2005, 11:29 AM

I would say buy once CS2 is out.

Don't wait for CS3 with the Macromedia stuff because we have no idea when that may be. I doubt that Adobe will release CS2 and then release a CS3 6 months later.

drissa · Apr 22, 2005, 01:30 PM

Thanks for the advice.

iMOTOR · Apr 22, 2005, 01:48 PM

Originally Posted by drissa

my hope is for a better version of DW, which is very clunky under OS X.

Dreamweaver works fine for me, are you running v.7.0.1?

Apfhex · Apr 22, 2005, 04:01 PM

Get CS2 since there probably won't be major upgrades from another while. I think I read in another thread that even after the merger there was still going to be a release of the planned new Studio MX.

drissa · Apr 23, 2005, 05:19 AM

Yes, I'm on 7.0.1 and it has always run as if I'm downloading a large file in the background. I read, on the MM forums, that other OS X users felt this way. I don't really mind - it has been very solid. A newer machine might help, although mine isn't exactly ancient - 800MHz Quicksilver, 768MB RAM.

godzookie2k · Apr 23, 2005, 03:06 PM

you're not going to see any real results of the adobe/mm merger until flash 9, cs 3, etc... and with cs2 right around the corner you might as well just wait for it to ship.

loki74 · Apr 24, 2005, 01:01 AM

yeah. Im personally waiting for CS3; I wouldt have the money to get them both. My suspicion is that all of the MM web content stuff will be keepers, but Adobe will stick with its general graphics apps. thats just what i think

anyhoo, i just hope they update the intefaces to make them consistent with Photoshop and Illustrator. Im a real b!tch about that

.. They didnt change the CEPRO look when they bought that out so....

Oh well. I'm sure that if its with Adobe it will turn out alright. But I would agree, they might run into some rough waters antitrust wise...

godzookie2k · Apr 24, 2005, 09:36 AM

not remotely. Its not illegal to have a monopoly (not like adobe has one, but..) Its illegal to abuse a monopoly.

loki74 · Apr 26, 2005, 01:51 AM

Originally Posted by godzookie2k

not remotely. Its not illegal to have a monopoly (not like adobe has one, but..) Its illegal to abuse a monopoly.

That just means that Adobe will win the suit... I'd be surprised if theres not even one person/company out there who sees this as a chance to file a lawsuit against a big company. Im not saying that Adobe should get sued--they've done nothing wrong; like you said, they havent abused their power--but someone will probably try...

godzookie2k · Apr 26, 2005, 07:56 AM

what suit? there can't be a suit!

loki74 · Apr 26, 2005, 11:40 PM

Originally Posted by godzookie2k

what suit? there can't be a suit!

There is no suit, dont worry. I meant the theoretical suit that stingy people make against evey sucessful person becasue they're in denial with the fact that these successful people are better than them and they got there without breaking the law.

I will again state: Adobe has thusfar done nothing wrong. But people will accuse them, and like I said, Adobe will win.

godzookie2k · Apr 27, 2005, 10:24 AM

now you just sound like a bitter victim of a frivolous lawsuit.

Chuckit · Apr 27, 2005, 01:42 PM

Don't antitrust laws forbid companies from basically buying up all their competition?

godzookie2k · Apr 27, 2005, 02:02 PM

Don't antitrust laws forbid companies from basically buying up all their competition?

no, not in america. Again, its not illegal to have a monopoly, its illegal to abuse it.

loki74 · Apr 27, 2005, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by godzookie2k

now you just sound like a bitter victim of a frivolous lawsuit.

not directly personally... but I see them all the time (my father is a doctor) and I see myself one day as a business owner, and I know that if I am successful, people will bash me for it, just like they do to nearly every successful person out there.

I'll leave the politics part out of it... but yeah, I think that frivolous lawsuits are some of the most ridiculous things in this world...

Chickit: Antitrust (i think) is actually a common misnomer--antitrust refers to well, trusts. That is, when multiple companies who should be in competition meet and agree to gouge a price, effectively creating a monopoly, and very effectively screwing cunsumers over.

So unless I'm mistaken (which I very well could be) antitrust laws would not deal with monopolies.

If it were illegal to have a monopoly, that would just be unfair. I mean, lets say thers an oligopoly, and some sort of scandal or natural disaster causes the other one or two competing companies to fail. Thus the oligopoly becomes a monopoly. The holder of that monopoly has done nothing wrong, but all of a sudden they are breaking the law. That would be ludacris! Another problem would be, who decides what is a monopoly and what is an oligopoly? I mean, Adobe vs the cumulitave Jasc, GiMP, etc could be considered a rather slanted oligopoly, while others would say its a pure monopoly.

And I'm sure other problems would arise if the existance of a monopoly were illegal, but I wont bother listing them all...

Chuckit · Apr 27, 2005, 07:34 PM

Found it. Doesn't this law forbid a corporation from buying its major competitors?

Big Mac · May 5, 2005, 08:12 AM

Originally Posted by loki74

Chickit: Antitrust (i think) is actually a common misnomer--antitrust refers to well, trusts. That is, when multiple companies who should be in competition meet and agree to gouge a price, effectively creating a monopoly, and very effectively screwing cunsumers over.

So unless I'm mistaken (which I very well could be) antitrust laws would not deal with monopolies.

Sorry for the resurrection of this thread with an off-topic reply, but I digress. . . You are technically correct - there is a slight distinction between the terms trust and monopoly, and you have accurately defined a trust. But the terms are very easily interchangeable, if not synonymous. For instance, Microsoft - which many would term a monopoly - was accused by the DoJ of violating Sherman Antitrust.

:dragonflypro: · May 13, 2005, 07:06 PM

ok, so will there be a Studio MX 2006?

godzookie2k · May 13, 2005, 09:58 PM

yeah probably. Actually I think it'll be 2005, iirc flash is supposed to drop by summer.