Comments on: Adobe to buy Macromedia for $3.4 billion

Document publishing giant looks to multimedia content as the next step in building its software empire.

[Stating]

Great, More Jobs Lost

Great, just great. The Bay Area needs even more jobs lost, and SF needs an even smaller tax base. Once the buyout is completed, Adobe's gonna whack away at Macro like crazy to boost profitability. High anxiety for Macro folks. Bus operations - Finance, Accounting, HR, IT, will get hit first, then they'll go after Customer Service, Marketing, etc.

Keith
www.techcando.com

[Stating]

Great, More Jobs Lost

Great, just great. The Bay Area needs even more jobs lost, and SF needs an even smaller tax base. Once the buyout is completed, Adobe's gonna whack away at Macro like crazy to boost profitability. High anxiety for Macro folks. Bus operations - Finance, Accounting, HR, IT, will get hit first, then they'll go after Customer Service, Marketing, etc.

Keith
www.techcando.com

[Michael Grogan]

As an end user...

...I have to say that both Adobe and Macromedia suck! Pdf documents ahve always been a pain because they're too bulky; even on a high end machine a PDF doc won't scroll smoothly in reader because it's just too damn big. Flash may be great for authoring but for vieewing streaming video it sucks. Even when the entire video is downloaded watching it on the Flash player is a halting and jerky experience. I'd love too see both companies bite the big one!

[Rusdude]

You're only half right

While it's generally agreed the PDF (especially the viewer/editor) is too bulky, Flash is a wonderful tool for VECTOR graphics, not video. Some video (a few seconds) is alright, but few people use Flash for video (or, at least, they shouldn't).

[Michael Grogan]

As an end user...

...I have to say that both Adobe and Macromedia suck! Pdf documents ahve always been a pain because they're too bulky; even on a high end machine a PDF doc won't scroll smoothly in reader because it's just too damn big. Flash may be great for authoring but for vieewing streaming video it sucks. Even when the entire video is downloaded watching it on the Flash player is a halting and jerky experience. I'd love too see both companies bite the big one!

[Rusdude]

You're only half right

While it's generally agreed the PDF (especially the viewer/editor) is too bulky, Flash is a wonderful tool for VECTOR graphics, not video. Some video (a few seconds) is alright, but few people use Flash for video (or, at least, they shouldn't).

Here is my take on this mess...

First of this is a sad day for people that love Macromedia and their products. Adobe doesn't care about their customers, they don't listen to what they want in the software. Adobe's software is bloated with half done, poorly implemented features and updates are done simply to increase income and not to offer anything of real value to its customers.

1. GoLive is now dead, it was walking funny for sometime and now has finally given up the ghost. Another example of Adobe buying a product bastardizing it and never really doing anything with it that makes it a great product that professionals or anyone else really wants to use.

2. ImageReady is dead, finally. I guess few people that it was interesting that ImageReady wasn't talked about in the information about the upcoming CS2 package. Instead Adobe fill mess up Fireworks and include it after this round of updates. Fireworks has always been far superior to anything Adobe has had for web graphics.

3. Freehand will either revert back to the original owners in which case it is dead meat or it will be stripped of innovative features that will then be placed in Illustrator. End result is the same Freehand is dead meat.

4. Flash and Dreamweaver will live on. However, Adobe will slow begin to Adobeized them and in the end create bastardized programs with horrible interfaces that are neither Adobe or Macromedia. The programs will become increasingly bloated, slow, poor updates, nothing added that customers really want, etc. etc.

5. FlashPaper, is dead. It is two effective, fast and easy to use. Adobe will cram it hap hazardly in to Acrobat making it a slow, bloated, buggy mess.

In the end we Macromedia customers are screwed big time. One of Dreamweaver's and Flashes biggest graces has been the incredible third party support with extensions. As these products crumble so will this support. Does GoLive have any hot third party extensions that are worth talking about? No, just crap.

We will either have to keep the versions of Macromedia software we have and hope that from Windows update to Windows update they continue to work. Or, we will have to hope that some other company will come out with something as good as these products so we have something to design our web sites with.

We may get one final decent upgrade for these products as I figure the next Studio suite release is just a few months away. It is after this release that we are all screwed. This is a dark day and one the people at Macromedia should be ashamed of themselves for.

Robert

[Rusdude]

Yeah, next Studio MX is MUST-BUY

I'll buy the next Studio and burn a bunch of back-up copies to make sure I'll have "good" versions of DW, FW, and flash apps.

Here is my take on this mess...

First of this is a sad day for people that love Macromedia and their products. Adobe doesn't care about their customers, they don't listen to what they want in the software. Adobe's software is bloated with half done, poorly implemented features and updates are done simply to increase income and not to offer anything of real value to its customers.

1. GoLive is now dead, it was walking funny for sometime and now has finally given up the ghost. Another example of Adobe buying a product bastardizing it and never really doing anything with it that makes it a great product that professionals or anyone else really wants to use.

2. ImageReady is dead, finally. I guess few people that it was interesting that ImageReady wasn't talked about in the information about the upcoming CS2 package. Instead Adobe fill mess up Fireworks and include it after this round of updates. Fireworks has always been far superior to anything Adobe has had for web graphics.

3. Freehand will either revert back to the original owners in which case it is dead meat or it will be stripped of innovative features that will then be placed in Illustrator. End result is the same Freehand is dead meat.

4. Flash and Dreamweaver will live on. However, Adobe will slow begin to Adobeized them and in the end create bastardized programs with horrible interfaces that are neither Adobe or Macromedia. The programs will become increasingly bloated, slow, poor updates, nothing added that customers really want, etc. etc.

5. FlashPaper, is dead. It is two effective, fast and easy to use. Adobe will cram it hap hazardly in to Acrobat making it a slow, bloated, buggy mess.

In the end we Macromedia customers are screwed big time. One of Dreamweaver's and Flashes biggest graces has been the incredible third party support with extensions. As these products crumble so will this support. Does GoLive have any hot third party extensions that are worth talking about? No, just crap.

We will either have to keep the versions of Macromedia software we have and hope that from Windows update to Windows update they continue to work. Or, we will have to hope that some other company will come out with something as good as these products so we have something to design our web sites with.

We may get one final decent upgrade for these products as I figure the next Studio suite release is just a few months away. It is after this release that we are all screwed. This is a dark day and one the people at Macromedia should be ashamed of themselves for.

Robert

[Rusdude]

Yeah, next Studio MX is MUST-BUY

I'll buy the next Studio and burn a bunch of back-up copies to make sure I'll have "good" versions of DW, FW, and flash apps.

[Rusdude]

R.I.P. FireWorks & DreamWeaver

... as we know them.

I agree with most points made here about worries that this merger raises about: (1) product quality; (2) support quality; and (3) jobs.

Having said that, I want to emphasize that potential demise of Fireworks, a very likely event, is disturbing to me. While I use Photoshop too, I find Fireworks to be much quicker for many image tasks (especially, web work). I really hope they use Fireworks as a basis for new versions of Adobe PhotoElements.

With regards to DreamWeaver, I really hope they don't attempt to merge it with GoLive. They should axe GoLive right away, and implement intergration of DW and Adobe programs (like we have with DW being integrated with other Macromedia products). DW stands head-and-shoulders above every other comprehensive web-site programs and messing with it isn't going to win Adobe any fans.

[Rusdude]

R.I.P. FireWorks & DreamWeaver

... as we know them.

I agree with most points made here about worries that this merger raises about: (1) product quality; (2) support quality; and (3) jobs.

Having said that, I want to emphasize that potential demise of Fireworks, a very likely event, is disturbing to me. While I use Photoshop too, I find Fireworks to be much quicker for many image tasks (especially, web work). I really hope they use Fireworks as a basis for new versions of Adobe PhotoElements.

With regards to DreamWeaver, I really hope they don't attempt to merge it with GoLive. They should axe GoLive right away, and implement intergration of DW and Adobe programs (like we have with DW being integrated with other Macromedia products). DW stands head-and-shoulders above every other comprehensive web-site programs and messing with it isn't going to win Adobe any fans.

[Mark_Smith]

Holly cow!

I just hope the Adobe interfaces remain the same. I neveer liked to work with Macromedia.

I hate Flash interface and way to work with it.

I just hope Macromedia gets more "Adobeable" now, instead Adobe software getting the Macrocrap feeling.

[System Tyrant]

Stand Alone

I think you might stand mostly alone with your opinion. But, I think everyone will agree that they don't want Adobe and Macromedia to merge, period.

I hope this somehow falls through.

[berk0080]

True that.

True that

[Mark_Smith]

Holly cow!

I just hope the Adobe interfaces remain the same. I neveer liked to work with Macromedia.

I hate Flash interface and way to work with it.

I just hope Macromedia gets more "Adobeable" now, instead Adobe software getting the Macrocrap feeling.

[System Tyrant]

Stand Alone

I think you might stand mostly alone with your opinion. But, I think everyone will agree that they don't want Adobe and Macromedia to merge, period.

I hope this somehow falls through.

[berk0080]

True that.

True that

[Tom CyBold]

Farewell, Good Old FreeHand

It's tough to say goodbye to a reliable old tool that helped us get a lot of work done.

FreeHand was one of the first programs my wife and I bought for our original Mac SE around 1989, back when it was still being developed by Altsys and distributed by Aldus. FreeHand 3.1 ended up taking us through most of the 90s and well into the 00s.

Compact, fast-loading, with an easy-to-learn yet flexible interface, it was a great little program that served as a graphical sketch pad for rapidly trying out visual ideas. Even after I upgraded to newer versions of FreeHand, my wife continued to fire up 3.1 year after year because it served 90% of her needs and was so fast to load and easy to use. It doesn't do mesh gradients or web animations or pattern brushes, but has never, to my knowledge, crashed on one of our Macs. Even now, it will fire up in emulation under OS X 10.3 and faithfully serve its master with no crankiness or instability.

Parts of FreeHand have always been clunkier than Illustrator, such as the pen tool. But, in general, I always preferred FH's multi-page, multi-page-size publication layout capability to Illustrator's single, fixed-size page metaphor. I often felt it was a good blend of illustration and page layout.

In general, I hate to see software companies merge because it always means less competition. But as long as I can keep old versions of FreeHand running on an old Mac or in Classic Mode on a new Mac, and as long as it can export in formats recognizable by other graphics programs, our hands are free to keep using . . . FreeHand!

Ba-dum-bum. Thanks. I'll be here all week.

Can somebody email Freehand 3.1

I have been using Freehand 3.1 for more than 10 years. My hard
disk recently crashed and I lost Freehand. I still have the
installation floppys but no floppy drive to read them. I tried a
LaCie USB drive but it cannot read my floppys.
If you have Freehand 3.1 on your disk, can you email it to me
with the registration number ?
I am currently using Freehand MX but I still need 3.1.
My email is [e-mail]
Thanks
Thierry

freehand 3.1

how can you keep old versions of FreeHand running on an old Mac or in Classic Mode on a new Mac, and as long as it can export in formats recognizable by other graphics programs, WHAT PROGRAMS ARE THESE. All my graphics were on an old mac with freehand 3.1 (i was like your wife with not liking the upgrades) Now I am trying to upgrade these graphics to a newer version of freehand so I can sadly move them in to a pc format.....need help

freehand 3.1

how can you keep old versions of FreeHand running on an old Mac or in Classic Mode on a new Mac, and as long as it can export in formats recognizable by other graphics programs, WHAT PROGRAMS ARE THESE. All my graphics were on an old mac with freehand 3.1 (i was like your wife with not liking the upgrades) Now I am trying to upgrade these graphics to a newer version of freehand so I can sadly move them in to a pc format.....need help [e-mail]

[Tom CyBold]

Farewell, Good Old FreeHand

It's tough to say goodbye to a reliable old tool that helped us get a lot of work done.

FreeHand was one of the first programs my wife and I bought for our original Mac SE around 1989, back when it was still being developed by Altsys and distributed by Aldus. FreeHand 3.1 ended up taking us through most of the 90s and well into the 00s.

Compact, fast-loading, with an easy-to-learn yet flexible interface, it was a great little program that served as a graphical sketch pad for rapidly trying out visual ideas. Even after I upgraded to newer versions of FreeHand, my wife continued to fire up 3.1 year after year because it served 90% of her needs and was so fast to load and easy to use. It doesn't do mesh gradients or web animations or pattern brushes, but has never, to my knowledge, crashed on one of our Macs. Even now, it will fire up in emulation under OS X 10.3 and faithfully serve its master with no crankiness or instability.

Parts of FreeHand have always been clunkier than Illustrator, such as the pen tool. But, in general, I always preferred FH's multi-page, multi-page-size publication layout capability to Illustrator's single, fixed-size page metaphor. I often felt it was a good blend of illustration and page layout.

In general, I hate to see software companies merge because it always means less competition. But as long as I can keep old versions of FreeHand running on an old Mac or in Classic Mode on a new Mac, and as long as it can export in formats recognizable by other graphics programs, our hands are free to keep using . . . FreeHand!

Ba-dum-bum. Thanks. I'll be here all week.

Can somebody email Freehand 3.1

I have been using Freehand 3.1 for more than 10 years. My hard
disk recently crashed and I lost Freehand. I still have the
installation floppys but no floppy drive to read them. I tried a
LaCie USB drive but it cannot read my floppys.
If you have Freehand 3.1 on your disk, can you email it to me
with the registration number ?
I am currently using Freehand MX but I still need 3.1.
My email is [e-mail]
Thanks
Thierry

freehand 3.1

how can you keep old versions of FreeHand running on an old Mac or in Classic Mode on a new Mac, and as long as it can export in formats recognizable by other graphics programs, WHAT PROGRAMS ARE THESE. All my graphics were on an old mac with freehand 3.1 (i was like your wife with not liking the upgrades) Now I am trying to upgrade these graphics to a newer version of freehand so I can sadly move them in to a pc format.....need help

freehand 3.1

how can you keep old versions of FreeHand running on an old Mac or in Classic Mode on a new Mac, and as long as it can export in formats recognizable by other graphics programs, WHAT PROGRAMS ARE THESE. All my graphics were on an old mac with freehand 3.1 (i was like your wife with not liking the upgrades) Now I am trying to upgrade these graphics to a newer version of freehand so I can sadly move them in to a pc format.....need help [e-mail]

Whatever happened to Competition?

Its no fun when the big fish consumes all competition. I dont know why Macromedia wants to sell. If I were holding a business like Macromedia, i wudn't. Maybe it doesnt make short term business sense. But i'd want to make better products and give a hard time to adobe. i really liked botrh adobe n macromedia softwares - flash, dreammweaver, r just awesome.

Whatever happened to Competition?

Its no fun when the big fish consumes all competition. I dont know why Macromedia wants to sell. If I were holding a business like Macromedia, i wudn't. Maybe it doesnt make short term business sense. But i'd want to make better products and give a hard time to adobe. i really liked botrh adobe n macromedia softwares - flash, dreammweaver, r just awesome.

Whats gonna die

I am pretty sure Dreamweaver will live. Its easily miles ahead from Golive. There are a few Adobe products whcih came out just to be in competition with Macromedia while it never seemd like it was Adobe's forte. Macromedia kicked a** with its softwares for internet media. I don't think Adobe shud tinker with Flash, Dreamweaver.

Whats gonna die

I am pretty sure Dreamweaver will live. Its easily miles ahead from Golive. There are a few Adobe products whcih came out just to be in competition with Macromedia while it never seemd like it was Adobe's forte. Macromedia kicked a** with its softwares for internet media. I don't think Adobe shud tinker with Flash, Dreamweaver.

[Bob_Barker]

NOOOOOO!!!!

So much for competition and innovation. Maybe Adobe realized they were becoming dinosaurs and decided throw around their weight. But why sell-out Macromedia?

Time to say goodbye to Fireworks, Freehand, Dreamweaver to get hacked up and thrown into the POS GoLive. Who knows were Flash is gonna end up now.

I hate you Adobe. ><

[Mark_Smith]

Do you hate adobe?

Thats because you never worked using corel...hahahahah...

Probably both consumer´s side will lose. What makes me more pist, is if you used to Image Ready, now youll have to forget everything, and learn Fireworks. All right...they are similar, but...time is money. If you used golive, now...youlll have to learn dreamweaver....and so on....

And *********, its like have a Hanna-Barbera character walking in Disneyland.

[Bob_Barker]

NOOOOOO!!!!

So much for competition and innovation. Maybe Adobe realized they were becoming dinosaurs and decided throw around their weight. But why sell-out Macromedia?

Time to say goodbye to Fireworks, Freehand, Dreamweaver to get hacked up and thrown into the POS GoLive. Who knows were Flash is gonna end up now.

I hate you Adobe. ><

[Mark_Smith]

Do you hate adobe?

Thats because you never worked using corel...hahahahah...

Probably both consumer´s side will lose. What makes me more pist, is if you used to Image Ready, now youll have to forget everything, and learn Fireworks. All right...they are similar, but...time is money. If you used golive, now...youlll have to learn dreamweaver....and so on....

And *********, its like have a Hanna-Barbera character walking in Disneyland.

On the other hand....

Just because this merger may happen (we can only hope the federal gov does not agree to it) we can STILL use the products we are using today.

I still use DW MX over MX 2004 (I like the interface better). The web (or illustration or bitmap images) is not going to change anytime soon, so just use what you currently have and we should all be fine.

Remember - a jpeg is a jpeg, whether it came from Image Ready, Graphic Converter, Photoshop, Freehand, Paint Shop, etc.

[TV James]

The government won't care

The government won't even really notice this merger.

On the other hand....

Just because this merger may happen (we can only hope the federal gov does not agree to it) we can STILL use the products we are using today.

I still use DW MX over MX 2004 (I like the interface better). The web (or illustration or bitmap images) is not going to change anytime soon, so just use what you currently have and we should all be fine.

Remember - a jpeg is a jpeg, whether it came from Image Ready, Graphic Converter, Photoshop, Freehand, Paint Shop, etc.

[TV James]

The government won't care

The government won't even really notice this merger.