Journal superflippy's Journal: Adobe + Macromedia = :( 2
I am not happy to hear that Adobe is buying Macromedia. Over the last several years I have used more and more Macromedia software and less and less Adobe.
Macromedia's software is better-suited to the purposes for which I use it. Fireworks was made to create web graphics; inside it, raster and vector formats work side by side in harmony. Photoshop is bloated and has tacked-on web and vector features that are really hard to understand and use.
But most importantly, Macromedia wants my business. I can skip every other upgrade cycle and still get an upgrade discount on their products. Lately, though, I've bought both Studio MX upgrades because the price was so reasonable.
Adobe acts like I should be grateful they let me buy their precious software. If I skip one of the yearly Photoshop upgrades, I have to pay full price. And there was no discount for people who owned older Adobe products who wanted to upgrade to Creative Studio. So Adobe CS would cost me $1000 while Studio MX cost me $400 with Macromedia's generous upgrade policy. This is why I'm still using Photoshop 6.0.
I really wish this were happening the other way around. Macromedia buying Adobe could only be a good thing. I'm afraid Adobe is going to take away all the software I like best and replace it with expensive bloatware.
Adobe vs Markup (Score:2)
Photoshop 5.5 and 6 were pretty good but 7 and CS are bloatware.
Acrobat 4 and 5 vs Acrobat 6 -- ditto. Acrobat Reader 7 for Unix is just sad -- I've had KDE lock up on me 4 times since I started using it. No other app I use on Linux has that distinction. Unfortunately, I *have* to use it sometimes because PDFs made with Acrobat 5+ that aren't saved in backwards-compatible mode won't print with the previous version. I can produce bet
Re:Adobe vs Markup (Score:2)
That really sums it up. I tried to explain it in this post [slashdot.org] and various replies to replies, but the root of the problem is that Adobe doesn't get the Web.