Canvas 7.0 Coming To Linux! 85
Rockhead writes: "Just saw this over at MacWeek. It looks like Deneba will be porting Canvas, their graphics, layout and kitchen-sink program, to Linux. The free beta is expected on the Deneba Web site early next month. Whoopee!" Let's hope that the release of free-beer proprietary vector programs spurs, rather than impedes, progress on KIllustrator and Sketch, both of which look great but incomplete at this point, but hold great promise in expanding Linux's meager selection of vector-drawing tools. Canvas also has some page-layout abilities -- looks like Deneba is seeing Adobe's free FrameMaker download for Linux, and raising.
QCad (Score:1)
That's nice, but... (Score:1)
--
Free beer vs free anything (Score:1)
Seems like sometimes people lost touch of the "Free" thing.
Yes, it's a "free download", but it's a beta software.
Would it be still free if it is not beta anymore?
It is also a proprietor program, ie, no souce is available. How to do debugging and send in patches if no source is available?
Doesn't that defeat the whole idea of Open Source?
I just wonder.
Re:Distiller (Score:1)
I wonder why so few people know about ps2pdf? It comes with Ghostscript, and works great. It's been around since version 5.xx -- in other words, for years. This saved my life in college...
Deneba. King of Fixed in the upgrade (Score:1)
Software sweatshop.
Vaporware.
Fix it in the upgrade
fixed in the major upgrade
Canvas 2 was superpaint* on steroids.
Canvas 3 was a late buggy fucking product. But it was 200% easier to figure out than Illustrator88.
canvas 3.54 was a final stable wonderful product.
Canvas 5 was a late buggy slow product.
Canvas 6 was a bloated product, that refused to read 3.0 and earlier files.
*Superpaint, the first vector and paint program by Silicon beach software (bought by aldus, who was bought by adobe).
* Great interface
Head of Silicon beach, Charlie Jackson, went on to create futuresketch and futuresketch animator. futuresketch animator went on to become flash.
Re:Canvas (Score:1)
OTOH, bloat it's got. They try to include everything in one box rather than making you buy several to get the tools you need, as Aldus does. The cost is that you get less choice, and all of the tools always load. The bonus is that the tools work together, and they're ready to hand when you need them. But you do get bloat. You do get a slow start-up. (And I still ended up needing to buy PageMaker.)
Don't expect this one to stay free, or to ever be open source. Deneba makes their money selling software.
Re:Advantages to non-free speech free beer softwar (Score:1)
Re:Free for linux but not for Windows/Mac? (Score:1)
All the tools do not always load (Score:1)
It's not really bloatware - at least not because of the number of tools it supplies. It's pretty much what a feature rich program should be. It's modular, and gives the user quite a bit of control over how big its disk or memory footprint is.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
Re:Distiller (Score:1)
Does the ps2pdf has "security" features of PDF? This is the main feature of PDF in the opinion of many people. They want to protect their document against print/copy. Of course this protections are limited, but people don't know that, and that is the point. If ps2pdf has those features then it is a winner and could be used by those people I mentioned, otherwise there still a need for a distiler for linux.
By the way I am not an expert in PDF, so how secure are those features anyway? Is the information encripted in any any way in the PDF file? Or is this simply a bit in a fixed position tha says "can copy" and other "can print".
--
"take the red pill and you stay in wonderland and I'll show you how deep the rabitt hole goes"
Re:PPC vs x86 Linux Software -- Porting (Score:1)
That's true, but doesn't invalidate any of the previous points. As long as the software is written in a high-level language (e.g. not ASM) the CPU architecture makes little difference.
Porting from Mac and Windows will be the far more difficult task -- replacing all Mac/Win OS calls with Linux/X calls, etc. How the software is designed also makes a difference here, but it is more how the software is structured (are all of the OS-specific poritons well isolated) than the language it is written in.
Once that is done, the software can easily be made to work on multiple Linux/Unix CPU architectures by recompiling. If the source is not available, it is basically an issue of whether there is enough demand for a PPCLinux version for Deneba to compile and maintain it.
www.ps2pdf.com (Score:1)
www.ps2pdf.com [ps2pdf.com]
john
Distiller (Score:1)
Anyway, I wonder: how does Adobe plan to make any money off their PDF format now that distiller will be free (beer)?
...and PPC isn't the only "alternative" platform (Score:1)
They're Also Using WINE (Score:1)
-Gav
Re:Canvas (Score:1)
OS bigotism and stupid business model. (Score:1)
Re:Free for linux but not for Windows/Mac? (Score:1)
Haha, ok, I missed that. Still, that, in my mind, is a part of the desktop environment. And when I said A desktop environment that can look like a Mac I off course meant look and work like a mac (minus the crashes please).
After all they fixed Mac font rendering...
Pleeeaze pretty please Adobe do the same on linux... and provide some nice (free) fonts to render. (Disclaimer: I haven't tried XF86 4.0 yet, with TrueType support).
(your sig is cool
-
Re:Free for linux but not for Windows/Mac? (Score:1)
Yes, I like this. I really hope Linux gains marketshare in this area. Hell, I even thought about starting a special distribution for media/press/graphics work (but I'm not quite skilled enough to do that
So what does Linux need for this market? Photoshop. Xpress. A desktop environment that can look like a Mac. The latter we pretty much have. The former two are just a port away, and at least Adobe has shown interest in Linux. Further, I think good versions of PPC linux would be usefull, so people can keep their hardware. Of course, half the purpose of this switch is to let them buy cheap fast x86 hardware...
Of course, there is a kind of Unix coming to the Mac platform. MacOS X. (The desktop version, I know Server is out already.) Aqua sure is purty, but it worries me when the GUI of the OS is more graphics intensive than most computergames...
(/RANT)
dufke
-
Re:OS bigotism and stupid business model. (Score:1)
It's just a matter of time before free beer catch up with the commercial software in quality. Since everything is open it's faster & easiers to develop.
Free beer never die (unlike commercial) and I think that's the reason why we'll catch up
Re:Canvas (Score:1)
When they went to the cross platform toolkit that allowed them to make the Windows version, the biggest thing they gave up when they was the Apple Event support.
I forget the name of the cross platform GUI library that they build their products on. I believe it is from some company that has long since gone out of business. Unfortunatly for Deneba, they've spent so much time writing code to the this abstraction API, they are really prevented from creating anything that takes any advantage of any OS they are porting to.
Re:Free for linux but not for Windows/Mac? (Score:1)
A desktop environment that can look like a Mac. The latter we pretty much have. The former two are just a port away, and at least Adobe has shown interest in Linux.
You are missing the point that people like to use MacOS not only because of it's looks but because it has working clipboard - something linux cannot provide today.
I'm wondering if Adobe is able to fix this. After all they fixed Mac font rendering with their ATM (Adobe Type Manager)...
In other news (Score:1)
Re:Top 5 things Linux needs to be ported to (Score:1)
They Had example drivers in DOS and *nix which was sweet.
I wrote a small daemon in FreeBSD that was *real* simple. on or off and only for one X10 unit. Okay.. I plugged in of course my Coffee pot!
From there as a big *heh heh this will be fun* I used PHP3 to talk to the daemon and have coffee from the web AND IT WORKED! rofl
Most of this was inspired from the 'java' howto. lol it was all so much fun to do
JA
Apple code + Linux + Mainframe = cool animations (Score:1)
Corel Motive (Score:1)
Corel has been showing impressive support for Linux lately. As a company that is presumably motivated by profit, I'm trying to understand how freely distributing a product (which they sell on other platforms) fits in with this motivation.
It seems clear that Corel wishes to bolster the usage of Linux. Given equivalent versions of Canvas 7, it is not hard to imagine users of the program running Linux, with its superior price/stability/performance, in more traditional business environments.
As the user base grows, Corel would be able to spend more time developing for Linux. Linux could be a better platform to develop on: aside from the obvious wins, Corel could develop products that compete with, say, Microsoft, without Microsoft screwing with the OS to hinder that competition.
And when the user base is large, and major development efforst are levied on Linux, does Corel abandon free-as-in-beer distribution and charge for its software like it used to on other OSes?. Kind of like a crack dealer, giving out the first few tries for free?
just a thought.
blow away Win$ in graphics market? (Score:1)
Now I haven't checked this for viability (sorry but this is off the top of my head) but what if RedHat or someone could BUY a big Graphics firm such as Adobe, then give a linux version of Photoshop for free.
Cost of my Adobe licenses well exceeds the cost of *nice* linux boxen plus my time to retool my brain to get comfortable under KDE or Gnome.
How many would convert?
If this could happen then someone should work out a way of *legally* requiring Apple to GPL Colorsync. Maybe Apple would do this just 'cos it might blow away windoze in a whole market area? What do you think?
Re:PPC vs x86 Linux Software -- Porting (Score:1)
Sure. I've done fixups for various apps running on the PPC (Macintosh) platform. Every single problem I have seen falls into one of two categories:
The main thing that Deneba will have to worry about in porting this is that they have serialized their internal objects correctly to account for endianness issues. (In other words, no writing of structs directly to/fron disk!) Since most well-designed C++ programs take care of this already, I expect it would be pretty painless.
---
Re:That's nice, but... (Score:1)
Re:No Qt for Mac (Score:1)
Re:free beer (Score:1)
I remember using this (Score:1)
Re:PPC vs x86 Linux Software -- Porting (Score:1)
ZDNET.com article: Canvas moves to Linux [zdnet.com]
PC Mag Review: Canvas 7 [zdnet.com]
Re:PPC vs x86 Linux Software -- Porting (Score:1)
Deneba Canvas 7.0 [zdnet.com] (March) review at MacWorld
Deneba Canvas 7 [the-internet-eye.com] (Feb 1) at The Internet Eye.com
Velocity Engine [maccentral.com] (Jan 17) MacCentral article on G4 Acceleration for Canvas 7
Another Review [creativepro.com] (12 Jan) at CreativePro.com
Yes, to AC above; Did it occur to you that the Windows release of Canvas 7 runs on x86 hardware?
As a follow-up, would velocity engine acceleration be easy to add to a Linux PPC version of Canvas or would it require a lot more coding?
Re:Advantages to non-free speech free beer softwar (Score:1)
re: graphics programs jumping on the bandwagon... (Score:1)
Re:Distiller (Score:1)
I wonder how they make any money off of it now. It's just some fancy zipped postscript. Maybe I'll come up with a new, smaller document format that's just zipped ASCII, and bundle pico with bzip2 and make lots of money...?
free beer (Score:1)
They should follow the GPL like Linux, where companies can sell as long as they open source, etc.
It would seem their support for open source is lukewarm and one should question their intentions like wise of REAL.
"Free for Linux" (Score:2)
While this is a cynical interpretation, it may be that the reason companies are releasing programs free for Linux while still selling the Windows/Mac counterparts has nothing to do with building market share at all--in Linux.
It suggests, perhaps, that they don't think there's any money to be made under Linux because people won't pay for products. Given a choice between a commercial product that does 95% of what one wants and an open source product that does 50% of it, many Linux users will go for the open source product. These companies are saying, in effect, "for all the talk about free speech, you guys really want free beer," and betting that if they release something that does 70% of what you want that's closed-source but "free for non-commercial use," you'll use that.
What's the advantage of that? Chiefly, word of mouth. It's a program you may get to be familiar with, even if you end up using the open source equivalent. If Linux takes off in the business market, perhaps that "free for noncommercial use" will get them money because you'll recommend the non-free version to your boss. And, of course, if Linux doesn't take off in the business market, no big deal. They weren't planning to give away the Windows NT version anyway, were they?
The interesting question is: are they right? As people have pointed out before, Linux may be the number two server platform behind NT, but some of the commercial OSes it leads in seats are still whomping it in profits. The reason behind this is at least guessable: people are installing Linux because it's cheap. They can buy one box and put it on a hundred machines. And despite all the companies that say they're going to make money selling service (Red Hat? Linuxcare?), Linux proponents often point to the great technical support you can get for free on the net.
In other words, many of Linux's best "selling points" for users may be big gaping pits of doom when it comes to making a profit, both for Linux OS vendors and for application vendors.
Canvas (Score:2)
I have been a Canvas user for many years, well, at least up until version 5. Early on it was a nice vector drawing program, but then it got delusions of granduer. Version 5 especially. I was quite disappointed in the bugginess and bloat of version 5, so I switched to other programs. I'm glad to hear that the Linux version is going to be free beer, because I don't think I'd want to wrestle with a non-free version of Canvas again.
Re:free beer (Score:2)
How is it like stabbing you? If you don't want to use non-opensourced software, then don't use it, and your life will continue to be the same (as opposed to getting stabbed, where your life will be significantly worse). They haven't taken anything away from you by not opensourcing it. Do you feel that every closed-source company out there has stabbed you?
They should follow the GPL like Linux, where companies can sell as long as they open source
They are a company who's goal is to make money, if they GPL'd it, there would be five dollar cd's on cheapbytes, and they would make less money.
It would seem their support for open source is lukewarm
Their support for opensource isn't lukewarm, it's non-existant.
one should question their intentions like wise of REAL
They intend to make as much money as they can, their first step in the linux market is to gain as much marketshare as possible.
Re:Free beer vs free anything (Score:2)
Re:Free for linux but not for Windows/Mac? (Score:2)
NO COMPANY CARES ABOUT THE LINUX MOVEMENT'S IDEALS. They are all in it to make the money. Thats the whole core of a business. They could like nothing better than to be able to release only closed source, non-free apps if the Linux market would stand for it. You can't blame them. Aside for the people involved in the movement, no one really cares about the ideal behind the GPL. Why should they? A company isn't there to make life nicer for the user, if they do, thats a nice benefit, but they're in it to make money. Take nVidia. Great company. The users (aside from the Linux fundementalists) love them, they make good products at nice prices. Their primary goal, however, is not to advance accelerator technology, or make 3D a nicer experiance for the user. Their primary purpose is to make money. Sure the engineers involved probably take a great deal of pride in their work, but the company as a whole could care less. Thats life.
Re:End User Apps for Linux (Score:2)
I'm an ungrateful S.O.B. (Score:2)
One valuable thing I can see from this is that Canvas is a somewhat major end user commmercial application entering a space that actually isn't covered too badly by free equivalents. I'd like to see how the free programs will stack up against it.
Re:PPC vs x86 Linux Software -- Porting (Score:2)
Sure. I've done fixups for various apps running on the PPC (Macintosh) platform. Every single problem I have seen falls into one of two categories:
Umm, that's three -- very funny, though I maintain that the only good Endian is a dead Endian...
Because... (Score:2)
Also, to address your theme of "dying or no-loss companies" (which you posted yesterday, too), there are a lot of places that are very big on IRIX and SGI hardware (my Uni. is one of those places). I don't think that SGI is truly about to get flushed. And OF COURSE most of the companies are not risking anything big on Linux at the moment; it's new, and it's got a philosophy behind it which is strange and unusual to them, something they couldn't have imagined a few years ago. Not long ago, almost no companies were doing anything...so give it time.
Lastly, I don't really care about a "business model". Would it be nice to have all the applications for Linux that we do for Windows? Well, sort of...I wouldn't mind the audio stuff ported over, but as it stands, I can _right_now_ use GPLd software for almost all of my needs. Sure, I'd like to not ever have to worry about doing Windows tech. support any more, but thanks to the nature of GNU, I'll always go home to a great OS, whether RedHat exists tomorrow or not.
If you want proof that OSS will eventually overcome, I point to SCO as an example. Today, if you wanted a UNIX to run on x86 hardware, what would you use? Linux or *BSD, I think.
PPC vs x86 Linux Software -- Porting (Score:2)
However, porting the Intel version to the PowerPC shouldn't be difficult, [Peters] said, as long as the software is written in a high-level language such as C++ and limits direct interactions with hardware. Hsu said that Canvas is written in C++.
It appears that the release will not be open-sourced (to retain the competetive advantage on the profit Mac & Win versions), so does anyone want to comment on Hsu's implication that porting to PPC should be relatively easy?
End User Apps for Linux (Score:2)
There was another ./ story [slashdot.org] a while ago about gnucash, a quicken-like program for linux. Many of the comments touted this as the kind of thing (thing=end user apps) that linux needs more of before it can become a desktop OS. After using it for a while I got to wondering if this is really what we want. The program is great, and useful, and the interfaces are mostly intuitive for somebody like me. So then it put it to the ultimate test, my mother. It failed, miserably. But then again, she couldn't use quicken at first sight either. Also, most people probably aren't going to want to learn a new OS, but once they see the light and thing about switching, they are definetly going to be discourage by the lack of applications that they know how to use.
This brings me to my next point. While it is a good thing in terms of getting more users to have apps that people already recognize not only by brand name but by the interface, is it all that good in terms of open souce? Lets say, for example, that whoever makes quicken decides to port it to linux. I don't know this for sure, but I'm willing to bet that they won't make it open source, but will instead to something a la Adobe, and release "Limited Trial Versions". What is more important for Linux, a higher installed (desktop) user base, or 100% open source?
I have more to say, but I'm tired so I'll stop now. Please let me know what your opinions on this are.
Free for linux but not for Windows/Mac? (Score:2)
Did anybody else notice the conspicuous difference between the Linux version of Canvas 7.0 and the Windows version? Namely, the version for Linux version will be free, and the Windows/Mac version is definately not, weighing in at $375. At first I thought it was only the beta version that was going to be free, but this is apparently not the case. According to the article, "At present, Hsu said, Deneba has no intention of charging for the software. "
It's amazing to me how companies appear to be compartmentalizing themselves. On one hand, they seem to be very interested in pursuing the free and open software movement when it comes to Linux, but when it comes to old platforms, like windows, the regular marketing rules prevail. This clearly shows that these companies are not interested in the movement behind Linux, but rather simply on capitalizing in a new market. I've got news for Deneba and other companies with Linux strategies, free and open software is good for any platform, not just Linux. In fact, free and open software is needed more on the Windows platform now than ever, if we have any hope of convincing Microsoft to consider similar behavior.
In my estimation, there are three possibilities here concerning Deneba. Either they don't understand the free software movement, or think Linux is to small a market to lose money on by giving away free software, or think Windows and Mac users are too stupid to notice that they're shelling out mucho dinero for a program that is completely free on another platform. In any case, that's no good strategy.
Re:End User Apps for Linux (Score:2)
I hope Linux never becomes the average desktop OS. The average Joe (or possibly in your case, Mom) needs a lot of handholding and overhead when it comes to computers. Folks who don't want to see what's happening under the hood, don't care that they can tweak and update to their heart's content. They want, as my wife says, "push play, Yay!" Linux is amazingly configurable, and I do hope it becomes the average business or cubical OS. If Linux gets so bogged down with the 'point and click' mentality, it'll end up being another bloatware. I'd personally rather it were a goodly percentage of the market (say 30%). We'd get the ports needed to keep us happy.
As for the folks who shell out the bucks for Win apps and the Linux guys get freebies, I think that they're testing the waters. If a huge sum of folks download it, it's a good indication that they'd want to buy the 'new-and-improved' version when it came out. If it were used heavily, and if the update had new features that I needed, I'd update by buying.
I think that the Linux average will go for the easy and quick higher user base, then bemoan the lack of open source. I think it'll hurt the open source versions in development. Why work on a Linux version of Quicken when Intuit does it for you? Why put out a vector graphics program when Canvas is available, and it's free (beer)? Maybe that's their goal, to discourage open source projects in their areas of expertise.
Again, good post zaius.
Top 5 things Linux needs to be ported to (Score:3)
4. My stove, coffee machine, laundry machine
3. That darn humidifier. Imagine my crontab entry:
0 0,8,16 * * *
2. My mug:
and finally
1. My african violet:
while ($stillAlive){
open MY,"courtain" if (time() > "8:00am");
mkdir "upward";
foreach $sisterPlant (@nearby){
};
++$flowers;
$grow++;
}
Re:Free for linux but not for Windows/Mac? (Score:3)
Say Linux goes on to explode on the desktop the way it has on the server market. When Joe graphics artist leaves Windows behind and goes to ask his Linux using buddy what graphics program he recommends, his buddy will tell him he uses Canvas (which he got for free several months ago) and it's awesome. So Joe goes to pick up Canvas, which is now $375. Also, when Joe's buddy goes to upgrade, he will most likely stick with Canvas, the program he knows, and pick up the new version at the upgrade price. So one copy of the program given away early on can translate into several copies sold down the road (or so goes the theory).
It's actually a very common strategy, and often quite successful. Whether it will be successful on Linux where there may be several 'good enough' free competitors will be interesting to see.
wrong department (Score:3)
To pick at nits, the actual quote is "What's our Vector, Victor?"
(Oh how I love that movie. I pray nightly for Paramount to release a 20th anniversary DVD edition.)
To remain semi-on-topic: I support a couple of Mac Canvas users at my job (version 3.5 and 5 only, as NHLBI decided not to spring for the upgrade to 7). It's a fairly decent example of the genre, and bringing it to Linux represents a Good Thing.
"Joey, do you like movies about gladiators?"