Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Adobe/Macromedia merger

15 replies to this topic
G twenty-nine
  • G twenty-nine

    Location: /home

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Apr 2005

#1

Posted 18 April 2005 - 10:31 PM

Here is the link. What do you think?

Samutz
  • Samutz

    if ($lol) { die(rofl()); }

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2003

#2

Posted 18 April 2005 - 11:18 PM

Couldn't really care less. Both make good media software, so good for them.

It's not like it's a merger that would piss me off, such as G4-TechTV.

PresidentKiller
  • PresidentKiller

    Anger Manager

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2004
  • Mexico

#3

Posted 19 April 2005 - 12:51 AM

QUOTE (Samutz @ Apr 18 2005, 18:18)
Couldn't really care less. Both make good media software, so good for them.

Yeah, and equally expensive... tounge.gif

Good for them, it would be weird to call it "Adobe Flash" now though...

Johnno
  • Johnno

    WD&P Ogre

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2002

#4

Posted 19 April 2005 - 02:40 AM

I was going to post this just last night.

But I didn't because I thought it was irrelevant to WD&P.

We'll see how it goes wink.gif

Tsuroki
  • Tsuroki

    Gone Fishin'

  • Inactive Staff
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2002
  • None

#5

Posted 19 April 2005 - 03:28 AM

I'm shocked, quite frankly. Both were industry leaders, and I really didn't think Adobe would ever buy them out.

I'm interested to see where the products will go now, since both companies had industry-leading technology (of course, Adobe was for image and Macromedia was for internet technology.)

Dalpura
  • Dalpura

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2003

#6

Posted 19 April 2005 - 09:10 AM

Can't wait to see the next line of products from then. Two great software companies merging must mean products that are twice as awesome as the previous, right? tounge.gif Doesn't bother me as long as I can keep getting the new version of Photoshop and Dreamweaver. biggrin.gif

PSXtreme
  • PSXtreme

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Jan 2002

#7

Posted 19 April 2005 - 03:34 PM

Photoshop CS2 is coming out in May. smile.gif
http://www.adobe.com...oshop/main.html

The Adobe/Macromedia merger doesn't sound bad, I mean, we'll get some great new products probably

Luke
  • Luke

    suckmyrocket

  • Inactive Staff
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2003
  • None

#8

Posted 19 April 2005 - 05:01 PM

I've always been a bigger fan of Abode than I have of Macromedia to be honest, I'm not too sure if it's going to be good or not. I remember when Adobe went and bought Cool Edit the audio thingy, didn't make much in terms of changes at first.

Chalkstar
  • Chalkstar

    QvsQ lab monkey

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2004

#9

Posted 20 April 2005 - 10:22 AM

QUOTE (Smithers @ Apr 20 2005, 03:01)
I've always been a bigger fan of Abode than I have of Macromedia to be honest, I'm not too sure if it's going to be good or not. I remember when Adobe went and bought Cool Edit the audio thingy, didn't make much in terms of changes at first.

I've been a bigger fan of adobe but I usually Macromedia for animation and webpages. I think it may bring them a bit more, but I think the main thing will be that now they get most of the "customers" getting their software, as they have most of the most widely used products for computer technology.

Tank
  • Tank

    Gangsta

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2001
  • None

#10

Posted 22 April 2005 - 02:41 PM

Rumors of PDF and Flash support in one plugin are floating about. I doubt it's true - PDF would die, at least in the business world, as businesses don't want Flash enabled on their computers.

I've never been a fan of PDF's personally. Most PDF's contain nothing more than what a HTML page could. The viewer takes too long to load.

Sure, some people abuse Flash, and give it a bad name, but Flash has good uses. Flash video is a good universal video streaming format although the codec could be much more flexible. Will Adobe undo everything Macromedia has worked towards with Flash and Flash video? This year will be interesting for Flash...

Svip
  • Svip

    I eat babies

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2001
  • None

#11

Posted 22 April 2005 - 02:54 PM

Tank. blink.gif

Tank, you're wrong.

PDF > Flash, flash is horrible, not only because of the people who is giving it a bad name, but mainly because flash on websites is quite annoying. I want strict XHTML to view.

I mean if you had flash on your site, do you still think I would be here?

Hell no!

However, I agree with PDF in away, but PDF is better at layout and easier, plus it also have better deals when saving it for a comic or something that should be printed out, where HTML can be too large sometimes.

So PDF will live, but remember, that PDF with Flash support doesn't mean that all PDF's will have Flash.

And maybe businesses would turn over.

Tank
  • Tank

    Gangsta

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2001
  • None

#12

Posted 22 April 2005 - 05:12 PM

QUOTE (Svip @ Apr 22 2005, 14:54)
PDF > Flash, flash is horrible, not only because of the people who is giving it a bad name, but mainly because flash on websites is quite annoying. I want strict XHTML to view.

Personally, if something could be better explained using animation, I'd prefer to see a Flash presentation rather than countless HTML pages of static images wink.gif

I only find Flash anoying on sites where I'm trying to read something - such as GTAF, Google, a news site, etc. Some sites have pretty cool implementation of Flash, such as sites built for a brand or product like movies, games, technology, etc. It just brings the subject to life. I'd hate to see Flash die, it just needs longer to mature.

Svip
  • Svip

    I eat babies

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2001
  • None

#13

Posted 22 April 2005 - 06:12 PM

QUOTE (Tank @ Apr 22 2005, 19:12)
QUOTE (Svip @ Apr 22 2005, 14:54)
PDF > Flash, flash is horrible, not only because of the people who is giving it a bad name, but mainly because flash on websites is quite annoying. I want strict XHTML to view.

Personally, if something could be better explained using animation, I'd prefer to see a Flash presentation rather than countless HTML pages of static images wink.gif

I only find Flash anoying on sites where I'm trying to read something - such as GTAF, Google, a news site, etc. Some sites have pretty cool implementation of Flash, such as sites built for a brand or product like movies, games, technology, etc. It just brings the subject to life. I'd hate to see Flash die, it just needs longer to mature.

True that some sites have good flash, but most sites around the web has missunderstood the idea of flash.

I agree that some stuff could be better explained in flash than in PDF.

But I like PDF because I can read stuff from there while I take my time.

And it's also easier for me, since I am not native English, and therefore speech can tend to be a bit hard at times.

While in PDF or HTML document it makes it's a lot easier.

But you can make some good stuff too in .gif format.

Luke
  • Luke

    suckmyrocket

  • Inactive Staff
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2003
  • None

#14

Posted 22 April 2005 - 06:46 PM

I'm no massive fan of PDF nor Flash, both of them take time to load, PDF is used for the wrong things, as is Flash. It's not like they're the only misused programs in the world though, I hate people who put together PowerPoint presentations and then just read off them, shouldn't the powerpoint be simple bullet points and the speech be detailed?

Anyway, that's besides the point. Flash is good as long as it's used properly, whole websites made in it irriate me more than anything. Dreamweaver's a good tool though, covers a broad range of abilities and languages.

Johnno
  • Johnno

    WD&P Ogre

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2002

#15

Posted 23 April 2005 - 02:48 AM

QUOTE
Most PDF's contain nothing more than what a HTML page could.

Quite true, but for printing, PDF has a myriad of advantages over XHTML, since few people know how to properly use print in CSS.
Plus PDF is better for business.

ie: You want to email a client some documents, with a few images.
With XHTML, you'd need to upload it to a server, or send all the pages plus all this images.
With PDF, you'd just send the one file.

wink.gif

Tsuroki
  • Tsuroki

    Gone Fishin'

  • Inactive Staff
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2002
  • None

#16

Posted 27 April 2005 - 03:04 AM

< Adobe has a plethora of multimedia development tools. Macromedia has Flash and Dreamweaver. tounge.gif

The biggest thing I'm expecting (and it's about time!) is full support for .psd-format images in Flash.
/>




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users