Will Flash Be Taken Off The Shelf?

argh.. by Suppafly · 2002-05-02 17:50 · Score: 0, Troll

Why didn't they post it when I submitted it..

At least my submission noted that macromedia is countersuing adobe claiming that Photoshop and GoLive infringe on their patents for web design software.

Re:argh.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 17:54 · Score: 0

Like any "good" newspaper editor,
they're looking for the sensationalistic
stories, that give distinct sides of good and bad.
Not a well-balanced with no clear "good guy" and
"bad guy".

Submit macromedia's countersuit by itself,
that might get in.
as long as it never mentions this one :)
Re:argh.. by Suppafly · 2002-05-04 07:25 · Score: 1

Yeh, I guess its easier to brand adobe as the bad as opposed to acknowledging the fact that these companies go back and forth pissing on each others shoes every chance they get.

Microsoft defense team speaks by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 17:50 · Score: 2, Interesting

"is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?"

Re:Microsoft defense team speaks by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 04:31 · Score: 0

That is assuming Microsoft products were any good. They're not. They're unstable, undocumented, closed source. They are disloyal to the user: DRM. They spy on the user: IE, Media player etc. Although the majority does use Microsoft products, that is mainly due to Microsoft marketing, and not due to the fact that "people really do like it". Most people do like a computing environment which lets them do the things they want to do (no DRM) and which does not allow outside parties invade their privacy.

Usual Quip by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 17:50 · Score: 0

"And in a flash, he was adobed" - Dmitri Skylarov in The Usual DMCA Suspects

I wonder... by fewl · 2002-05-02 17:51 · Score: 3, Interesting

if everyone's response to Adobe will be as vehement as if Microsoft did it...

--
Your actions on earth echo in eternity.

Re:I wonder... by Em+Emalb · 2002-05-02 18:25 · Score: 3, Funny

Nah, responses will mostly look like this:

4 misguided first posts
3 W00T!! l33t p05t5
150+ I hate flash
75 I love flash, you can do some cool stuff w/it.
4 I hate Bill G posts
10 I like Adobe cause of Acrobat posts.

--
Sent from your iPad.
Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:41 · Score: 0

You bring up a good point, but around here there's no love lost for Adobe either.
Re:I wonder... by __aahlyu4518 · 2002-05-02 19:46 · Score: 1

And ofcourse :
1 post with a summary of the number of other posts
1 comment to the summary to make it complete
Re:I wonder... by rbeattie · 2002-05-02 23:12 · Score: 2

I already HATE Adobe with a passion after the crap they pulled with Dmitri (much more than I dislike Microsoft.) Now they are using the courts yet again trying to shut out competition? They're the worst.

I use almost no Adobe products and recommend to everyone I know and work with that they use other products when possible (Anyone know of a decent PDF reader?) I know a lot of other people that are doing the same.

However, I do use a ton of Macromedia stuff, though not Flash which is in general a waste of brainpower. But Dreamweaver and Fireworks rule- AND both use the same UI as Flash which means they have the customizable tabs too. Even the newest MX versions Are these products going to go away too?

ARRGH, Adobe sucks. I hope Macromedia's counter suits REEM them.

BOYCOTT ADOBE. Send them an economic message that they suck.

-Russ

--
Me
Re:I wonder... by PunchMonkey · 2002-05-02 23:57 · Score: 1

And someonse has to:

1 post of the story in case the site gets slashdotted

:-)

--
I'll have something intelligent to add one of these days...
Re:I wonder... by FFFish · 2002-05-03 02:39 · Score: 3, Interesting

Acrobat alternative: JAWS PDF (and it's arguably better than Acrobat. I find it far less buggy.)

But it's not a reader, it's a PDF print engine.

--

--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Re:I wonder... by errxn · 2002-05-03 03:13 · Score: 1

And, of course, the requisite goatse.cx post, the "Stephen King is Dead" post, the "Dirty GNU Hippie" post, and a post that claims to be the text of the story, but is actually rewritten in spots to make it appear that the whole damn thing is screwed because of Linux....

--
In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
Re:I wonder... by NDPTAL85 · 2002-05-03 05:46 · Score: 1

How about folks just use the best products they can find from whatever company sells them and leave the politcal crap for those individuals who place politics over practicality?

--
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
Re:I wonder... by Qrlx · 2002-05-03 08:58 · Score: 1

So long as you don't care that your American Flag was made in China, go for it.
Re:I wonder... by NDPTAL85 · 2002-05-03 09:58 · Score: 1

Why would I care? Lowest price wins. You're not about to suggest that we pathetically base our purchasing decisions on where the products come from now are you? Patriotic buying has never been a very smart way to run an economy.

--
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
Re:I wonder... by Qrlx · 2002-05-03 13:40 · Score: 1

My approach is this: I vote with my wallet. There's more to a purchasing decision than efficiency and utility. Country of origin is something that matters to me, because certain countries suck and I don't want to support them. Same goes for companies.

Try donating your time (or money) to charity some time, you might find that it's rewarding in spite of how it looks on your balance sheet.
Re:I wonder... by NDPTAL85 · 2002-05-03 14:03 · Score: 1

Would you entertain the possibility that the greater success of capitalism inside certain countries that suck, such as China, paves the way to a later transformation to Democracy? As China joins the world's markets and since it has joined the WTO its markets, and thus society will be forced to open up as never before. Capitalism and the process of free market economics allows people to learn more about the rest of the world and thus question their governments like they have never before.

So one could make a reasonable argument that by denying a country, one that has a oppressive government, your business you are delying the day when they become a democracy and thus no longer a threat to us. Food for thought.

--
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
Re:I wonder... by Qrlx · 2002-05-03 21:18 · Score: 1

That's an interesting point and I think there is something to be said for it. Capitalism tends to highlight the opportunities of the individual, and individualism works well with Democracy. Looks good, but it's too simplistic.

Take a look at America. We've been Capitalist and a Democracy from the get-go, yet we are known throughout the world more for the success of capitalism than for the success of democracy. It's easy to see that the primary function of our government is to create an environment in which American capitalists can thrive. I believe that is what the Founders had in mind, and they've succeeded.

Except maybe they've succeeded too well. Just look at the massive consolidation of power by American media corporations over the past 20 years, the dwindling diversity on the airwaves. How antithetical is that to the Democratic ideal of giving everyone a voice? On the other hand, Econ 101 teaches that free markets tend towards monopoly. Hell, even the electorate has moved this way, we've only got two political parties in this country, whereas in Europe there's dozens. Maybe Capitalism ins't the good friend of Democracy it makes itself out to be.

Just looking outside our borders, for every example you can provide of successful capitalist ventures outside of the USA, I can point to repressive governments backed by the USA to bolster American business interests. It just so happens that in China the Chinese government already takes care of repression, and they sure as hell don't need any help from America to keep their populous at bay. (But they love our money, and they're happy to make the plastic crap on sale at your nearby Wal-Mart.)

Bringing Dole Pineapple to Hawaii may have ultimately brought Democracy to Hawaiians (after 50 years of foreign occupation), but who says they needed it? Weren't they a soverign people, with the same right of self-determination as you and I, and didn't they have a right to live under a King if they so desire? Are you really going to tell me that the life of a typical Hawaiian is better now than before America conquered^H^H^H freed them? Strange how Democracy, the "free will of the people," and Capitalism, the freedom to produce and consume as one sees fit, don't seem to be able to accept the existence of alternate political and economic realities.

Next: The World Bank and The IMF. Frequently their austerity programs are contingent upon the privatization of state-run functions such as the electric grid or municipal water supplies. Well, we all saw how great that worked in California just the other summer. Add to that the Enron mess and suddenly Capitalism doesn't look like it's the best solution all of the time. And don't give me any of that idealistic crap about how those Enron guys were crooked and those California deregulators didn't do it right, because this is the real world we live in. So please explain how the IMF's requirements of privatization of state-run services do a damn thing to help the citizens of a struggling country.

There's another problem when you bring Democracy and Capitalism together: We're all fat, dumb, and happy, and too lazy to vote. Look at who makes the decisions, who gets involved in politics. Americans with their freedom to vote and freedom to carry guns and freedom to drive SUVs and freedom to trade MP3s are too busy being thrilled by their consumption and enjoying all their shiny possesions to get involved in the political scene. Take a look at who's on the board of any local or regional government, and it's mostly real estate developers and lawyers. They are the only people who can be bothered to care, since they have a direct stake in the outcome. For them, it's really part of their job description to get those zoning easements and exemptions so they can put up more tract houses. I don't have the time to care about such things because I've got an Exchange server to look after.

A presidential election in this country can't even draw half of the people who've bothered to register out to the polls. The number is about 12% for primaries or smaller municipal elections. That is absolutely pathetic, and it's at that local level where so many important decisions get made. Hell most of the people aren't even informed about what goes on in their local government. In my town you have to read the Alternative weekly papers to get any in-depth coverage of local government, and this is suppposed to be a hotbed of community involvement and activistm.

So maybe Capitalism will open the door for greater Democracy. Great. Democracy politely steps back and says, "No, I insist, you first."

I hope this has given you some things to think about, because your last statement, I must say, is completely asinine. You seem to argue that I'm wrong to not reward a country that oppresses its people, because by supporting individual entrepreneurs in [INSERT COUNTRY NAME HERE] I somehow pave the way for Democracy. Well, I've put a hell of a lot of gas in my car over the years and last I checked Saudi Arabia is still a Kingdom, Iraq is ruled by a dictator, and Iran and Kuwait aren't any better. Venezuela's democratically elected President was almost deposed in a coup driven by the oilmen, and Russia is no better off twelve years after the demise of the Soviet. Again, it would be different in the ideal situation, where we truly had free markets, and capitalists didn't break the law when the cost-benefit analysis shows it's cheaper to dump the toxic waste into the river and occasionally get caught than to dispose of it properly, all the time.

So here's some food for thought for you: Let's say that I agree, and I can kind of see your point, that bringing global trade to a repressive society will push that society towards democracy. Let's say it works, and now that country has democracy and free markets.

What happens then? What's the next evolutionary step in the political or economic structure?
Re:I wonder... by NDPTAL85 · 2002-05-04 04:00 · Score: 1

Well first of all things aren't as bad here as you think they are. Yes capitalism leads to the creation of monopolies, but even without regulation a business can only become so big before it is too inefficient to compete against its smaller competitors. And we DO have regulation. We've got the DOJ and FTC to regulate industries who may or may not be coming under the influence of a rising monopoly or to regulate existing ones. We don't just let our businesses run roughshod over anything they please. As for the airwaves, well for TV there's cable, 100's of channels and most of America has cable. For radio I can understand your pain, I share it too. But there's internet streaming and XM radio. In short, if you want the good stuff you'll have to pay for it. I don't see a problem with that. Freedom of speech remains.

I'm not so sure that having dozens of political parties is such a great thing. One only has to look to the world's oldest democracy, India, to see the folly of dozens of so called "coalition" governments which are different parties in the government constantly re-aligning themselves with who-ever didn't insult them on that particular week. The more parties you have the more overhead the government needs to get anything done. If you think the U.S. government is slow to act on things, imagine how bad it would be if there were 4 or 5 parties in Congress. It just so happens that the majority of Americans actually ARE represented in either Republican or Democratic party ideals. I'd like my government to continue actually functioning so I don't really have a problem with that.

Yeah the US has propped up crooked regimes for a long time. And its a bad thing to do. But we've done it for strategic interests, oil. We have to ensure the oil will flow. In concerns to that, democratic transformation of that particular country(ies) is secondary. It will just have to wait till we're all driving hydrogen-electric hybrids. But for nations that hold no strategic interests and only represent a potential enemy, then we can use capitalism as a silent weapon to foster democratic transformation. Its a start at least.

The Hawaiians were certainly a soverign people. And yes they have every right to self-determination. I just don't know how many Hawaiians today who would honestly like to go back to hunting and catching their own food and building their own tools......etc. Plenty of them like the American way of life very much. Democracy and Capitalism is very tolerant I would say. We're extremely tolerant of the democratically run socialist/communist governments in Europe. As long as they don't bother us, we don't bother them. But they aren't a threat to us to begin with. What we have little tolerance for is regimes that are dangerous not only to our way of life but to their own citizens. And as long as they don't hold a strategic resource that we need, we will work to change what they are, for the good of everyone.

The World Bank and IMF suck. They aren't represenative of capitalism. Its really a form of lethal incompetence. They need to be reformed massively and I hope the continued protests of the anti-globalization folks eventually prods them to reform their policies. Because its the World Bank and IMF who are giving globalization a very bad name.

As for voting, well all I can say is people have the right to vote and the right to not vote. We did have a fairly high recent voter turnout for the last presidential election after all. A non-vote can really be interpreted as a "Hey I'm ok with whichever choice you make since it is either good for me regardless or will have little to no effect on my life". When people are pissed or upset about something however, they DO vote to change things, but once those things are righted they go right back to not voting until the next political emergency. No ever said that in a democracy everyone had to vote each and every time. I would think the fact that the republic has survived for the past 200+ years is proof evident enough that we're all mostly satisfied with the way things are being run. We've had only one civil war and of course some urban riots but nothing on the scale to overthrow the federal government. Crime is low, unemployment while recently spiking up to 6% is still low...etc. In short if a people are ABLE to become fat, happy, dumb and lazy its because their government is working correctly.

I would also argue that Russia is vastly better off then they were before. Changing an economy is not an overnight job. It takes years and years. They've first got to root out all the corruption then setup proper laws and regulations for businesses before their capitalist economy will be as efficient as the others of the world. But at least now the people are free, free to say what they want and do what they want. Thats a big plus in my book.

Ok you asked what if it worked and the country is a democracy with free markets. Well, after that we just trade and be happy! There isn't really anything more left to do after that. We watch with glee as the standard of living in the newly democratic nation rises and our investments in said country prosper. Then we move onto the next non-democratic nation and work on them. And then the next. Then the next. Until there's no more non-free people's on the planet. Once that is accoomplished we consider a loose framework for a world government. Something that say the United States, European Union, African Union (doesn't exist yet), Middle Eastern Union (again not here yet) and Asian Union (this too, not here yet!) would be states of. Then once the globe is united, we focus on space travel and colonizing the solar system. Massive colonies on the Moon and Mars and perhaps free floating Oribital Compounds capable of holding millions or billions each. We could populate the solarsystem with 10's of billions or 100's of billions of humans without even moving past the orbit of Pluto! Imagine the levels of trade that could commence then! wh0000000 b0y. Sorry the capitalist in me got out of control again.

--
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.

patented 'tabbed palettes'? by dirvish · 2002-05-02 17:52 · Score: 3

How are tabbed palettes patented? That is totally inane! From the article: 'alleging that the user interface of Macromedia's Flash Web animation tool infringed on Adobe's patent for "tabbed palettes," a feature that allows users of design software to rearrange the work space on the PC screen.'

--
FoundNews.com - get paid to blog.,

Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 17:57 · Score: 2, Insightful

How are tabbed palettes patented?

Take two random computer terms xxx and yyy.
Let the patent title be xxx'ed yyy's.
Write 36 pages of bullshit about it.
Submit everything to the patent office.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Twylite · 2002-05-02 18:42 · Score: 5, Informative

There is a tendency, especially in the OSS/FSF world, to under-estimate the significance of innovations in software. While I am largely against the current patent system, my dislikes for it revolve around the duration of patents, and the inability of clerks to apply or monitor the requirements for innovation.

You consider "tabbed palettes" ludicrous. With the benefit of hindsight, I can hardly disagree ... but were they innovative at the time, before world + dog started using them?

Maybe a better example (unpatented, fortunately): toolbars. Would those be patentable? Are they (were they) innovative? We managed to get through over 20 years of GUI use without the widespread use of toolbars. Anyone know when they first appeared?

Assuming a windowed environment, the use of a title bar with some system buttons can be considered obvious: that has been around since the beginning. But the idioms by which we further break down interfaces and make them accessible are developed over time. Which necessarily implies that there is room for innovation: doing something which is NEW, and not just a variation of what has been done before. And that is patentable.

So we're left with two questions: should such innovation be patentable; and are tabbed palettes new or a variation?

I assert that GUI innovations SHOULD be patentable (although I'd like to see a much shorter duration on all software-related patents). There are individuals and companies which spend a lot of time, effort and money researching GUI concepts, improving ease of use, and generally developing idioms which gives their software an edge ... but then have that idea reused by others in less than a couple of months, because the development cycle is shorter than the research cycle.

From Adobe's site:
Q11: Tabbed palettes are fairly common throughout software applications and operating systems -- what makes Adobe's palettes special and patentable? A: Like Velcro® and Post-It® notes, the very best inventions become so familiar that they are taken for granted. The fact that tabbed palettes seem so natural and common now is a testimony to the Adobe development effort that went into the invention. Adobe's patent describes a unique method that allows tabs within palettes to be customized, separated and reorganized by users. This invention was a significant leap forward for customers' productivity and personalization of the interface.

As for tabbed palettes ... this is a more difficult one. But first you need to understand the patent. This is not just about a tool dialog with a tab panel in it! The patent is available from Adobe's site, and a set of animations illustrate the infringment.

As you can see ... this patent is about multiple tool dialogs (palettes) which dock together to form tabbed panels within a single dialog. Suddenly the idea is not so obvious anymore. Dockable components which overlap to save space ...? That's not a universal GUI concept; showing and hiding tool windows or popping up dialogs in a stack is a traditional means to handle this problem. Arguably Adobe DID innovate in this instance.

--
i-name =twylite [http://public.xdi.org/=twylite], see idcommons.net
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by dirvish · 2002-05-02 18:57 · Score: 0, Redundant

I do not think an interface design should be patented. Obviously you should be able to copyright your code if you want but these software patents are out of control.

Dockable components which overlap to save space ...? That's not a universal GUI concept; showing and hiding tool windows or popping up dialogs in a stack is a traditional means to handle this problem.
Overlapping components are very common in software and in web design. Maybe they should sue Google for their use of components which overlap with their tabbed menu of web, images, groups, or directory search. I would say that overlapping components are more common these days than popping up dialogs in a stack. Adobe did not innovate this any more than I did when I wrote labels on the little folder tabs in my desk's file cabinet.

--
FoundNews.com - get paid to blog.,
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by MisterBlister · 2002-05-02 19:20 · Score: 1

Toolbars, at least as we understand them today, were largely the product of the first versions of -- get ready for it -- Excel. Yes, the Microsoft product.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by KFury · 2002-05-02 19:23 · Score: 5, Funny

That set of animations demonstrating the design overlap would have been a lot smaller if they'd done it in Flash.

--

Kevin Fox
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by zulux · 2002-05-02 19:24 · Score: 4, Insightful

but were they innovative at the time

Inovative yes, but worthy of a monopoly of 19 years? No.

See the way patents use to work is that a company would disclose a non-obvious method, in return for a temporary monopoly. A tabbed interface is quite obvious, and it's disclosure of it's inner workings does nothing for the public good.

Just by seeing one (tabbed interface), I can duplicate it's effect. I don't need a patent desclosure to figgure it out - so therefore it's a trivial invention, obvious to one skilled in the arts.

I just hope that an OpenSourse/GPL author get a patent on somting vital to the computing field and brings companies like Adobe too it's knees.

--
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:34 · Score: 0

Yes, I'm sure anyone who's ever rifled through a shoebox of index cards , or a drawer of manilla folders could never have come up with this gaspingly innovative idea....

Look fuckwit the reason why this interface is popular isn't because of any innovation but because it derives from visual organization systems the physical world which are age old and obvious as the nose on you face.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Quila · 2002-05-02 19:35 · Score: 2

Therefore you obviously haven't read the patent we're talking about, because it mentions Excel specifically.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Hes+Nikke · 2002-05-02 19:47 · Score: 1

what does this do to DragThing? DragThing's whole point is to be tabbed pallets!

--
Don't call me back. Give me a call back. Bye. So yeah. But bye our, well, but alright we are on a shirt this chill.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:51 · Score: 0

so when are Xerox going to be sueing windows for stealing there idea of a windows based OS? This brings back bad memorys of Amazon and the 1-click buy polova. How someone can patent something as fundimental as this i do not know, but i would like to apply for a patent on CAD (or Coffee Aided Design)
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by lfourrier · 2002-05-02 19:58 · Score: 1

We managed to get through over 20 years of GUI use without the widespread use of toolbars. Anyone know when they first appeared?

don't know, but look at macpaint where you choose tools in a bar (circa 1984). ok, it was on the left, but it really was a bar of tools.

I assert that GUI innovations SHOULD be patentable

ASSERT FAILED!!!

gui innovations could be protected as design, trade marks, and so on. If they become widespread without being protected in court, they'll become public domain, and as such freely usable.

UI design question
In eclipse, view have a comportement partly similar to what you describe about adobe palettes (but they are not palettes (perhaps, if there is an unambigous definition of what is a palette)).
Is there a risk of patent infrigement from IBM?
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 20:16 · Score: 0

On the Amiga and Atari from around 1986 something it was very common in paint programs to have what you call toolbars. Actually there where no menus, just buttons which whith you selected the current action. For each button there was often a configuration screen, like pencil brush, pattern etc.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by eyeball · 2002-05-02 20:33 · Score: 2

As for tabbed palettes ... this is a more difficult one. But first you need to understand the patent. This is not just about a tool dialog with a tab panel in it! The patent [adobe.com] is available from Adobe's site, and a set of animations [adobe.com] illustrate the infringment.

I can see that Adobe had to run Flash to create the screengrabs and animations. Perhaps Macromedia will learn their lesson and put some text in their EULA, something to the effect of "By running this program you are giving up the right to sue us for patent infringement."

--

_______
2B1ASK1
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by pubjames · 2002-05-02 20:33 · Score: 5, Insightful

I assert that GUI innovations SHOULD be patentable (although I'd like to see a much shorter duration on all software-related patents).

When I was a CS undergraduate, I took the designing user interfaces course. As part of the coursework, I designed a voice activated interface (this was at a time when such things didn't exist). Various other students imagined how other interfaces of the future might work. Some of the ideas we came up with were great.

Now, we could have all patented the ideas we came up with, and since then I'm sure some of our patents would have been infringed, and we could have licenced and sued. But would it make sense to do that? What if all undergraduate students did it? New developments in the software world would grind to a halt.

The argument that interface innovations that appear obvious now weren't at the time they were invented is I believe a poor one. A creative person can sit down with a pencil and paper and come up with lots of ideas for possible user interface designs - it's relatively easy for those people who have an inclination for it. You've only got to look at the web sites of some of the more creative web designers to realise that there are many different creative ideas out there for user interfaces. The world would be a poorer place if all these designers patented their ideas and prevented other people from using them.

The interface that is common today for products like Adobe Photoshop is a cumulation of many different ideas from many different individuals and companies. As a company focused on the creative industy, Adobe should be ashamed of itself for this kind of action.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 20:41 · Score: 0

I can see that Adobe had to run Flash to create the screengrabs and animations.

If you are talking about the animations here , you're wrong. They're GIF animations.

Moral of the story : Right click before you post.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by po8 · 2002-05-02 20:42 · Score: 3, Insightful

As you can see ... this patent is about multiple tool dialogs (palettes) which dock together to form tabbed panels within a single dialog. Suddenly the idea is not so obvious anymore. Dockable components which overlap to save space ...? That's not a universal GUI concept; showing and hiding tool windows or popping up dialogs in a stack is a traditional means to handle this problem. Arguably Adobe DID innovate in this instance.

You're joking, right? No, you're claiming that Adobe invented the...wait for it...file drawer! Look carefully at those little tabs on top of the palette. Now look around your office. Gee, what might have inspired the idea of putting little labeled tabs on top of records that are obscured by other records so that they can be quickly indexed? But the idea of having a file drawer simulated in software: now that's innovation! Dockable components that overlap to share space indeed...

The FAQ mentions a unique method that allows tabs within palettes to be customized, separated and reorganized by users. Who could have thought up such a crazy innovation? [Shuffles through file drawer, reorganizing and relabeling files.]

Sheesh.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by eyeball · 2002-05-02 21:32 · Score: 1

I didn't mean they were flash animations, I meant they had to run Flash to capture the actual Flash designer-whateveryoucallit program in the act of moving tabbed menus, then turn that into an animated gif. But my original post was a joke anyway, dumbass.

--

_______
2B1ASK1
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Twylite · 2002-05-02 22:30 · Score: 4, Interesting

I agree that 19 years of monopoly is unreasonable, hence my assertion that patents should be allowed, but the duration should be much shorter.

Unfortunately patent law operates on an all-or-nothing principle: a major technological advancement that cost $1 billion and 15 years to achieve receives the same protection as a minor competitive edge which cost $10000 and 3 months.

As for it being obvious ... creative research is like being on the wrong side of a trap door. Its really hard to go through, but anyone on the other side can easily work out the trick. Innovation is often about doing something which is blindingly obvious, but no-one thought of it before.

Often just knowing the result and the fact that it can be accomplished makes it easier to reproduce. Chemistry is a good example: a theoretical compound can be proposed and its potential properties suggested, but determing how to manufacture the compound can be a tough problem. A couple of experts look at it and tell you it simply can't be done. Then someone announces they have create it, and cheaply. The experts reevaluate, knowing they must have missed something: it is possible, with current technology, and inexpensive - given those hints they are a lot closer to a solution.

So, what SHOULD be patentable? Algorithms? RSA is quite obvious to anyone skilled in mathematics ... once they've seen the algorithm. Should the internal combustion engine have been patentable? It was a major technological advancement, it has been the bastion of private transport for the better part of a centuary, but it is arguably just a derivative of a steam piston. Obvious to anyone skilled in mechanics.

I would like to see OSS obtain some patents and fight fire with fire. But it won't happen. No-one in the OSS world is prepared to put development effort into a product which involves patented technology, because of the stigma the community has attached to patents.

--
i-name =twylite [http://public.xdi.org/=twylite], see idcommons.net
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by pacman+on+prozac · 2002-05-02 22:33 · Score: 1

probably not I can remember amiga software having toolbars and I'm pretty sure it was around before windows came out. See PageStream DTP software for one example. I can also remember laughing at win3.1 because it was so primitive compared to workbench :)
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Conan+the+Linuxman · 2002-05-02 22:47 · Score: 1

Should GUI innovations be patentable? Hell No! At the rate the U.S. Patent Office is issuing software patents, there will be no more GUI innovations. All the methods for using a GUI interface with a mouse will already have patents issued to the large corporations in the Great Software Patent Grab of the Century. These patents of course are available to anyone. Anyone, with a large team of patent attorneys, that is. Of course these large corporations can then threaten to sue any individual that programs anything that remotely does anything resembling their innovation. That should help put an end to innovation. As innovation can only hurt those that already have the power and money. Of course, the large corporations could sue other large corporations, but usually they will be happy with an exchange of these software patent innovations.
In the case of the Adobe patent, one might think "Hey this sounds innovative, Adobe deserves a patent on this for all of their hard work. Then after 17 years anyone will be able to use this innovative concept and prosper from it. Boy I am so glad we have an organization like the U.S. Patent Office that truly rewards innovation and preserves the American Way of Life!"
But seriously, does the Adobe innovation warrant a patent? NO! This patent, like most thing in a GUI just mimics something we do in everyday life. The GUI is basically designed around the concept of the use of your desk and file cabinet to sort papers. Overlapping windows are just an extension of placing documents on your desk and sorting through them. The use of tabs is just borrowed from the tabs (index) in your file cabinet. The Adobe concept is basically the idea of taking a document visible from the index (tab) in the file cabinet and placing it on your desk (undocked). After you are finished working on the document you then re-file the document where it s still readily visible through the index (docked).
I don't believe one should be able to patent the methods of viewing, sorting and the filing of documents, just because they are done on the computer.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by tps12 · 2002-05-02 22:52 · Score: 3, Interesting

See the way patents use to work is that a company would disclose a non-obvious method, in return for a temporary monopoly. A tabbed interface is quite obvious, and it's disclosure of it's inner workings does nothing for the public good.
Just by seeing one (tabbed interface), I can duplicate it's effect. I don't need a patent desclosure to figgure it out - so therefore it's a trivial invention, obvious to one skilled in the arts.
That is just a side effect of your knowledge of programming. That is, you might invent a magic salad chopper that most people, when looking at it, won't understand. You haven't patented the chopping of vegetables (just as Adobe hasn't patented the customization of UIs), but you did patent this one machine that chops vegetables. But, someone who has worked in the field (engineering, focusing on turbines or whatever it is your chopper is based on) might see it and think, "ah, of course." Now, should he be permitted to go recreate your invention? Patent law says no.

--

Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 23:26 · Score: 0

He said "the very first versions of exel", i.e. before the Amiga and before Windows.

The first Mac(!) version of Excel dates from 1984.

The Amiga was introduced on the market in '85.

Just a tiny off-topic detail in this topic, of course.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 23:32 · Score: 0

The university probably would have owned the patent. Check the fine print.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 23:43 · Score: 0

Of course the problem with that is that the school would hold the patents.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by pubjames · 2002-05-02 23:48 · Score: 2

Of course the problem with that is that the school would hold the patents.

It's not relevant to my argument whether the school or the student holds the patent.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by billcopc · 2002-05-02 23:58 · Score: 1

Funny, I thought tabbed palettes were yet another basic element of the Windows API ?! Adobe doesn't own the widget, they just used it.

Heck, I'll go patent the ugly VB Bitmap Buttons because I can prove I made the ugliest back in '92, before all the school-taught idiot "programmers" jumped onto the VB bandwagon.

--
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by markmoss · 2002-05-02 23:59 · Score: 3, Interesting

I would like to see OSS obtain some patents and fight fire with fire.

Note that at least in electronics, corporations use patents to force other corporations to cross-license their patents far more often than they can collect significant royalties or maintain a monopoly using the patent.

So how could the OSS community use the same principle? Maybe we write a GPL-like patent license -- in exchange for a license to use the OSS patents, you have to put the same or a less restrictive license onto your patents in the same area. The trick is defining "same area"...
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Hard_Code · 2002-05-03 00:37 · Score: 2

The suit was filed in 2000, only 2 years ago - hardly a seminal software innovation. I am pretty damn sure that there is at least 1 piece of software dating since 2000 that has a feature like this.

"I assert that GUI innovations SHOULD be patentable (although I'd like to see a much shorter duration on all software-related patents)."

Well, that's the tricky part isn't it? And this really isn't a software innovation. It's one of those squirmy "look and feel" "innovations". I find it very hard to believe that Adobe spent very much money "researching" this "invention". Software research, especially UI research, (compared other types of research) is pretty cheap.

I seriously doubt the worth of handing out patents for things which are not physical inventions or processes in the first place. But if we *were* to hand out patents for these things, we should have some clueful people determine patent durations, on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the speed of the market in which the patent was filed, and the significance of the patent. I wouldn't give software UI innovations a patent duration of more than a year. Software patents themselves probably shouldn't be more than a few years.

--

It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by dup_account · 2002-05-03 00:43 · Score: 1

What's great is that Adobe couldn't help themselves and threw in some Marketing/Product comparison at the same time. The Adobe example moves faster then the Flash example (although the Flash one appears to be doing more than the Adobe)
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by jlower · 2002-05-03 00:59 · Score: 1

I'm not sure Excel arrived in '84 - Microsoft had a version of Multiplan for the Mac before they came up with Excel.

But the point remains. The first Mac shipped with MacWrite which surely did have a toolbar.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by angel'o'sphere · 2002-05-03 01:00 · Score: 2

Toolbars, at least as we understand them today, were largely the product of the first versions of -- get ready for it --
Excel. Yes, the Microsoft product.

Should be rated as "funny".

As well as one of the first the posts in which one says: tabbed panels are in windows since he remembers windows.

1) Tabbed panes are relatively new. In Win 3.1 they did not exist. Except for 3rd party libraries.

2) Excel is not the first product with a tool bar.

Even my old AppleWorks on an Apple ][ in 1984 allready had tool bars. I'm pretty sure, the first SmalTalk development environments as well had tool bars >20 years ago.

Regards,
angel'o'sphere

--
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by ZoneGray · 2002-05-03 01:02 · Score: 2

The question shouldn't be simply whether tabbed pallettes are innovative. Rather, does the patent protection provide sufficient incentive to justify denying others the use of these pallettes?

Because they're patented, users of nearly all software are denied the utility that comes from using tabbed pallettes. But would Adobe have developed them even without patent protection? I strongly suspect they would have.

Of course, these are not things that a judge should concern himself with; the law is the law, and as it exists, it's fairly clear. It's a matter for policy-makers (Congress) to think about, though. It's clear that the patent system is badly in need of overhaul. Most of the "innovation" that it encourages seems to consist of people trying to invent a hundred different patentable ways to do the same thing. That's wasteful, and doesn't justify denying the public the use of the numerous but trivial innovations that currently receive patent protection.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by 0xdeadbeef · 2002-05-03 01:02 · Score: 2

Oh wow, how novel. Someone made tabbed dialogs work like tearable menus. The original techniques are far more "innovative"; Adobe's combination of them is obvious, given the nature of the interface, and how trivial it is to implement. Perhaps they were the first, but one programmer's bright idea several years ago does not justify a patent, or holding the rest of us hostage for using it.

Though I have to admit, the degree to which Macromedia imitated the interface stylistically is pretty cheesy. They ripped them off like lazy hacks, but in art and industrial design that is hardly uncommon, and when illegal, falls under copyright law, not patent law.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by angel'o'sphere · 2002-05-03 01:10 · Score: 2

Of course the problem with that is that the school would hold the patents.

It's not relevant to my argument whether the school or the student holds the patent.

Probably in the US. Not in germany.

In germany there is a protection law for the inventor. A student at teh university very likely will own the patent. If you make inventions whuile under working contract, the company might own it but you get revenues (guarantied by law!) from their exploitation of the patent.

In germany its also not possible to make contracts (e.g. for employment) wich cancel the law. Contracts with such clauses are void.

Regards,
angel'o'sphere

--
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by fritzson · 2002-05-03 01:10 · Score: 1

> Maybe a better example (unpatented, fortunately): toolbars. ...
> Anyone know when they first appeared?
If by toolbar you mean the bar across the top of the app which contains the drop down menus, then, I think, Apple gets credit. Many people think that Apple took the Lisa/Mac interface from PARC, but I am pretty sure they added two interesting innovations in order to reduce the number of mouse buttons from three to one.
The Smalltalk-80 windowing system didn't have toolbars or useful window decorations (e.g. the iconify button, the close button, etc.). Instead the middle mouse button popped up an application specific menu and the right button popped up a window management menu. (The left button was for selecting, same as now.) Apple got rid of the other two buttons by inventing the tool bar and the little window decorations which handle window management.
If today's standards (or lack thereof) were in place then, Apple would almost certainly have patented these innovations succesfully.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by the+bluebrain · 2002-05-03 01:53 · Score: 1

The keyword for me is "non-obvious". And this is the point there I have the impression the patent office is letting way too much through. In this instance the question could be "if I let a bunch of GUI hacks loose on this problem, how likely are they to come up with something similar?". I would think close to 100% certainty.

Adobe addresses this aspect only in Q8: "Adobe will not be the R&D department for its competitors".
... Arr and Dee? This isn't a rocket engine whose blast chamber is cooled by its own liquid hydrogen fuel ... more likely it's something some annoyed user-cum-developper prototyped in two New York minutes, and said "uh, sure. whatever." when asked if Adobe could use it.

IAdefinitelyNAL, so I go by the spirit of the law - and in this case (as many others) I see nothing but a straight-out lie in the answer to Q10, "[...] is Adobe simply using litigation as a tool to beat its competitor?"

--
yes, we have no bananas
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 01:54 · Score: 0

> I assert that GUI innovations SHOULD be patentable

So you would like symphonies and axioms be patentable?

IMHO this case should be dealt with as a copyright issue and not a patent issue.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by torokun · 2002-05-03 02:03 · Score: 1

Not everyone who has a patent prevents others from using their invention. Software development would not "grind to a halt," as you suggest, because most patent holders licence their patents to others for a fee. This fee is not usually unreasonable. If you want to use someone else's invention, you must pay them. If the invention doesn't deserve that protection, prove it, and you'll have your free use.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by pubjames · 2002-05-03 02:15 · Score: 2

Software development would not "grind to a halt," as you suggest, because most patent holders licence their patents to others for a fee.

Increasingly a lot of innovation in the software sector is happening as a result of Open Source projects. There are lots of examples, but for instance, one I'm quite excited about is that icons in KDE in the next version can be vector-based. I think this can be viewed upon as an innovation because I believe neither OS X nor Windows XP have this feature.

But what if someone had patented this idea? Who would pay the fees? KDE is not a profit making organisation, and so they would have to remove this feature. This is just a little example, but I do believe that software development could indeed be seriously impeded if software patents become commonplace.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:22 · Score: 0

Are you sure? I used Excel 1.x and 2.x and vaugley remember when the big deal when they added toolbars
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:28 · Score: 0

After a little googling, I semi-confirmed that the toolbar was (probably) added in Excel 3.0.

Excel 2.2 for OS/2 PM wihtout toolbars. The Mac and Windows versions should look very similar.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Flower · 2002-05-03 02:34 · Score: 2

I would like to see OSS obtain some patents and fight fire with fire. But it won't happen. No-one in the OSS world is prepared to put development effort into a product which involves patented technology, because of the stigma the community has attached to patents.

And where is the OSS community going to get the continual funding to churn these patents out and enforce them? How much money are you willing to personally invest to file a counter-suit when MS or Novell or AT&T comes knocking on some unknown developer's door so we can enter a cross licensing deal to let that guy's project move on? What happens when that company sues another developer over the same patent and we have to do this dance again?

When we're finally entrenched into the system and OSS isn't fun to do anymore because we're more busy talking to lawyers and getting suggestions on replacing a comma with a semicolon in sentence X so a patent passes than writing software where do we go?

Where do we go in areas where the patents are already littered like a minefield? Last month I had a chance to hear Radia Perlman talk and meet with her. She talked about how she had an interest in doing research in a particuliar field but saw the patent issues she would have to deal with and decided to skip it. One of the finest minds in the field and it isn't worth her time to contribute because it would be more time sidestepping every frivilous patent claim out there.

Btw, RSA's real protection came from their stance that the copyright on the code was more important than the patent. This was how they made sure MIT didn't see a friggin dime for giving RSA stewardship over the patent. So much for the Bayh-Dole Act helping universities. And compare usage of RSA here in the US as compared to Europe. Europe which had no software patents got a lot more milage out of RSA than we did in the States.

So in this case, I will be a fanatic and opinionated (I'm entitled. I'm 36 :) I don't care if it took a thousand man years to create and someone spent a billion dollars on it. Software patents are bogus under the US patent system and I'd rather throw this baby anti-christ out with the bathwater than try to fix it. Software is a field of ideas and ideas should not be patented under any circumstance. Tangibles yes. Make a better material for the soaker hose I water my roses with and I'm all for giving you a patent. Not to mention the US allows broad patents and does not require that a patent advance the field and the system becomes an idea killer instaed of an idea distributor.

The easiest way to fix software patents is to have no software patents.

--
I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:45 · Score: 0

Origin of toolbars:
Interactive children's books, beginning in the 1960's.
You press a farm animal, hear a noise.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by arkanes · 2002-05-03 02:47 · Score: 3, Informative

this is one of the many reasons why software patents are bogus - it's not a patent on an invention - that is, a new product that does something new, or something old in a new way. It's a patent on a concept, not an implementation. After playing with Photoshop for 20 minutes I know enough about these tabbed palletes to invent my own that would infringe the patent - yet the actual code I write would bear little similarity to Adobes, the binary I generate would be almost totally different - in other words, I would have invented a new way of doing something old (display tabbed palettes). This is like me seeing someones veggie chopper, deciding that I can make something that would do the same thing, and creating one that, while it does chop veggies, does it in a totally different way than his does. Thats not patent infringement, but in software it is? Please.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by stapedium · 2002-05-03 03:30 · Score: 1

I'm not sure if they were vector based, but SGI's $D window manager had antialiased scalable icons back in 1994. Again, I'm not sure if these were vector based, or if they just used lots of hardware to do quick antialiasing on highres rasters, but the core idea of scalable user interface components was there.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 03:30 · Score: 0

If the invention doesn't deserve that protection, prove it
What do you mean? This is a value judgement. Whether something is "obvious" is an opinion. That's why patent cases are risky and expensive. Paying a million dollars to a patent lawyer hardly qualifies as "free use."
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by pacman+on+prozac · 2002-05-03 04:08 · Score: 1

The first popular OS I'm aware of that used them was Xerox's gui for its Star 8010 machine. Info available here.

This was a bit before my time in 1981.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by zulux · 2002-05-03 04:26 · Score: 2

The 'Classic" example of a traditional pataentable idea, was the manufacturer of a rifle bore.

One company knew how to make them - and even after studying a rifle, nobody else could figgure it out.

This is where a patent makes sense - the company patented the idea and got a monopoly on the device. They benifited in that they diden't have to take measures to keep the process secret, and the public benifited because they got to see an otherwise hidden manufacturing technique.

What does the public benifit from for Adobe's tabbed palette?

Nothing. Just a lawsuit.

--
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by good-n-nappy · 2002-05-03 04:27 · Score: 1

I will go you one further. Not only should GUI innovations not be patentable but software innovations in general.

As I understand it, software patents are hardware patents taken to their "logical" conclusion. That is, since any software can be implemented in hardware, the transitive closure is to allow patenting of the software directly. I think this is bogus. Putting something in hardware by definition makes it concrete. It would also raise the bar on what is needed to get a patent thus eliminating a lot of the crap.

I realize this is well beyond redundant but sometimes things just need to be said again.

--
Never underestimate the power of fiber.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by tobylyn · 2002-05-03 05:19 · Score: 1

"Now, we could have all patented the ideas we came up with,..."

No, you couldn't. *Ideas* are not patentable.

T
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by pubjames · 2002-05-03 05:28 · Score: 2

No, you couldn't. *Ideas* are not patentable.

Sure, you need a working example, but in the case of user interfaces that is easy. If, for instance, I want a patent on "dragging little dots around as a way to navigate information", it's a piece of cake to make a working example in Macromedia Flash, on which I could get a patent. So whilst I agree that "ideas" are not patentable and that you need a working example, when it comes to how a graphical user interface works that isn't much of a barrier.

After all, Adobe's patent on 'dockable tabs' does not specify, for instance, the language or operating system it works with. So anyone could throw together a working example of that type of user interface design and patent it.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by sysadmn · 2002-05-03 06:43 · Score: 1

Read the patent.
When you put one file cabinet in front of another, do file folders jump from one to the other to minimize the amount of space it takes up, while maximizing the number of tabs that can be seen?
I'm not saying Adobe is right, just that things aren't as simple as you imply.

--
Envy my 5 digit Slashdot User ID!
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Hibernator · 2002-05-03 09:08 · Score: 1

When I was a CS undergraduate, I took the designing user interfaces course. As part of the coursework, I designed a voice activated interface (this was at a time when such things didn't exist). Various other students imagined how other interfaces of the future might work. Some of the ideas we came up with were great.
Now, we could have all patented the ideas we came up with, and since then I'm sure some of our patents would have been infringed, and we could have licenced and sued. But would it make sense to do that? What if all undergraduate students did it? New developments in the software world would grind to a halt.
This happens all the time, and in fact helps drive commercial software development. Professors and their students patent new ideas as part of the paper publication process. If you read the fine print you'll discover that your school owns the right to any intellectual property that you invent while using their resources, and universities commonly license these patents to large corporations (like Microsoft).
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by pod · 2002-05-03 12:17 · Score: 1

I find it very hard to believe that Adobe spent very much money "researching" this "invention".
Exactly. Probably what happened was some Adobe developer was bored one day, or had some spare time between optimizing filters for those damn Motorola vs Intel benchmarks... and thought it would be neat to have multiple dialog boxes moved into a single tabbed one. All the necessary UI code is there, you just have to put it all together. It may not be immediately obvious, but it wasn't to the guy who coded this up. He was probably messing with all kinds of approaches.
I seriously doubt this was some grand multi-year multi-million-$ research project; and it cost Adobe nothing beyond what they had to pay the guy to otherwise sit idle.

--
"Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 12:34 · Score: 0

[sniped sensible argument]
, Adobe should be ashamed of itself for this kind of action.

I agree completely.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by fferreres · 2002-05-03 13:33 · Score: 2

Patents costs are never accounted for. Whenever you decide to invest in some new product, you have to research an ever increasing number of patents.

So the base cost of everthing grows proportional to the number of patents. After some time, patents are something that is hurting competition in those patent intensive countries.

It's not the cost of the patent, the problem is you must spend a LOT of money just to know you are not infringing. And sometimes, you can't even know if you are infringing: only a trial could solve the issue. This adds risk to returns which in turn hurts patent heavy industry.

Also, people that invent but don't have the resources to patent are raped by big companies. And after beign raped those same companies prevent this low budget players for doing everything. Send a bunch of lawers against a small start-up and you are done with them.

In the end, you'll find you just can't do anything without infringing someones right to collect money from you.

Just great. I guess some country will realice this at some point and become a patent free country. No pressure or economical penalties will be able to harm this coutry, because mostly everyone will want to be there.

--
unfinished: (adj.)
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by po8 · 2002-05-03 17:57 · Score: 1

Whatever. Once you have the basic file drawer/folder/tab idea, there are all sorts of obvious improvements that can be made in the computer version. The keyword being obvious: you aren't in principle allowed to patent small changes to an existing idea. But principle doesn't seem to get one very far in the patent game these days...
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-04 03:27 · Score: 0

Its got nothing to do with whether or not something is a "universal GUI concept".

A patent is considered "obvious" if somebody WHO IS AN EXPERT IN THE FIELD can be considered to easily come up with the same solution IF PRESENTED WITH THE SAME PROBLEM.

I guarantee you that pretty much any software developer who has done a little UI programming would come up with the same solution IF PRESEENTED WITH THE SAME PROBLEM. Because it is *obvious*.

The question does not resolve around whether or not other developers have or have not come up with the invention (thats the 'prior art' side of patent law and is unrelated) - the question is only, if presented with the same problem, would pretty much any "expert in the field" be able to come up with the same solution.

And that makes the vast majority of UI patents "obvious" and invalid. 99.9% of them, any expert in the field would not only be able to come up with them, but be able to do so with less than 5 minutes of thinking about it.

On a side note, I would argue that toolbars have been very common in the last 20 years. I remember using a very early Apple Macintosh around 1985 or so, and already the basic applications that came with it (e.g. McPaint) utilized toolbars as a primary feature. Microsoft then copied McPaint and called it PaintBrush (the extreme similarities between the two still painfully evident today), and even the earliest versions of PaintBrush, which has been included with every single version of Windows since at least 3.0, utilize toolbars as a primary features.
Re:patented 'tabbed palettes'? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-04 03:33 · Score: 0

Obvious to anyone skilled in mechanics.
See, heres where you are confused. When the internal combustion engine was developed, it was NOT obvious to people "skilled in mechanics" WHEN IT CAME OUT - at that time, it would have taken anyone skilled in the mechanics *months* or *years* of work to come up with such an invention.
Adobe's patent, on the other hand, WOULD have been obvious *already* to anyone 'skilled in the field', WHEN IT CAME OUT. That is to say, anyone skilled in the field WHEN THE PATENT CAME OUT, had they been presented with the problem, would have been able to come up with the solution *independently* within *minutes*.
Patents are NOT often about things which are "obvious but noones thought of it", thats a myth. Patents are very SELDOM about that - the vast majority of patents are about things that took people 'skilled in the arts' a LONG TIME to figure out, not a matter of minutes.

God damm i am drunk by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 17:52 · Score: 0

shiiit sorry please mods me doewn cuz i am drunk sorry i wont ever o this again

This is a good thing by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 17:52 · Score: 0

The ends justifies the means!

i tried... by webmonarch · 2002-05-02 17:53 · Score: 0, Offtopic

i failed

Flash: The BLINK tag writ large by rjamestaylor · 2002-05-02 17:53 · Score: 3, Funny

my favorite quote from Philip and Alex's Guide to Web Publishing

--
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello

Re:Flash: The BLINK tag writ large by gaspyy · 2002-05-03 02:20 · Score: 1

Remember just a few years ago those nasty, annoying java applets? The ones that would make an image wiggle or a text to scroll? Is Java evil? Is Java the equivalent of the blink tag?

Of course not! Just like Java, Flash is a tool. It's up to you how to use it.

You know, I expected the "proud geek community" to be a little open-minded when it comes to software.

I hate patents by codepunk · 2002-05-02 17:54 · Score: 1

But I hate Flash more....good by you will not be missed.

--

Got Code?

Re:I hate patents by jawtheshark · 2002-05-02 19:02 · Score: 1

Amen! I hope it will rot in hell!
On thing we have to think about is that many people make their money by making flash animations/presentations/sites. I personally have a good friend who only does exactly that. Okay, he's into Marketing, so that's probably his evil side :-)
Note that I have thought of flash as a non-web technology that was abominated to run on the web. I have absolutely nothing against flash-based CD-Roms that are used for informational, educational or commercial presentations.
Oh, and those neat humourous swf files (Can't think of any right now, but joecartoon is famous for them) I'll miss those a bit, but only a bit :-)

--
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)

It would be right... by cyberformer · 2002-05-02 18:00 · Score: 5, Insightful

...if Macromedia had actually ripped off work that Adobe had put a lot of time and effort into, then shared with the public. (This is what the patent system is for: inventors share their work, and in return get a monopoly for twenty years, after which the work passes into the public domain.)

Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be the case. The patent is over "tabbed palettes", a type of user interface design. So it's not an invention, just a ludicrous software patent.

Many years ago, Apple tried to sue Microsoft for copyright infringement over their user-interface. Had they (ab)used the patent system instead, they might have won, and there would be no Windows.

Re:It would be right... by discstickers · 2002-05-02 18:08 · Score: 1

Actually, the main reason Apple lost was beacuse John Sculley (CEO of Apple at the time), signed a document allowing Microsoft to use Apple's look and feel in Windows 1.0 and all future derivations.

Guess why he signed it? Because Billg threatened not to publish Microsoft productivity apps on the fledgling Mac.

--
I have a shitty sig!
Re:It would be right... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:11 · Score: 0

Somehow I have the feeling that MS would argue their way out of this one like this:
MS Spin-doctor: "Umm, your Honor, the Graphical-User-Interface is an irremovable module of Windows, and it's deletion would cripple the system or make it highly unusable."
Court Jester: "Your Honor, he's lying- the inclusion of the GUI is the detrimental factor here"
Re:It would be right... by JanusFury · 2002-05-02 18:19 · Score: 1

I'll say one thing, I don't plan on supporting Adobe or Apple after the garbage they're pulling over Flash. First the Sorenson lawsuit, and now this.

I currently use Paint Shop Pro - I bought it a while back for $75 and absolutely love it. I've been considering buying Photoshop or Illustrator, though, because PSP sorely lacks many features I could use greatly.

I also have been considering buying a macintosh, because I really want to learn how to use their new technologies and their new OS.

But I've been a longtime user of many Macromedia products, and have found them all to be of superior workmanship. Seeing Adobe and Apple pull this garbage has lost them a customer. I'll be sticking with my Macromedia Flash, and my Jasc Paint Shop Pro, thank you very much. They may not be the best product around, but they're worth every penny I paid for them, and both Macromedia and Jasc are good companies. I'll also be sticking with Windows XP, because I like the OS better, and I also don't see the need to support a monopoly in the making any more than I see the need to support a monopoly that already exists.

--
using namespace slashdot;
troll::post();
Re:It would be right... by aardvarkjoe · 2002-05-02 18:27 · Score: 2, Funny

I'll also be sticking with Windows XP, because I like the OS better, and I also don't see the need to support a monopoly in the making any more than I see the need to support a monopoly that already exists.

Wow! That's conviction, all right.

--

How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
Re:It would be right... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:33 · Score: 0

Just pirate that shit, fool!
Re:It would be right... by Duncan3 · 2002-05-02 18:36 · Score: 1

if Macromedia had actually ripped off work that Adobe had put a lot of time and effort into, then shared with the public
So if it was open source it would be just fine... like GIMP!

--
- Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
Re:It would be right... by Ian+Peon · 2002-05-02 18:57 · Score: 5, Funny

I agree with you, I think that patent's should NOT apply to soft...

Many years ago, Apple tried to sue Microsoft for copyright infringement over their user-interface. Had they (ab)used the patent system instead, they might have won, and there would be no Windows.

...OK, now I'm torn!

--
Never never never smoke crack before geometry class!
Re:It would be right... by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2002-05-02 18:58 · Score: 1

it could also be agrued that both Quark and Corel already had these features before adobe did, from what I've heard.
Re:It would be right... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:08 · Score: 0

You pay for software?

the wonders never cease...
Re:It would be right... by cpt+kangarooski · 2002-05-02 19:13 · Score: 1

I thought that it was because he threatened to take away the version of BASIC that Apple had licensed from them for use on the Apple II, which was at the time the primary money maker for Apple.

Ah well, either way, the gist of it is the same.

--
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Re:It would be right... by Malcontent · 2002-05-02 19:51 · Score: 2

"I also don't see the need to support a monopoly in the making any more than I see the need to support a monopoly that already exists."

Quite possibly the stupidest thing I have ever read in my life. Only on slashdot I guess.

--
War is necrophilia.
Re:It would be right... by tetro · 2002-05-02 19:55 · Score: 1

Well...the SWF format is open sourced, right? People shouldn't worry since Flash animations won't be destroyed anytime soon. I think this is a sly attempt by Adobe to get the SVG format to replace SWF.

--
.smell my feet.
Re:It would be right... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:56 · Score: 0

Of course the fact that any patent on their UI that Apple obtained would have been under serious threat of being struck down by Xerox prior art. Now if Xerox had a patent which Apple licensed, there might have been no windows. And Microsoft had no leverage with Xerox like they did with Apple.
Re:It would be right... by gl4ss · 2002-05-02 20:57 · Score: 2, Interesting

and quite rightfully too. what was windoze more than misuse of someone elses invention of gui?
and what made apple products different from pc+msdos?gui.
(yeah yeah i know it was demonstrated by some prof in 70(or 60) so it really wasnt their idea after all..)..

but the 'invention' in this case, tabbed palettes as shown in examples, are NOT necessary for software to be usable, they're just HANDY. they should have just considered that using patented stuff(like swinging sideways) involves PAYING the inventor.

and quite frankly, i'm not so keen on flash, especially it getting into a bloated to everthing replacement for java, only that it's not in the same spirit(more like coming to extra interface for activex or sh*t)..

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:It would be right... by onosendai · 2002-05-03 00:38 · Score: 1

Have you tried fireworks? unlike photoshop, the internet output doesn't feel like an after thought, it's tight with DW and the new scripting ability in FW MX is a great feature

But seriously, i dumped PS as my #1 graphics tool for web design about year ago and haven't looked back ..

/me sits back and waits for the royalty checks to roll in from macromedia ...

--
<? include ('signature.inc'); ?>
Re:It would be right... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:25 · Score: 0

Absolutely anything to make this another Microsoft bash, hey? Such jealousy.
Re:It would be right... by Reziac · 2002-05-03 02:38 · Score: 2

Wasn't whether an interface itself could be patented or copyrighted defined as a resounding NO by the Lotus vs. [whoever it was] lawsuit of many years ago, re the "look and feel" of Lotus 1-2-3 menus??

--
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Re:It would be right... by FuzzyBad-Mofo · 2002-05-03 03:31 · Score: 1

Wrong, Flash (SWF) is a closed source API from Macromedia. I believe you might have gotten SWF and SVG mixed up..
Fuzzy
Re:It would be right... by RevAaron · 2002-05-03 08:01 · Score: 2

Windows wasn't a misuse of Apple's GUI. It was a ripoff of it. "Misuse" implies that MS licensed it, and abused or overstepped their bounds for that license. But that isn't the case.

Apple didn't invent the GUI. Nor was it demonstrated by "some prof." The first GUI was created by Ivan Sutherland in 1963 while he was working on his PhD at MIT. By GUI, I'm talking about the first program with an interactive graphics display.

However, systems like Mac OS and the Windows GUI shell isn't just a GUI. What MS stole from Apple was the WIMP (windows, icons, menus and pointer), which is more than a babystep up for any sort of interactive graphics display.

The WIMP was first invented at XEROX Parc, as an internal research project as part of the development of the Smalltalk programming language. You can see a screenshot of a modern version of Smalltalk's similar environment here. The original looked pretty similar, but it had a BeOS-like tabbed window decoration, and was only in black and white. Incidentally, as a part of the Smalltalk project, OOP (the term, and the way we know it today- Simula had something similar a few years before). This was during the 70s, with the first commercially available WIMP system, Smalltalk-80 in 1980.

Apple didn't steal the WIMP, per se. They aquired engineers that worked on it from Xerox. Xerox didn't see it as commercially viable. It is a common misconception, that Apple stole it from Xerox, while Jobs snuck in covertly.

With them, Apple brought the first generally available commercial computer using a WIMP interface, the Lisa. Couple years later, MS had released Windows 1.0, a pretty substandard copy of Apple's aquired ideas, and what little they knew of Xerox's work.

--

Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
Re:It would be right... by RevAaron · 2002-05-03 08:04 · Score: 2

Not quite... I believe it was over other MS apps that they were creating for the new Mac OS. MS Word being one of them, that was quite popular, and existed only on the Mac at that time. But it may have been BASIC too, but by that year hadn't Apple's own AppleSoft BASIC become more popular?

--

Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
Re:It would be right... by RevAaron · 2002-05-03 08:08 · Score: 2

Just found a good link with some of this stuff... see this.

--

Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad

This will never happen. by g_bit · 2002-05-02 18:01 · Score: 1

I personally don't think this will ever happen simply because Flash is such a huge movement on the Internet.

Soooo many people use it, and some even depend on it for part of their lively-hood. Also, I think it would kinda suck if it where to happen because as Flash gets better and better I think it might have a chance of becoming the predominant interface on the net.

Plus, it's pretty cool what some people do with it.

Re:This will never happen. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:14 · Score: 1, Insightful

"I personally don't think this will ever happen simply because Flash is such a huge movement on the Internet."

A court would not care nor consider "what a big movement" this is on the internet before reaching a decision.

The judge will base his/her decision on how great a negative impact he/she feels the product remaining on the market will have on Adobe. Also, if it is stopped, it still dosent stop people who already have it from using it.
Re:This will never happen. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:12 · Score: 0

Look for it to become freely and widely available on the net if it is "removed from sale", on more than the warez channels.
Re:This will never happen. by Quila · 2002-05-02 19:30 · Score: 2

I personally don't think this will ever happen simply because Flash is such a huge movement on the Internet.

It could have also been because around this time Adobe was working on their Flash competitor, LiveMotion. They had to have known the case wouldn't get to court for years, so stopping Flash to give a young LiveMotion a boost can't be it.

Maybe it's because one of the product differentiators of LiveMotion was that it had the same interface as all other Adobe products. Then Macromedia starts making all their products look like Adobe's, blowing their differentiator.
Re:This will never happen. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 22:00 · Score: 0

Soooo many people use it, and some even depend on it for part of their lively-hood

And then those people would have to go and get other jobs that are appropriate to their level of intelligence, and leave the internet and the web to people who bother to understand it.

Prior use perhaps? by Suppafly · 2002-05-02 18:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

from Macromedia today for using some patented interface stuff in Flash

One would assume there is prior use for tabbed palettes (which is the interface stuff the mentioned in the article). Adobe has been around for a long time, but I don't see how they can basically patent tabs

Re:Prior use perhaps? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:46 · Score: 0

Has anyone actually read the patent? The decision is related specifically to the ability for a tab to be dragged out and become a self-standing palette, then dragged back in. Adobe provides examples of the specific infringment. Note also that this is not just "a Flash thing." Now that the new MX product line has a relatively consistent interface, there could be some serious problems, given that Adobe is seeking an injunction.
Re:Prior use perhaps? by j09824 · 2002-05-02 19:04 · Score: 2

What an idiotic patent: that's a simple presentation choice, similar to choosing a snazzy layout for some printed document. Are we going to patent bold faced section headings next? It's also very similar to docking toolbars.
If Macromedia's software engineering is reasonably good, they should be able to rip this out of their product line within a few days.

Tabbed palettes? by heneon · 2002-05-02 18:02 · Score: 1

Can anyone explain what these tabbed palettes are? I _hope_ they aren't normal tabbed windows with different palettes in them :P

Re:Tabbed palettes? by Fizzlewhiff · 2002-05-02 18:17 · Score: 2

I suppose they are talking about the interface in the upper right part of the app as shown in this screenshot.

Clicking the bars slides the bars and shows the tool you want. It isn't a tabpage like I am used to seeing but has the same function. I have seen this technique used somewhere else recently and it wasn't an Adobe product. I wish I could place it. Actually, it just dawned on me that this screenshot is a beta version so it is possible they have already corrected it.

--

'Same speed C but faster'
Re:Tabbed palettes? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:38 · Score: 1, Informative

Tabbed palettes are a way of having a lot of controls organizable.

You have small floating windows with themed controls in them - 'color swatches', 'layers', 'actions', 'gradient', to name a few off to top of my head. Instead of the palette title being on the flowting window's title bar, the title is on a tab at the top of the window. You can drag a tab onto another tabbed palette window, and the tab row will suddenly contain both of them, letting you compactly stack up your working space and have a lot of controls only a click or two away.

Watch someone use Photoshop or any other Adobe graphics tool and you'll see them in action. I especially like the variant of them found in Illustrator, whre you can not only make your own choices as to what tabs belong with each other, you can also dock one tab to the bottom of another, for ultra-mega-palettes.
Re:Tabbed palettes? by Vireo · 2002-05-02 18:44 · Score: 1

Well, it seems to me that it is the same interface as Mozilla's and Netscape's Sidebar, the tabs being the Bookmarks, History, Search, etc. buttons.
Re:Tabbed palettes? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:43 · Score: 0

bah. freehand uses them too. c4d too. every damn design tool i used in the last years used this type of tabbed palettes. or i'm utterly missing the point.
Re:Tabbed palettes? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:58 · Score: 0

In which case Satori had them before Adobe.
Re:Tabbed palettes? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-04 03:40 · Score: 0

Its like a combination of dockable dialogs and tabbed dialogs. Each "tab" in the tabbed dialog can be "dragged off" ("undocked") and become a dialog of its own. It can then be "redocked" and it takes its place again as a single page of the tabbed dialog.

Thats it. Nothing fancy, and nothing that would take any person 'skilled in the arts' more than a few minutes to figure out.

This Just In by cscx · 2002-05-02 18:02 · Score: 4, Interesting

Apple sues Microsoft over "the close button in the upper corner of the window."

What's next, the icon? Are the tabs in Mozilla in violation? The concept of "tabs" in "windows" no matter if you call them "palettes" or not, was part of the Windows API as long as I can remember.

Re:This Just In by eugene+ts+wong · 2002-05-02 18:14 · Score: 1

They are also going to sue people who tabs in their school binders to help organize their notes.

Other sueable things include the movement of a cursor, the cursor itself, and the use of color.

The good news is that although I own red, I'll let you guys use it for free. Just go to my web site and sign up. I'll email you the legal forms that allow you to use red in your projects.

--
testing out my trending skills
Re:This Just In by nsxdavid · 2002-05-02 18:25 · Score: 1

There was, in fact, a patent long ago involving the use of the XOR to display a mouse cursor on the screen non-destructively.

God... will it ever end!

--
David Whatley
Re:This Just In by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 22:55 · Score: 0

Actually, if I remember correctly, Novell owns red.
Seriously.
Re:This Just In by __past__ · 2002-05-02 23:00 · Score: 2

That's NOT funny. The german Telekom did exactly that: They sued people arguing they owed the rights on the color magenta, and the letter T.

--
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
Re:This Just In by number+one+duck · 2002-05-02 23:12 · Score: 0

Hey, could you please post a mirror of that download link? I need red for a project I'm working on but can't seem to download it. Thanks.
Re:This Just In by angel'o'sphere · 2002-05-03 00:49 · Score: 2

That's NOT funny. The german Telekom did exactly that: They sued people arguing they owed the rights on the color magenta, and the letter T.

This is wrong.

The German Telekom sued for trade mark violation.

The trade mark consists by the letter T and some '.' points, set in a custom font, on a magenta like background.

However the colour is not "magenta". The colour is a custom invented colour for the Telekom.

Its not even close to magenta for my eyes, but thuman eyes differ in colour perception.

I think its a big difference if one is sued for patent infringement, which is more or less his problem and the patent holders, or if one is sued for trade mark infringement wich is a problme for the trade mark holder and the general public as well. Especialy as the infringer of a trade mark is a dumb ass in my eyes as it is to obvious to do that. And it should be obvious for him that he is doing it. A patent can get infringed by accident, for infrinfging a trade mark by accident you need realy bad luck in not noticing its existance.

Regards,
angel'o'sphere

--
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Re:This Just In by __past__ · 2002-05-03 01:08 · Score: 2

They sued a publisher because of publishing a book with a cover in the colour both the telekom and the publisher called "magenta" (how do you invent colours, anyway? Isn't that like inventing numbers?), and they sued a company called "t-media AG" that didn't use those dots.
You're right that it was a trademark issue, however.

--
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
Re:This Just In by Aerolith_alpha · 2002-05-03 02:48 · Score: 1

i invent colors very carefully by clicking on a patented Adobe®(TM) Tab in my macromedia fireworks application, which then yields a dropdown allowing me to 'invent' upwards of 216 websafe colors--I'd say in a given day I invent about 200-5000 different colors, and yes, I file patents for them all--My next lawsuit will be against /. for stealing my latest invention... that spiffy green color.

sorry if its not funny, i haven't had my caffine yet.

--
mov ax, 13h int 10h
Re:This Just In by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 04:40 · Score: 0

Wrong again. Deutsche Telekom, an in their country well hated provider of outage prone, yet expensive communication services, as well as former state monopoly, does claim to own the rights to any word prefixed by a T-.
Re:This Just In by eugene+ts+wong · 2002-05-03 09:00 · Score: 1

Would you believe that Pepsi tried to own a particular shade of blue?

--
testing out my trending skills
Re:This Just In by eugene+ts+wong · 2002-05-03 09:05 · Score: 1

Sorry about that. Here it is. www.red.com/register.html

--
testing out my trending skills

right result, wrong reasons by Kris_J · 2002-05-02 18:04 · Score: 1

As a multimedia developer I wish Flash had never been written. I also disable animated gifs, videos and midi background music. You say fancy, I say annoying.

Re:right result, wrong reasons by ElCagado · 2002-05-02 18:55 · Score: 0

wait. I need to crap on you.

errrrrg. unnnnnng.

plop. plop. plop.

brap brap.

unnnnng. errrrrrr. thhhhhhhp.

plop. plop. thhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhp.

wipe. wipe. wipe. wipe. sniff. stinky.

flush.
Re:right result, wrong reasons by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:47 · Score: 0

you don't really like multimedia, do you?
Re:right result, wrong reasons by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:53 · Score: 0

Methinks you are in the wrong line of work.
Re:right result, wrong reasons by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:56 · Score: 0

What exactly does multimedia mean to you? TV, Newspaper, Radio? It can't be anything else because you say you don't use it...
Please crawl back in your cave and make some wallpaintings.
Re:right result, wrong reasons by Kris_J · 2002-05-02 20:05 · Score: 2

The web ruined multimedia. Director, Authorware -- gems. A team of people all specialising in stuff like 2D or 3D graphics, sound, video, intructional design -- all great.
Then came Flash and with it every little shit with a pirate copy and the ability to convince other people to give them money.
To me, multimedia is about content. To everyone else it seems to be about designing a new GUI for every damn website. And if it's not flash, it's Fireworks and it's auto generating javascript rollovers.

If it stops banner ads and other annoying netisms by blair1q · 2002-05-02 18:05 · Score: 2

then where do I send my check to support the plaintiffs?

Adobe to Macromedia - by Gunsmithy · 2002-05-02 18:06 · Score: 1

All your code are belong to us!

--
Kids these days. They don't know the difference between classic, and just plain old.

Please by First_In_Hell · 2002-05-02 18:06 · Score: 1

Flash may be the bane of a lot of people, but I have seen some pretty slick looking Flash sites out there (design & astheticlly wise HTML canot touch it for WEB). Others may not like something, but for some it is a great thing, this is just wrong.

Re:Please by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 06:05 · Score: 0

99999999

9999999999999

good cartoon uses flash! by cdf12345 · 2002-05-02 18:07 · Score: 3, Interesting

I know that on Adult Swim, "Home Movies" started using flash for their animation this season and it is wonderful, actually many of the Adult Swim Comedy block use flash if I'm not mistaken.

This is really a shame, I hope a new version is available soon.

--
Chicago2600.net more than a lifestyle, its a survival trait.

Re:good cartoon uses flash! by YourMissionForToday · 2002-05-02 18:36 · Score: 0

None of the Adult Swim cartoons use Flash. Not even the worst of the bunch, "Home Movies." I've written a short script for home movies, what do you think?

Brendan: Uhm, okay?
Mom: Uhm, okay?
Coach McGurk: Okay, uhm, okay?
Brendan: 'Cause, uhm, okay?

The saddest part is, that lasts 1 hour 15 minutes whilst Sealab is only 15. What a crock.

--
Liberate your mind in two clicks or less.
Re:good cartoon uses flash! by Dephex+Twin · 2002-05-03 01:48 · Score: 1

None of the Adult Swim cartoons use Flash. Not even the worst of the bunch, "Home Movies."

From what I've heard, Home Movies _is_ animated with Flash this season. And also, Home Movies is a good show.

mark

--

If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
Re:good cartoon uses flash! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 06:54 · Score: 0

What they really should do is bring back Welcome to Eltingville as a series instead of just a one time special. I was lucky enough to catch it the one time it was on and I must say it was absolutely brilliant. Mainly because it was just so right on about how geeky fanboys behave.
But I agree with your comment. Cancel Home Movies. We need more Sealab in our pathetic lives.

Slashdot is a piece of shit by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:07 · Score: 0

Jesus.. I write this big, well thought out reply, and Slashfag says I have to wait more than 7 seconds between pushing reply & submit, while in the meantime thoughfully throwing what I had written in the fucking toilet.

Thanks slashdot, you really are a peach.

7 SECONDS IS A LONG FUCKING TIME.

Hemos is a cocksucker by Shaklee3 · 2002-05-02 18:09 · Score: 0

hemos i got an idea, how about you shut the fuck up because no one gives a flying ratshit about this. This would website sucks my left nut. Fuck you

Dorks by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:09 · Score: 0

Well, I know if you renamed Macromedia to Microsoft, everyone would be promoting the other guy, even if it was a totally inferior product. But, it's not Microsoft, so yay, down with the other guys up with big-business, hang-em-high!!

Adobe is suing just because... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:10 · Score: 0

another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?

No, Adobe is suing because their own product isn't taking over the market like they'd hoped it would, and Macromedia's is. If you had gone to all the trouble of obtaining a patent, why wouldn't you then defend it? As if you hadn't heard the IT sector is faced with difficult economic times.

And isn't Apple suing Sorenson over inclusion of a codec in a Macromedia product? Everybody loves a winner.

If it kills Flash, it's ok with me by tommy · 2002-05-02 18:11 · Score: 1

Flash is a scourge of the internet

--

I have a woman and money. Life is good.

Re:If it kills Flash, it's ok with me by SnakeStu · 2002-05-02 18:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

Flash is a scourge of the internet
Flash is a tool. Many (perhaps all) tools can be abused. Saying that Flash is bad because too many monkeys use it in ways that are totally inappropriate is like saying e-mail is bad because too many monkeys use it for spam (i.e., a way that is totally inappropriate).

--
No Laughing Allowed!
Re:If it kills Flash, it's ok with me by Arthur+Dent+75 · 2002-05-02 18:33 · Score: 2, Insightful

But there's a difference to e-mail. The signal-to-noise ratio is much lower with Flash. Per day, I see about 5-10 bad (advertising, splash page) Flash animation versus about 0 good ones. I have only seen about 10-20 really useful Flash animations up to now.
With E-Mail it's about 50-50 at the moment. That is also not nice, but it is acceptable.
This is why people hate slash: The number of abuses exceeds the number of well-thought use by about a factor of 20.

--
michael at slashdot.org: The real answer is that a couple of the slashdot authors are sick.
Re:If it kills Flash, it's ok with me by raduga · 2002-05-02 19:38 · Score: 1

This is why people hate slash: The number of abuses exceeds the number of well-thought use by about a factor of 20.
Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

--
First, nothing begins if not opening
Re:If it kills Flash, it's ok with me by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:55 · Score: 0

"Per day, I see about 5-10 bad (advertising, splash page) Flash animation versus about 0 good ones"

stop visiting so many porn sites then
Re:If it kills Flash, it's ok with me by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:09 · Score: 0

Flash may be a tool, but its existence without Macromedia even attempted to get it part of a standards process is ultimately going to be a crucial watershed for the internet - once user acceptance without standardisation reaches a certain mass it will take *years* to roll it back, all that time the bulk of the web is at the mercy and whim of Macromedia, which at the end of the day is just another money-hungry software-patenting, DMCA-benifitting anti-Free Software proprietary siftware house, looking to dominate an open arena with propriietary protocols and consumer lock-in.

Get it?
Re:If it kills Flash, it's ok with me by mlsemon2 · 2002-05-03 03:52 · Score: 1

Heck, even something evil like guns have been used to deter crimes on a regular basis. The only thing that Flash has deterred on a regular basis is good taste. You know how some people want "medical marijuana" in the US to treat diseases? Well, there should be "medical Flash" that is legal only by prescription from a style doctor, but make Flash illegal otherwise.
Re:If it kills Flash, it's ok with me by spyderbyte23 · 2002-05-03 05:02 · Score: 1

Well, there should be "medical Flash" that is legal only by prescription from a style doctor, but make Flash illegal otherwise.
Good idea, otherwise people with non-approved ideas and tastes which deviate from The Almighty Norm might be free to disseminate their ideas.
I think you were kidding, but I can never tell around here any more.

--
-- Support Ometz le-Serev.

Adobe.. by iONiUM · 2002-05-02 18:12 · Score: 1

What were you thinking? This is a horrible thing to do, why do they care so much whether or not macromedia uses their damned "tabbed pallets" or whatever. Flash on it's own is not that bad, and has brought us many .. well .. not great, but sometimes funny "internet jokes of the week". I don't even know how much money flash is making for macromedia.. I'm pretty sure adobe is making an ass out of themselves for doing this; I mean, they don't even have any sort of "rival product" for flash.

Re:Adobe.. by GutBomb · 2002-05-02 19:46 · Score: 2

umm.. what is Adobe LiveMotion 2.0 then?
Re:Adobe.. by krujos · 2002-05-02 19:55 · Score: 1

live motion does the same thing is flash
Re:Adobe.. by Daniel_Carter · 2002-05-02 20:05 · Score: 0

In my perception, Adobe LiveMotion 2 is in direct competition with Flash as it is designed for the same use that the MacroMedia product is :) not many people know of LiveMotion as Flash really is the superior (in my eyes) product having been tried and tested, and generally accepted by the public.

stupid patents by pretzel_logic · 2002-05-02 18:12 · Score: 2, Funny

remember that NBA star that tried to patent the finger wiggle he did after he scored? ever notice how many web sites look exactly like Amazon.com? stand proud brother, you are an open source hero, you will never have to deal with this

--

pretzel_logic

Patents: Defend them or lose them. by gklinger · 2002-05-02 18:13 · Score: 1, Informative

It should be noted that Adobe isn't being spiteful. A key part of having a patent is defending it. If Adobe fails to defend their patents, they'll lose them. Patents, and more specifically the fees earned from licensing those patents, represent important income streams for companies.

We may not all be Flash lovers, but is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?"

I don't think this lawsuit is going to result in Flash being taken away from anyone. Adobe and Macromedia will work out some kind of licensing arangement and it will be business as usual.

Don't worry. There will be plenty of blinkin' and flashin' on the web for years to come. Oh joy.

Re:Patents: Defend them or lose them. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:17 · Score: 0

A key part of having a patent is defending it.
So is a patent on a manner of swinging on a swing defended by punching the infringing kid in the nose? ;-)
Re:Patents: Defend them or lose them. by SpookyFish · 2002-05-02 18:23 · Score: 1, Offtopic

Finally, a smart post in this discussion. Mod it up.

Flash: Good or Bad? by JanusFury · 2002-05-02 18:15 · Score: 2, Offtopic

Flash has long been the scourge of the internet. People use it to make large, annoying, ugly, flashy, and noisy animations instead of just making webpages. And now it's being used for obtrusive banner ads that even take up entire pages!

But Flash has a number of positive uses - it can be used to create complex animations for presentations, or to create simple amateur animated movies in a fraction of the time taken using other tools. It can be used to create simple database applications. It has a powerful variant of javascript, which allows you to do many complex scripting tasks using only flash. It has powerful XML support for exchanging data with servers, making it possible to use it for e-commerce and data-transaction applications. It has a light memory and disk footprint, doesn't use too much unnecessary bandwidth, and has great multimedia capabilities.

If Flash dissapears, I will sorely miss it.

--
using namespace slashdot;
troll::post();

Re:Flash: Good or Bad? by mcasaday · 2002-05-02 19:00 · Score: 1

Everyone here seems to claim that Flash deserves to be purged from the Earth because it is often used to create annoying ads and intro animations. I say plain old HTML can be just as annoying, when used badly.
I hate those full page ads as much as you, but I also recognize some of the incredible creativity that Flash can facilitate. Take a look at the Remedi Project for some examples of what I'm talking about. Let us not forget little gems like Shinji-san, or Joe Paradise.
At least take a look at what's being done with the medium before you condemn it.
Re:Flash: Good or Bad? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:31 · Score: 0

I'd say that the flash based intros are actually a much bigger problem than the flash based ads. Ads can be filtered. However, a badly done flash intro cannot be skipped. So what are you going to do if you're using a HTML browser without flash support? Right: you'll have to do without that site.
Re:Flash: Good or Bad? by JanusFury · 2002-05-03 13:31 · Score: 1

I'm offtopic? Gee, thanks moderators. And I'm sure THIS comment (Which IS totally offtopic) will get modded up +5, Insightful, just to prove how totally lame some of the moderators are. :P

--
using namespace slashdot;
troll::post();
Re:Flash: Good or Bad? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-04 03:50 · Score: 0

Its true you CAN use Flash for very useful, complex things - its a very powerful tool for building complex UI interactions.
However, at least 98% of Flash users use Flash where HTML would be 100% able to do the job. The next 1.99999% of Flash users use Flash to do things that HTML can't do, but are useless. Only 0.00001% of Flash users use Flash where Flash was truly a good design choice.
And then theres the annoying % of Flash users who put some entirely useless Flash animation "intro" on their front page, but make Flash the ONLY way to "click through" to the ACTUAL web page, forgetting to include even so much as an .html link to get to the actual web page (which often doesn't even use Flash at all). So people who don't have Flash can't even get to the web page, even though the web page doesn't use Flash! How stupid that? Heres an example: http://satellite.worldonline.co.za/ (I emailed the webmaster and he said he would fix it, that was about six months ago and it still hasnt been fixed! So the webmaster even knows about it). So all I get with Mozilla is a big white box that says "click here to get the plugin".
PS all of the above "statistics" I made up. What is true though is that approx. 5% of web sites use Flash. I've only ever seen ONE website, EVER, that used Flash for something useful that actually required the use of something as complex as Flash.

Flash Blows! Choose SVG! by The_THOMAS · 2002-05-02 18:15 · Score: 0, Flamebait

nuff said

--
Ya Sure! You Betcha!, The_THOMAS

Re:Flash Blows! Choose SVG! by XBL · 2002-05-02 18:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

Maybe I would if a program could produce SVG and JavaScript to do the same stuff as Flash, and as good as Flash. Also a new plug-in would be needed.

Not likely to happen anytime soon, if ever. Plus if it did, Flash would still be better in most ways.
Re:Flash Blows! Choose SVG! by The_THOMAS · 2002-05-02 18:51 · Score: 0, Flamebait

SVG is W3C standard. Flash is Macromedia owning your ass. Nuff Said.

--
Ya Sure! You Betcha!, The_THOMAS
Re:Flash Blows! Choose SVG! by obsidian+head · 2002-05-02 19:11 · Score: 1

I program a generator for Flash files. Flash is featurewise superior, but the performance isn't. Read this well-known comparison.

Flash is also a fairly open standard, but easily subject to Macromedia's whims. As for business -- Flash is near-ubiquitous, where SVG has virtually 0% adoption. It won't rise until net access and machines become much faster.
Re:Flash Blows! Choose SVG! by Error27 · 2002-05-02 19:31 · Score: 1

>>Not likely to happen anytime soon, if ever.

if ever?

Everyone has this wierdly distorted time scale where the world seems to end three years from now.

Almost everything that can happen will happen at some point. In this case, my guess is that the point will come within the next couple years.
Re:Flash Blows! Choose SVG! by obsidian+head · 2002-05-02 19:31 · Score: 1

Fuck. Gotta wake up. I mean SVG is featurewise superior, but performance isn't.
Re:Flash Blows! Choose SVG! by fuzzbrain · 2002-05-02 19:34 · Score: 2, Informative

I don't know much about flash but I have fooled around with SVG and IMHO you can do MOST of the things that flash is usually used for in web-sites with SVG, Javascript ande SMIL animation. Also, SVG carries a lower network payload.

There are a couple of tools for viewing SVG already: Batik, Mozilla can be compiled with native SVG support, there is and the is a general-purpose SVG plug-in put out by Adobe-- wonder if that's a motivation for them here. There are also tools to convert SWF files to SVG files.

Here are some relevant URLs:
http://www.webreference.com/authoring/langu ages/sv g/intro/
http://www.carto.net/papers/svg/comparis on_flash_s vg.html
Re:Flash Blows! Choose SVG! by Iamthefallen · 2002-05-02 22:00 · Score: 1

Really? Someone should let these guys know about it

--
Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
Re:Flash Blows! Choose SVG! by XBL · 2002-05-03 02:17 · Score: 2

I have built a whiteboard that uses Mozilla's SVG capabilities, and it's nothing too productive at the moment. It crashes, has lots of bugs, etc. Plus it's not in the normal Mozilla builds.

One day maybe Mozilla will have full SVG support with good performance with now bugs in the regular builds. I don't see that happening for a long time, however.

Anyone seen the patent. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:15 · Score: 0

Has anyone seen what the 'tabbed palettes' patent is?

Is it something totally obvious or something really innovative.

Patents are good if used correctly but the current abusive state of things have the potensial of seriously harm software development in general.

THE answer to all problems by Faile · 2002-05-02 18:16 · Score: 1

"Oh, so all that money we spent on R&D didnt turn out like we hoped for...anybody we can sue over it instead?"

I'm just waiting for "We-make-silly-software-patents-and-then-license-t hem-to-companies-for-LOADS-AND-LOADS-of-money" to get off the ground, then we'll really have something to bash the patent burea with. Hey we might even get MS in on the deal!

Can you sue a public 'service' for having an average IQ of 5?

--
Anataka suki desu. Itsumo. Itsumademo.

Re:THE answer to all problems by Alzheimers · 2002-05-03 01:04 · Score: 1

I'm just waiting for "We-make-silly-software-patents-and-then-license-t hem-to-companies-for-LOADS-AND-LOADS-of-money" to get off the ground,

Replace 'software-patents' with 'Hardware-patents' and you have RAMBUS...

Yes, it is right - as in legally right by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:18 · Score: 0

We may not all be Flash lovers, but is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?

It's called: capitalism. You were born into it, you love it. Now cope with it.

Flash Rocks by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:19 · Score: 0

Check out WebAgent

Then have a look at some of the flash files on this site.

Then come back here and tell us how much flash sucks and is bad for the internet.

Tabbed what? by gmerideth · 2002-05-02 18:21 · Score: 1

Are they actually referring to the fact that in photocrap and illumastrator you can re-arrange the dialog boxes and move certain objects (such as layers) into the color selection box?

You can do the same in flash generator too.

If they are trying to get a product, who gives a damm if it's flash, off the market because the UI has a the ability to re-arrange tabs then I feel very sorry for Adobe and wish the 9 year old in charge up there would stop staring at his winky and go play in the sandbox.

When aliens come down from space and look at the miserable, pathetic sue happy idiots we've all become I for one hope they do vaporize this planet and make way for a new hyperspace bypass. Bloody miserable humans.

--
Why do overlook and oversee mean opposite things?

Tiptoes by jcsehak · 2002-05-02 18:23 · Score: 5, Insightful

This is the equivalent of a car company patenting their cup holders and suing any other manufacturer who put them in. Who's the real loser in the end? As Macromedia CEO Rob Burgess points out, "Ultimately, it is our customers, and particularly our mutual customers, that will be harmed." Yup, half of us wind up with burnt, coffee-stained crotches.

So what, now no software developer can include tabbed palettes? Wouldn't it be nice if Adobe said "Hey, Macromedia, you've used one of our ideas, but that's alright, we'll use one of your ideas, and both our products will be the better for it." No more can people stand on the shoulders of giants. Today, you have to stand on your tiptoes. Either that, or knock everyone else down.

Well Adobe, for 2.8m, you've impeded the progress of software development, created enemies, and left your customers with a bad taste in their mouths. And you know what? I bet a lot of people will feel a lot less bad about pirating your software after this. I hope it was worth it.

--

c-hack.com |

Re:Tiptoes by Kynde · 2002-05-02 19:12 · Score: 1

Well Adobe, for 2.8m, you've impeded the progress of software development, created enemies, and left your customers with a bad taste in their mouths. And you know what? I bet a lot of people will feel a lot less bad about pirating your software after this. I hope it was worth it.

Dead on. I know a lot of people that are happy using Adobe's software, but I'm wondering how long people will put up with Adobe's legal department. It simply cannot be beneficial to get news coverage for patent cases about stuff like palet tabs. People are already sick and tired of software giants suing over stuff they shouldnt own in the first place just because they're huge and can afford to the ludicrous legal fees.

I guess someone has to say this, it was also Adobe that started the Sklyarov bullshit.

--
1 Earth is warming, 2 It's us, 3 it's royally bad, 4 we need to take action NOW
Re:Tiptoes by vena · 2002-05-02 19:21 · Score: 1

considering that by most estimates, photoshop has been the most widely pirated piece of software for in the world for some time, i don't think anyone's ever really felt too bad about pirating adobe software :)
Re:Tiptoes by foniksonik · 2002-05-02 19:21 · Score: 2, Insightful

2.8 million dollars... what is that, like the amount Macromedia spends on catering yearly? Gimme a break.

This is a nominal fee for back pay of the patent license. They'll work out a deal and probably have a better working relationship because of it. I know Adobe uses the SWF format in LiveMotion but Macromedia can't do a thing cause the specs have been open sourced... well, whatever... it's just drama.

--
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
Re:Tiptoes by Quila · 2002-05-02 19:23 · Score: 2

This is the equivalent of a car company patenting their cup holders and suing any other manufacturer who put them in.

Actually, I'd bet the really cool pop-out cupholders in the Audi A6 I rented are probably patented. Note that I'm talking about their design of cupholder, not cupholders in general.
Re:Tiptoes by BlueUnderwear · 2002-05-02 19:28 · Score: 2

Who's the real loser in the end? As Macromedia CEO Rob Burgess points out, "Ultimately, it is our customers, and particularly our mutual customers, that will be harmed." Yup, half of us wind up with burnt, coffee-stained crotches.
Nope, in that case it's not the customer that'll be harmed ultimately. On the contrary, the customer will get a nice loot too. In the end, the real loser will be Mc Donalds'

--
Say no to software patents.
Re:Tiptoes by Stiletto · 2002-05-02 23:40 · Score: 2

I'd hate to say it, but people on Wall Street and boards of directors love it when their company sues someone and wins, and they're the ones in control. What end users think is pretty insignificant, but isn't that always the case?
Re:Tiptoes by ronfar · 2002-05-03 00:40 · Score: 1

Well Adobe, for 2.8m, you've impeded the progress of software development, created enemies, and left your customers with a bad taste in their mouths.
This is the kind of thing you'd expect from Adobe, who's corporate motto is "We put Dmitry in prison."

--
All the creatures will die, And all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai. (Jubai, 1605)
Re:Tiptoes by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:00 · Score: 1, Interesting

Well Adobe, for 2.8m, you've impeded the progress of software development, created enemies, and left your customers with a bad taste in their mouths. And you know what? I bet a lot of people will feel a lot less bad about pirating your software after this. I hope it was worth it.
I had Adobe's web graphics suite on order. I'm on hold, trying to cancel my order presently, and I'm making the reason for it very clear.
Re:Tiptoes by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:46 · Score: 0

And yet you still use Photoshop because it is the best out there.

Settle down Boys and Girls. Adobe is no Microsoft.
Re:Tiptoes by ynohoo · 2002-05-03 02:56 · Score: 1

I liked you "Well Adobe..." rant so much I've included it in a mail I've just sent to Autumn Blatchford the only email address I could find on Adobe's site, buried in the pressroom section.
I'm sure she'd love to hear from us all...;)

--
need a free COBOL editor for Windows?
Re:Tiptoes by horza · 2002-05-03 03:21 · Score: 2

2.8 million dollars... what is that, like the amount Macromedia spends on catering yearly? Gimme a break. This is a nominal fee for back pay of the patent license."

That last remark reminds me of the tactics of domain squatters. Buy as many obvious ones as you can afford ... hope one hits paydirt ... hold domain to ransom ... use money to buy as many more as possible ... ad infinitum. Adobe will see the victory as encouragement and will probably pour the money back in to patenting as many obvious things as they can.

Phillip.

--
Property for sale in Nice, France
Re:Tiptoes by Anenga · 2002-05-03 04:34 · Score: 1

Well Adobe, for 2.8m, you've impeded the progress of software development, created enemies, and left your customers with a bad taste in their mouths. And you know what? I bet a lot of people will feel a lot less bad about pirating your software after this. I hope it was worth it.
Thanks! Now I have an excuse ;)
Re:Tiptoes by jcsehak · 2002-05-03 05:51 · Score: 2

Wow, thanks! That's a hell of a compliment.

--

c-hack.com |
Re:Tiptoes by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-04 03:57 · Score: 0

Actually, the saddest part really is that 99.9 % of both of these companies customers will never even become aware that any of this ever happened. When the prices of both products go up, to pay for all this legal nonsense and the inevitable license fees, 99% of customers won't even ask why they're paying more, they'll just pay up and carry on with their lives.

They're gone in Flash 6 MX by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:26 · Score: 1, Informative

Those tabs are gone in Flash 6 MX, which was recently released.
It's too bad that many people don't seem to understand that Flash is soo much more than a crappy animation software. Sure, I hate the banners too but with Flash you get a very nice object-based scripting language, based on JavaScript - the object model and syntax is basically the same.
You can create very complex games or other cool stuff with Flash, so if the only thing you know about it is that it makes banners - then you know nothing.
At work I am currently involved in a large project of making several games in Flash, which are to be deployed in schools as an alternative or complement to books.
You can create your standard space shooter in Flash quite easily, or you could write a 3D engine if you want. Not that the latter can have texturing because of speed concerns but hey, you could probably get around that some way.

Just my two ehh Euro

Re:They're gone in Flash 6 MX by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 22:11 · Score: 0

an alternative [...] to books

Am I the only one who finds this scary?

Nah, who needs literacy?

Adobe, catching up to Microsoft? by smaug195 · 2002-05-02 18:28 · Score: 1

With their whole DMCA lawsuit thing, and now all these petty lawsuits like this one against Macromedia, one begs to ask the question, is Adobe as evil as Microsoft? Do remember they have basically a monopoly with Illustrator/Photoshop. Just something to think about I suppose.

Re:Adobe, catching up to Microsoft? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 23:03 · Score: 0

Adobe has an estimable record of exposing themselves as stinkers. The most prominent example can be found here, but think also of the Dmitriy Sklyarov case.

Clarification by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:28 · Score: 0

Browsers are not effected by this ruling.
Only Flash creator/editors.

By the way - Mozilla has tabbed panes - are they impacted by the ruling?

Flash authoring app != Flash plugin by mcasaday · 2002-05-02 18:32 · Score: 5, Interesting

Even if Macromedia was prohibited from selling the Flash authoring tool this would not necessarily have any affect on the browser plugin itself. I don't see what would keep Macromedia from developing a new version of its authoring application with an interface that doesn't employ tabbed palettes.

Oops, they've already done just that.

I wonder how this would affect Flash MX. It doesn't feature the UI elements that Adobe claims to have invented. (And thank the gods for that, I hate tabbed palettes as much as most of you Slashdotters hate the Flash plugin itself.) Would Macromedia only have to pull Flash versions 5 and earlier off the shelves?

What a waste of resources such lawsuits are. Companies squabbling like children, running complaining to mommy and daddy every time one of them has any kind of problem. Grow up or go to bed without any supper, I say!

Re:Flash authoring app != Flash plugin by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 20:12 · Score: 0

so true
Re:Flash authoring app != Flash plugin by artemis67 · 2002-05-03 01:08 · Score: 3, Interesting

Even if Macromedia was prohibited from selling the Flash authoring tool this would not necessarily have any affect on the browser plugin itself. I don't see what would keep Macromedia from developing a new version of its authoring application with an interface that doesn't employ tabbed palettes.

Oops, they've already done just that

Hmmm... Where have I seen that pallette before? Oh yeah, right here.

Better keep those lawyers around a while longer Macromedia. :-D

Then again, Microsoft is the king of interface ripoff, maybe they'll just be flattered...
Re:Flash authoring app != Flash plugin by Nodatadj · 2002-05-03 01:22 · Score: 1

Or maybe here?
Check out the other screenshots and you'll see that each of the sections in the tool palette can be folded up just like the word shot. Sodipodi has been doing this for ages.
Re:Flash authoring app != Flash plugin by deusx · 2002-05-03 01:26 · Score: 2

Umm... I've also seen it in these other OS X apps:

OmniOutliner

StickyBrain

And I swear I've seen it in a few others. I don't think Microsoft has a particular claim on that UI widget.
Re:Flash authoring app != Flash plugin by torokun · 2002-05-03 01:55 · Score: 1

Yeah -- they're a real waste of money when drug companies make $10,000,000 more because of one more day of patent protection. It could make the difference between profit or loss for a research project. What a waste.
Re:Flash authoring app != Flash plugin by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:26 · Score: 0

read the article, it says they may have to take products off the shelf..
Re:Flash authoring app != Flash plugin by Reziac · 2002-05-03 02:31 · Score: 2

If Macromedia's response to lawsuits is to give up, FlashMX may be doomed as well. A day or so ago I saw a news article about Macromedia being sued (by some other company, not Adobe) for a patent infringement in FlashMX. (Sorry, I didn't pay any further attention, but surely someone else here did.) The fun with patents never ends... :(

--
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Re:Flash authoring app != Flash plugin by Jobe_br · 2002-05-03 02:45 · Score: 1

In this case, nobody is ripping off anyone else's interface, they're merely following Apple's UI guidelines, by my guess. When Apple started seeding OS X, I'm certain they provided sample apps and recommendations on how to do things of this sort, so that all OS X interfaces might share a similar look 'n feel. Its the same on Windows - most apps use the same type of interface, Adobe/MM apps being a large digressor, since they follow the interfaces they set out on their Mac products (which are typically released first).

Just a thought, really.
Re:Flash authoring app != Flash plugin by ChannelX · 2002-05-03 03:10 · Score: 1

Macromedia didn't give up. This lawsuit has been going on for quite awhile and the 2.8 mil they had to cough up is nothing for a company like Macromedia. I know people here hate patents but Adobe was completely right to enforce their patent. The minute they don't they're screwed. It would have been easier for everyone involved if Macromedia would have just paid the damn licensing fee.

--
My blog: http://jkratz.dyndns.org/~jason/blog/
Re:Flash authoring app != Flash plugin by Tim+Browse · 2002-05-03 03:25 · Score: 1

This type of thing is also used in 3D Studio Max - it's the main form of UI, except for toolbars. Sure, it looks a little different, but the functionality is exactly the same.

Tim
Re:Flash authoring app != Flash plugin by jallen02 · 2002-05-03 03:28 · Score: 1

Its trademarks you have to enforce unquestioningly, patents you can selectively enforce.

Jeremy

What's next? by jcsehak · 2002-05-02 18:33 · Score: 1

What's next, the hyperlink?

--

c-hack.com |

They're corporations, but... by SofaMan · 2002-05-02 18:33 · Score: 1

Is it so unreasonable to expect Adobe to go "Hey, the court says it's our patent, but we'll licence you the right to use it.". Who loses in that scenario? Adobe gets cash from Macromedia to cover it's development and patent costs (such as they are), and Macromedia doesn't have to completely redesign Flash to take the product of Adobe's patent out.

Adobe, will of course, most likely use this decision as leverage to hobble Flash for long enough to hock their own less-successful equivalent.

It'd be nice to see a big media corporation occasionally act in the interests of it's users rather than just what they see as the interests of their shareholders. It'd also be nice to see media companies use patent law the way it was meant to be used, rather than to oppress the market into doing things its way.

--

SofaMan -- Occasionally Battling Evil With His Mighty Powers Of Indolence.

Re:They're corporations, but... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:37 · Score: 0

Who loses in that scenario?

The american public.

Because if this is the standard by which software patents are to be judged, the progress of the art of software development will be serverely retarded by the difficulty of creating software products without accidentally re-inventing something small and obvious which later turns out to be patented.

No, don't mod it up by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:33 · Score: 0

Trademarks have to be defended in order to remain valid. Patents don't. They can be selectively enforced, or not enforced at all.

Government Subsidizes Property by Baldrson · 2002-05-02 18:34 · Score: 2

Until government gets out of the business of subsidizing property by taxing those who create property for the protection of those who own property, we'll have this situation in which property rights are disrespected.

--
Seastead this.

Re:Patents: Defend them or lose them. --- Bzzzt! by ClarkEvans · 2002-05-02 18:35 · Score: 5, Informative

. A key part of having a patent is defending it. If Adobe fails to defend their patents, they'll lose them.

Bzzzt. Try again. This is true for Trademarks but not Patents or Copyright.

Wait, there's nothing wrong with Flash! by Xtian · 2002-05-02 18:35 · Score: 2, Informative

I don't think anyone is understanding what the problem is here: Flash has a menu interface (as do tons of other products) that has movable little menus that float about the screen that you can place anywhere. Lets just set asside how crazy it is to be able to patent that: what does the court case say about Flash?

Nothing about its technology. This is a user interface issue, not an issue on how Flash works. Nobody will have to stop using their Flash movies on their pages--the workings of those are not being disputed, nor how the Flash program generates them.

So big deal. Macromedia will make a "non-tabbed-window" version of Flash (and of all its other products I guess because Director and Dream Weaver have the same style menus) with one big solid window and non-movable menus. I doubt it'll be hard for them to do that. Heck, fix a few things, add a few features, and its Flash 6.0. Time to upgrade anyway.

Flash fans need not fear. You web pages are safe.

Microsoft uses tabbed palettes... by cookd · 2002-05-02 18:36 · Score: 2, Interesting

The first place that comes to mind is Visual Studio. In VC6 IDE, the "Output" window (where trace messages, build output, etc. appear), you select which type of output appears with a tab. I suppose it isn't a palette... But look at the tools palette in VB or Visual Interdev. Or the shortcuts in Outlook. Visual Studio 7 IDE uses these everywhere.

So why didn't Adobe sue Microsoft? Because Microsoft could afford to fight them in court. Macromedia is a somewhat smaller company, so it is a little bit easier to beat them into submission.

All in all, this just sucks. It doesn't matter how much we like or don't like Flash. What really matters is whether the "Tabbed Palette" is patentable...

This is why I work for a large company instead of a fun startup -- I don't make as much of a difference, but at least my company can't be thrown around by the big guys for no good reason, so I have a small amount of job stability.

--
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

Re:Microsoft uses tabbed palettes... by Armchair+Dissident · 2002-05-03 01:08 · Score: 1

Visual Studio doesn't infringe the patent. Yes you have tabs on dockable windows; but importantly you can't pick up a tab and create a new dockable window out of that.
On my screen at the moment, I have an output window - with it's corresponding Build, Debug, Find in Files x etc tabs - and a project window with it's ClassView, ResourceView, and FileView tabs.
Now I can picku up the project window (for example) and move all the tabs in that window around but I can't (and this is the fundamental bit) pick up the ClassView tab, drag it off the window to create a floating ClassView toolbox.
With Macromedia's products, they chose to follow the precise same look and feel of Adobe - to the extent that they're virtually the same to use. But it's the way the tabs interact that is the issue.

--

The ways of gods are mysteriously indistinguishable from chance.

but we really like it! by Provincialist · 2002-05-02 18:37 · Score: 1

but is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?

I agree with all those who complain about bad patents, and I too detest Flash, but the submitter who would ask the above question is really missing the point. If patents could be violated by anyone who really did want to violate them they wouldn't provide much incentive for innovation. No matter how low my opinion of patents as currently instantiated may drop, I would still contend that they are a valid concept in some situations.

later,

Jess

--
I am programmed for etiquette, not destruction!

Not All Tabbed Palettes� by deharlow · 2002-05-02 18:39 · Score: 5, Informative

From Adobe's FAQ at http://www.adobe.com/adobefacts/faq.html#Q11 they are not claiming to have a patent on all tabbed palettes but only on those that can be customized, separated, and reorganized by users. Also for all those who say Adobe is claiming a patent in tabs in general check out Question 17 on the FAQ. Lastly check out the pictures that Adobe has on the site showing the problems...I bet the court took on look at those and had a lot of questions. Daniel BTW Now whether this patent should have been issued is a whole different matter and I am sure that others will cover it.

Flash MX: bad product gone terrible by Metrollica · 2002-05-02 18:41 · Score: 0

I have been designing and programming with Flash for more than 2 years. There were bugs with masks and the panels kept disappearing whenever I switched windows, but I learned to deal with this and found work arounds for the bugs. I did this because I thought this technology was great and had a bright future.

Flash MX is out now, and it just pisses the hell out of me! I want to use the new ActionScript features, as well as the improved multimedia and server-interaction capabilities which Flash MX is great at. But as a development tool it completely fails.

The interface has gotten much worse. Instead of maximizing the screen real estate, it's much more busier than it used to be. With only a few items open the design work space is tiny. The Timeline is much harder to deal with. The Actions panel pops open whenever I switch back to the Flash window. And there that awkward shaped and useless Properties panel. This software is just much worse without the floating toolbar technology.

The Color Mixer doesn't work anymore. And useful things like memory of the size and position of the library are taken away with this new release. These are just some of my complaints concerning this piece of software. It takes much longer to do simple tasks in MX than in 5, and there are many more bugs. Adobe should give LiveMotion's interface the abilities it needs to develop powerful Flash apps so I can continue programming. And as for Macromedia Flash MX, good riddance.

--

--Metrollica

Oh, the hypocracy! by Otis_INF · 2002-05-02 18:41 · Score: 3, Insightful

"...but is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?"
Suddenly, 'Internet Explorer' comes to mind, looking from an average Joe Windowsuser POV.

--
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.

Re:Oh, the hypocracy! by jdavidb · 2002-05-03 00:47 · Score: 2

I was going to paste that same quote in and substitute "Windows" for "Flash." It would be nice if Microsoft had to follow the same laws everyone else did, but in the end, I want free software to win on merits.

--
Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
Re:Oh, the hypocracy! by haggar · 2002-05-03 01:24 · Score: 1

Not the fucking point at all. Did Netscape sue Microsoft over patent infringement?

--
Sigged!
Re:Oh, the hypocracy! by NorthDude · 2002-05-03 01:48 · Score: 1

He did not quote anything about patent, he quoted something about removing an appreciated product from the hand of the user for the sole benefit of another company. While I think that MS should open up their specs a bit more to enable interoperabillity. Face it, the current case will benefit OTHER companys who strive to play king-of-the-hill with microsoft long before it benefit the public and the open source movement. Saying otherwise is to lie to yourself.

--

I'd rather be sailing...
Re:Oh, the hypocracy! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:29 · Score: 0

I want free software to win on merits.
Don't wait up.

Doesn't Apply to Flash MX by Erik+K.+Veland · 2002-05-02 18:41 · Score: 1

The Macromedia MX series now uses stackable and dockable palettes. After using it for a month I can say it's neither better nor worse, just different.

--
"I tend to think of OS X as Linux with QA and Taste", James Gosling, creator of Java

Re:Doesn't Apply to Flash MX by Quila · 2002-05-02 19:20 · Score: 2

The Macromedia MX series now uses stackable and dockable palettes. After using it for a month I can say it's neither better nor worse, just different.

Good. Maybe they should have tried that in the first place instead of ripping off the dominant graphics app GUI.

OK, probably a troll, but... by tlambert · 2002-05-02 18:42 · Score: 4, Funny

I think the most useful thing anyone has ever implemented in "Flash" is the "Bypass Flash intro" button...

-- Terry

Re:OK, probably a troll, but... by Rentar · 2002-05-02 21:49 · Score: 1

Sorry to disappoint you, but most of the time they are not done in flash, but just simple links in the surrounding HTML.
Re:OK, probably a troll, but... by MrFredBloggs · 2002-05-02 23:09 · Score: 1

Pity the whole site isnt done that way. HTML is good enough for delivering the sort of content i like, although i admit there are apparantly millions of people who like those pointless `shoot bin laden` type flash games, judging by the number of links i get sent to them. Shame the quality is up there with PD amiga software of the early 90`s!
Re:OK, probably a troll, but... by peddrenth · 2002-05-02 23:15 · Score: 1

almost as useful as the "block images from this server" and "loop animations: never" options
Re:OK, probably a troll, but... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 03:28 · Score: 0

Bravo! Well said.
And when the site doesn't have that option, I like to use the "Bypass Site" method. I'm sick and tired of sites that waste my time and bandwidth with their crappy flash trash. Most sites (commercial-> money and non-commercial -> ego) want to attract people, not put them off. I wonder how many other people's eyeballs (besides mine) these sites lose? It's a little like a newspaper wanting your to read their publication, but forcing you to wear 3-D glasses. Not good for business.

Re:In case it's slashdotted! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:43 · Score: 0

Hello Klerk,

Will you eat Wil Wheaton for me? You seem to be innovative and a bit insane. Thanks.

Sincerly,
SOCIETY FOR EATING WILL WHEATON

OT: Favorites by _Sprocket_ · 2002-05-02 18:43 · Score: 2

The saddest part is, that lasts 1 hour 15 minutes whilst Sealab is only 15. What a crock.

Actually, I like Home Movies. And while Sealab 2021 is amusing, I couldn't see it managing to hold on a larger time slot. But then, humor is a very subjective thing. To each their own.

Re:OT: Favorites by YourMissionForToday · 2002-05-02 18:49 · Score: 0

So white that I'm slathering myself with Barbeque sauce (for scientific purposes only, thanks) and going sunbathing...

--
Liberate your mind in two clicks or less.

Bzzzt? If not the patent-holder, then who? by Provincialist · 2002-05-02 18:44 · Score: 1

Are we to imagine some magnanimous third party that flies into action whenever some inventor imagines that her patent has been infringed? Why haven't we heard of this generous organization before? Enforcement is 9/10 of the law.

later,
Jess

--
I am programmed for etiquette, not destruction!

Whorer of karma! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:46 · Score: 0

Whorer of karma!

yes flash should die for the greater good. by t · 2002-05-02 18:48 · Score: 2

We need some kind of mass casualties to show how evil and stupid these software patents are. One of the biggest problems with the M$ case is that netscape didn't just completely die and have all its assets auctioned off.

t.

ok im done. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:50 · Score: 1, Funny

im done with the net. im done with all this ludicrocity.. im done.. im going to work somewhere else.

you know what? ive spent years and years designing programming and brainstorming the best way to get my clients visible. ive done more business using the technologies of macromedia adobe microsoft linux bsd sun blah blah blah

im tired of the constant battle for money. im tired of the fucking ad's- and im tired of you .. big business.

oh yeah and dont reply to this you slashdotted lemmings.. your the reason this net we live in is a corporate gayism.

fuck off all you corporate privatising.. fuck off everyone that HORDES money like a sick fuck.. you know what? back in 89 i had a fucking net connection.. it might not have been fast. and back in 89 i had access to data i needed.. and back in 89 when i accessed that data .. i didnt have to deal with 3418902340391473413902 popups.. and back in 89 i could get my work done..

now all your doing is wasting our FUCKING TIME..

your sick. your old and gray and worst of all.. you dont get layed.

go home to your budget cut's layoff's market downfall's and your fat ugly wives. gg dipshits http://static.stileproject.com/rnd/img/aS1.jpg

i will never use ps again. i will never use flash again.. for those of you coding cold fusion.. you suck but even more important.. dont continue to use it..

for the free software movement.. and those of us making it happen stick to it.. dont get caught up in this tangle of tie vs tie.. because your tie is retrofitted and it aint coming off.

fuck this im out..

- Anonymous Coward (the MAJORITY of those who cared once)

Re:ok im done. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 01:55 · Score: 0

Did you have an apostrophe or shift key back then?

I know I'm typing on a decade old keyboard (IBM M-board) and mine has them. Perhaps you were using an old Lear-Siegler terminal missing these features to type that post? Can I suggest going down to the local pawn shop? You should be able to pick up a used keyboard with these important keys for about $0.50.

Tabbed palettes no longer part of Flash UI by th'FOOL · 2002-05-02 18:50 · Score: 1

They came up with a system that actually works quite nicely, and are using it for all of their new stuff. I doubt that they would have to pull their fresh product off the shelves, and they'd sooner sell that than the old stuff. Oh, and the 'tabbed palettes' were not just in Flash, but most of their software. You know what's far more annoying than bad Flash banners? SPAM. Funny. I don't see any anti- email nazis around here....

Flash is used to cover up web designers' lack of by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:51 · Score: 0

skills in creating a web site that works. Take a good look at web sites that you must have flash in order to view the site. Do the web designers that use flash in this manner explain to small businesses that they are limiting the audience who can view their site? If you had a small or medium retail or service business (not a software or web business) would you place a limit on the number of users who can view your site? How many dial up users can afford the bandwidth for flash? Anyone know about the six second rule? The site loads in six seconds or less, or you lose the viewer. Does flash allow this, especially to dial up customers?

Good riddance.

Well they could sue MS over VS.net by Otis_INF · 2002-05-02 18:53 · Score: 2

... afaik, the patent is about customisation in tabbed windows, thus customize your tabs. VS.net has that too. I'm sure MS will come up with 'but these are 'dockable windows' instead of tabs', but it could be fun to see some jury of non-geeks break their minds on that case :)

Btw, Macromedia isn't that small, they bought a lot of companies in the last couple of years and hold a strong marketshare in the webdesign market, where Adobe is, except for photoshop, a smaller player.

--
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.

Martin Niem�ller by AirLace · 2002-05-02 18:53 · Score: 0, Redundant

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the communists
and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me -
and by then there was no one left to speak out for me.

Re:Martin Niem�ller by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:10 · Score: 0

That is so inappropriate for this topic it's not even possible to explain.
Re:Martin Niem�ller by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 20:02 · Score: 0

I like rewording the ending to read:
"..Then they can for me -
and no one spoke out then, either."

...here's a rant in support of flash... by jdbo · 2002-05-02 18:54 · Score: 5, Insightful

...and this is coming from someone who just spent several hours learning all about the painful ins & outs of cross-platform/cross-browser Flash player plug-in detection...

For certain applications, Flash works wonderfully _and_ far better than anything else out there. I am thinking in particular of short animations (with or without limited interaction) that can demonstrate ideas/diagrams/or tell a story.

BTW, I work in educational R&D so I see great examples of this stuff used all the time to complement web-based curricula. Sure, it can't be indexed by a search engine, but it's there to _illuminate_ the ideas stated in the text; i.e. to enhance it, not to replace it.

Sure, Flash can be abused (as many advertisers have done, and designers who want to use it as their entire tookit); However, the Flash-haters on /. are confusing the abuse of a general purpose tool (with some flaws that are being corrected) with the "dastardly deeds" done with it.

BTW, how does /. usually respond to attacks on general purpose tools that some people are attacking based on a relatively minor domain of applications that they dislike? (hint: CSS, copyable-CDs, PVRs, reverse-engineering tools...) ...Sigh...

Yes, most Flash ads suck. And so do 90% of Flash-heavy sites. This problem won't be corrected by removing a particular tool - the crappy designers will just migrate to SVG/Real/WM/etc. Besides, banning/spitting on something disliked is the RIAA/MPAA way of doing things.

If we're such geeks we should be proposing/creating superior tools that are better focused on what Flash is best at, or improving Flash ourselves. Nope, I guess it's just easier to bitch about it.

Re:...here's a rant in support of flash... by th'FOOL · 2002-05-02 18:59 · Score: 1

amen brother!
Re:...here's a rant in support of flash... by karm13 · 2002-05-02 22:06 · Score: 1

they would probably use adobe live motion to produce swf content.

--

--
making up good sigs is a hard thing to do.
Re:...here's a rant in support of flash... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 22:10 · Score: 1, Insightful

If we're such geeks we should be proposing/creating superior tools that are better focused on what Flash is best at, or improving Flash ourselves. Nope, I guess it's just easier to bitch about it.

I agree. All Flash "developers" should go away, invent their own internet "multimedia" distribution application and protocol, and leave the web free of this stuff.

This idiotic nonsense is fragmenting the web! It was not meant to be a generic multimedia tool. Try reading the actual W3C specs, and understanding the design goals. It will help you see why people with a clue dislike it.
Re:...here's a rant in support of flash... by gaspyy · 2002-05-03 00:57 · Score: 1

I work with Flash since v2.

Some online apps simply cannot be done feasible with *anything* else than Flash.

The company I work has just signed up for an oline, interactive e-learning project.

The product has to be small, easy to update and maintain and very dynamic. We're using Flash MX + PHP/MySQL for some backend stuff.

Such a project could not have been done in plain html. Java could be possible, but with Flash we can easily use animations and sound (which in this case are not gratuitous but required). Shockwave or Authorware would require a lot more work, money, etc.

The "lessons" will be XML files pulled from the database, media clips and so on. And it's so easy to develop all these in Flash...

I know that most of you don't like it, but have you ever tried to develop anything with it? (version 5 or MX?) I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
Re:...here's a rant in support of flash... by prowsej · 2002-05-03 02:10 · Score: 0

Sure, it can't be indexed by a search engine, but it's there to _illuminate_ the ideas stated in the text;
I don't know what you're talking about. Flash is indexed in search engines - theres no reason why it wouldn't be. Google has been indexing Flash pages for almost a year. As an example try doing any search with the filetype: handler set. For example Google this: "test filetype:swf"
Re:...here's a rant in support of flash... by FuzzyBad-Mofo · 2002-05-03 03:48 · Score: 1

See, my main problem with Flash is this: it is a user hostile program. There are no controls to disable Flash temporairly, or even stop an animation from playing.

If I were so inclined, I could disable JavaScipt, Cookies, ect. in my browser. Why should a plugin be any different?

Until Macromedia makes their plugin user friendly, there is no way in Hell it will run on my browser. I just feel sorry for Joe Public, who doesn't know what is the source of those annoying skyscraper ads on Yahoo.
Fuzzy
Re:...here's a rant in support of flash... by tswinzig · 2002-05-03 03:55 · Score: 2

If we're such geeks we should be proposing/creating superior tools that are better focused on what Flash is best at, or improving Flash ourselves. Nope, I guess it's just easier to bitch about it.

This reminds me of a joke...

What do you call 1,000,000 copies of Flash lying at the bottom of the ocean? A good start!

The reason we're bitching about Flash is because it is being abused by so many frigging sites that it makes me want to uninstall it. When I used MSIE, there was basically no way to prevent Flash from running without killing all other interactivity. Now I use Mozilla, and I basically just use MSIE when I come to one of those sites that uses Flash that I need to view.

People may really hate Java applets, but I've never seen a Java applet flying around my window, blocking my view of the content on screen, trying to sell me shit.

--

"And like that ... he's gone."
Re:...here's a rant in support of flash... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 07:50 · Score: 0

...but I've never seen a Java applet flying around my window, blocking my view of the content on screen, trying to sell me shit.

So who's to blame: is it the Flash technology or the person designing with it?
Re:...here's a rant in support of flash... by Proc6 · 2002-05-03 15:50 · Score: 1

If youre bitching about a "ads flying around my window, blocking my view of the content on screen, trying to sell me shit", why dont you protest the SITE you're looking at, not Flash. Maybe the website you're on is run by ad revenue hungry jerkoffs. Flash is sort of the wrong target for your anger.

--
I'm Rick James with mod points biatch!

Smells like jealousy. by solios · 2002-05-02 18:55 · Score: 2

Adobe's web-oriented offerings suck more balls than you can possibly imagine compared to Marcomedia's. Straight up, I use Adobe software to MAKE my content, and Macromedia software to DELIVER it. I would never DREAM of using Imageready for writing slicing or code and I sure as shit am not about to use pagemill.

Adobe did some things VERY well- then Photoshop 6 came out, targeted for "web intergration"... and things have been going downhill from there.

About two years ago, maybe three... all of a sudden, all of the new Macromedia apps started to look like Adobe apps. Fireworks is the best example- it handles like Photoshop the way Flash handles like Director (in other words, it looks exactly like it should handle the very same way and doesn't even try to).

Adobe has had the "tabbed" features for as long as I've used their product. (about 4+ years). They didn't show up in Macromedia apps until recently... coincidentally, they're in Director, Dreamweaver, and Fireworks (apparently they're in Flash as well, but I hate flash and don't use it.). That's a good chunk of the Macromedia catalogue.

If you really want to push it, the options screens for Word have ALWAYS been tabbed. And I'm sure Word's implementation predates Adobe's.

Tabbed UI elements are about as fundamentally usefull as pulldown menus, rubber-soled shoes, batteries and bread. Patenting them is dumb, as it only impedes the useability of products that could greatly benefit from consistant and well thought out design.

So it's bad. But if Adobe wins.... Flash could slowly wither and die. Which is fine by me- maybe then people will stop asking me if I know how to use it... and maybe, after that... they'll stop sending me links to flash sites.

Adobe's just pissed that people are buying Macromedia's productivity apps instead of theirs. They haven't considered that in the areas they compete, Macromedia is way, WAY superior. [with the possible exception of Illustrator/Freehand].

Re:Smells like jealousy. by Quila · 2002-05-02 19:17 · Score: 2

and I sure as shit am not about to use pagemill.

I'd sure hope not, as that's from the days of Dreamweaver 1. Try GoLive 6, it blows Dreamweaver away.
Re: Smells like jealousy. by Saint+Fnordius · 2002-05-02 19:51 · Score: 1

Despite the ranting tone, the poster has a point; Macromedia put a lot of effort in making *all* of their apps use identical tabbed tool options, identical keyboard shortcuts, et cetera.

Why Adobe singled out Flash as the target is beyond me. Flash was orginally a third party product that got assimilated into the Macromedia fold, and gradually adopted FreeHand's appearance. Heck, until Flash 5 came out, it was a bear moving graphics from FreeHand to Flash!

The new "MX" line certainly looks as if Macromedia knew they might lose, and started migrating away from the old style. This will just force them to step up the speed, and maybe add FreeHand & Director earlier than they wanted to.

Considering how the "infringement" runs throughout the entire Macromedia line, yet Adobe targeted only one program, I'd appeal. At the very least, it would give Macromedia time to bring the rest of their products into the MX safe harbor.

It's sad. I like Flash, I like FreeHand, and I like Photoshop/InDesign. I used to like these companies for making good, intuitive tools.
Sigh...
Re:Smells like jealousy. by uglyduckling · 2002-05-02 21:01 · Score: 1

So it's bad. But if Adobe wins.... Flash could slowly wither and die.
OR.... they could quickly release a new version where the dialog boxes do not behave like the Adobe ones....
This has been said about a million times already, but Adobe are not claiming patent on tabbed dialogs, only on the novel idea of being able to move a tab from one palette to another, or even drop it out on its own.
Re:Smells like jealousy. by Reziac · 2002-05-03 02:48 · Score: 2

Word's use of tabs in the options setup goes back to Winword v6 (don't know about Mac versions), dated 1994, IIRC.

But even so -- see my previous post about the Lotus interface suit. Anyone here got details they can post about that? It's relevant, I think.

--
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Re:Smells like jealousy. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 03:52 · Score: 0

It sure does, and it sounds like Macromedia could end up making money off of it, if they can use it to force everybody currently using Flash 3/4/5 to upgrade to Flash 6... 'sorry no you can't have 2 new copies of Flash 5, Adobe won't let use sell it' Result: Flash 6 gets a big boost.
Adobe could regret this big time.

Macromedias Other products use Tabs too. by EMR · 2002-05-02 18:55 · Score: 1

Dreamweaver, fireworks and probably Freehand use Tabbed dialogs to decongest the work area..
this is REDICULOUS!!!!
What other programs use Tabbs to decongest dialogs.. Heck it's a standard component in just about EVERY GUI toolkit no matter what OS you use..
Someone better find some prior art and SCREW Adobe..
First they go after Killistrator and now this..

Re:Macromedias Other products use Tabs too. by Quila · 2002-05-02 19:15 · Score: 3, Interesting

That's detachable tabs with build-your-own-palette. Adobe specified early Excel tabbing in their patent as prior art they were deviating from with their own invention.

what to do? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 18:56 · Score: 0

ok, so Adobe has patented this tabbed pallete.
What should other products do to be able to include this tabbed pallete legally? pay?

If the world has to pay Einstein to use that e=mc^2, it would be foolish.
Math has been there all along, it only happened to be that he has that larger capacity and capability of brain to find the formula.

Tabbed Pallete has always been there all along, it only happen that Adobe patented it first and it's not necessarily their own 'creation'.

Money rules,heh?

Wrong - try patenting the Gas pedal by anonymous+cupboard · 2002-05-02 19:02 · Score: 1

If I get into a car anywhere in the world with manual transmission, there are the pedals organised, accelerator, break and clutch.

This means that it is relatively easy for me to drive a car made anywhere in the world. It is advantageous to be able to easily move between programs, with the real differentiation being: feature-set, reliability and cost. Users require less time to retrain between systems

Of course, the producers of overpriced, unreliable and underfeatured software prefer people to be locked into one implementation.

What is the frequency, Kenneth?! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:02 · Score: 1, Insightful

One of the first posters had it right. Since it's not Micro$oft, people don't seem that upset about this. Wake up and smell the coffee. This is a user interface patent. What the fuck. How about George Lucas patents "use of computer graphics to depict a character in a motion picture" wait he already has. Those fuckers. Excuse my French. EVERY PATENT THAT HAS TO DO WITH SOFTWARE IS FUCKED UP. Fuck Adobe.

I don't want to hear whining about how they have to protect their patents. The whole system sucks.

I know this is a fucking mindless post but I can't fucking stand it when those fuckers fuck us all over. Software patents are what Sean Penn was really referring to in The Game when he says, "They fuck with you and fuck with you, and just when you think they've stopped fucking with you that's when the real fucking begins."

In my normal life I can't spout off like this so I have to do it in Slashdot it makes me feel better sorry for the mindlessness.

Flash MX won't be taken off the shelf... by silhouette · 2002-05-02 19:02 · Score: 4, Insightful

...because it doesn't use tabbed palettes. Those were introduced in Flash 5, and replaced in MX by a windowish-docking system. I would wager that Macromedia's decision to change the interface in MX was based far more on the lawsuit than on user feedback.

Adobe is seeking an injunction preventing Macromedia from selling "the infringing software" - which is, like I just said, Flash 5. Notice that Macromedia released Flash MX within the last month, and are now going to be actively phasing out their Flash 5 product and pushing MX instead. Is this good timing just a coincidence? You tell me. So what I'm wondering is what Adobe could possibly do to further harm the Flash product line (besides the $2.8mil in damages, of course).

The original Legend of Zelda in Flash MX: a prototype

--
Experts agree: everything is fine.

Ethics/Morals by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:05 · Score: 0

I believe the question that was stated in the post was one of ambiguity. If you really sit and think about it, it should come to mind that Social Darwinism plays a key role in our economic success ("Survival of the fittest"). Microsoft, for instance. Microsoft shouldn't be labled as a monopoly, but rather as companion of economic society. Microsoft by no means prevents competition, being the complete idea of capitalism. In a sense, it encourages more active productivity. It should also be mentioned that any kid in a garage with a good idea, retains the ability to overcome Microsoft's stronghold on computer software, etc. It just takes time. This brings to point: Is it fair to penalize success?

maybe they'll destroy each other by j09824 · 2002-05-02 19:08 · Score: 2

Macromedia is countersueing over some hare-brained UI gimmick of their own; if we are lucky, the two companies will sue each other out of existence and web sites will stop using both PDF and Flash.

Note that the patent applies to a UI gimmick in the Flash authoring software, not the Flash player. And if Macromedia's software engineering is at all reasonable, they should be able to remove this feature from their software within days and without losing any significant functionality. They can probably actually just post a small patch that disables the dragging for now and later come up with an alternative in terms of non-patented UI technology.

The fact that this is patented at all and that Adobe has been brazen enough to sue over it is something we shouldn't forget, however.

Oh No! by NeuroManson · 2002-05-02 19:09 · Score: 4, Funny

How am I gonna watch Osama Bin Laden In a Blender now???

--
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!

We may not all be Flash Lovers - What ??? by bushboy · 2002-05-02 19:15 · Score: 2, Interesting

What the heck is that supposed to mean ?

Oh yes - I forgot, the only use for Flash according to /. is 'annoying banners'

Forget the fact that it's the most widely used and distributed plugin. Forget the fact that people use it for presentations, cartoons, multi-media cd-roms, educational purposes etc. etc. etc.

No, perhaps most of you 'code no graphics geeks' don't like Flash, but 90% of the rest of us do.

--
A slashdotting - you get the stick first and then the carrot !

Re:We may not all be Flash Lovers - What ??? by igottheloot · 2002-05-03 03:43 · Score: 1

and 90% of you use fucking aol too.

flash is one of the most annoying fucking plugins ever invented. i think your list of it's uses sums up why so i don't need to give any reasons why.
Re:We may not all be Flash Lovers - What ??? by innit · 2002-05-03 06:53 · Score: 1

No, perhaps most of you 'code no graphics geeks' don't like Flash, but 90% of the rest of us do

Presumably you simply forgot to provide the evidence you doubtlessly have to back this claim up?

Stuii!

An interesting Flash movie by KeelSpawn · 2002-05-02 19:15 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Sorry this is a little off topic, but here's an iddictive and interesting flash movie a friend of mine made that i want to share with everybody, enjoy. http://games.sohu.com/fightgame/fight3.swf

--
http://www.palmzone.net

Ah yes by gvonk · 2002-05-02 19:17 · Score: 0, Flamebait

Why the bloody hell do you have enough karma to get an auto +1? THE LINK HE PUT IN THE PARENT TO YOURS WAS the BT suit. JUST CLICK THE LINK!!! AAAAHHHHH!

Seriously, though , are you retarded?

--

El Karma: excelente(principalmente la suma de moderación hecha a los comentarios de los usuarios)

Re:Ah yes by beerits · 2002-05-02 19:30 · Score: 1, Flamebait

Why the bloody hell do you have enough karma to get an auto +1? THE LINK HE PUT IN THE PARENT TO YOURS WAS the BT suit. JUST CLICK THE LINK!!! AAAAHHHHH!

Stuff like this used really piss me off too, but I finally realized that posting on /. is like throwing shit at a wall. Throw enough of it and something will stick.

Re:Patents: Defend them or lose them. --- Bzzzt! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:20 · Score: 0

I think your right about not having to defend patents. Still though what he says is right because if they don't try to get license money from companies using their patents then what is the use of having them?

Microsoft may be next by leonbrooks · 2002-05-02 19:21 · Score: 3, Insightful

If these idiots win against Macromedia (plugin required to view this message because format is not open), that will make it easier for them to take on Microsoft next. Their patent does seem rather trivial, though, and you could probably bring it down in flames by pointing out that it's just mimicing real-life paper layouts (ie is not in principle new).

--
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing

Why all the hatred of Flash? by seekohler · 2002-05-02 19:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

In less than a week I was able to write a kick butt XML based Internet Call Notifcation client in Flash. It notifies our ISP customers when they get phone calls while online. The thing can even play back any voice messages left by callers in real time! I was blown away by how easy it was to write the client and it was less than 50k when finished!

Don't let lousy Flash ad banners or poorly designed webpage interfaces give you bad taste for the Flash format in general. It's really quite amaizing what can be done with it when used right... especially when developing sockets based web applications. Next on my list is a full fledged Flash chat client.

I hope Macromedia doesn't get hit too hard from this. I just bought MX and I really dig the new features.

Re:Why all the hatred of Flash? by KjetilK · 2002-05-02 22:28 · Score: 1

It doesn't run on my platform. It's not accessible (yeah, they tried to do something about it, I know). It's controlled by a single company. Which is even a BSA member. I want an universal, accessible web. That's all I need.
But then, hatred is not the word.

--
Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
Re:Why all the hatred of Flash? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:30 · Score: 0

It doesn't run on my platform.

You mean that "fantastic" open-source platform where anyone can add features and fix such problems as things not running on it. Remember... SWF is an open format so get off your ass and make it work instead of whining.

It's controlled by a single company.

Heaven forbid a company offer the public something. And, if I'm not mistaken, as mentioned above, SWF is open. Is that why Adobe can put out their own software that can make "Flash" animations? You mean Macromedia controls the SWF format?

Oh, lordy, no! They developed it and put it out there for others to use, I think it's their right to keep control. Don't force your "everyone must give away anything they work hard to create" mantra on the rest of the world.

You want an alternative? Try SVG. Just don't expect the rest of us to follow. I mean, the plugin for it is around 3M (as opposed to around 150K for Flash) and it being distributed primarly through Adobe (*gasp* a single company).
Re:Why all the hatred of Flash? by seekohler · 2002-05-03 06:23 · Score: 1

1. There were only two choices... Java or Flash. I chose Flash. Java would have taken much longer to code and would have been a major headache. Not to mention that I've never used a browser JVM that wasn't crash prone.

2. Why reinvent the wheel? It would have taken forever to rework someone elses code. My point is that it only took me a few days to write the app in Flash. Not only was all the sockes stuff practically written already, designing a clean, easy interface was a snap. We even had time to include MD5 encription in the client .

3. We'll see. Keep in mind that this was designed to be a simple info client much like an IM client. Nothing more. I never said Flash should be used for writing a full featured word processor (although I believe it could).

4. What part of "only 50k" did you not read? The app is tiny and there isn't anything in it that could possibly bog any Flash enabled computer down. You're thinking of when people do full screen scaling and rotation on 150 bitmaped images in their Flash animations. Now THAT would slow it down.

Re:Bzzzt? If not the patent-holder, then who? by cpt+kangarooski · 2002-05-02 19:24 · Score: 1

Defend or lose means that if you do not defend them now, you cannot defend them in the future.

Whereas failure to defend a patent generally does not destroy a cause of action to defend it later on. (yes, there are estoppel arguments like laches, but it's not too relevant here)

--
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.

i'd also note that... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:29 · Score: 1, Funny

Adobe uses Flash animation on their frontpage.

I guess it's ok for them to use it since they own the patent that it is infringing? :)

Re:i'd also note that... by jtrascap · 2002-05-02 19:56 · Score: 3, Informative

Actually it's not flash - it's their own package called Live Motion. It produces Flash-compatible graphics and SVG-based anims. SVG is open-source and where Adobe wants to go. Flash is binary and somewhat more constricted and where Macromedia keeps it's cashflow. Adobe wants to kill 2 birds with one stone...
Re:i'd also note that... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 07:22 · Score: 0

Then why do people care if Flash is gone, they could just switch to Live Motion then... of course adobe would have to make it's own plugin...
Re:i'd also note that... by macsox · 2002-05-03 07:50 · Score: 2

livemotion does not export to svg. that was dropped from livemotion 2. and it exports to the flash file format, not just flash-compatible. macromedia semi-open sourced the file format (swf).

--
go get it
Re:i'd also note that... by jtrascap · 2002-05-06 19:25 · Score: 1

Ah - then I stand corrected. But then again, we've since seen that the tabbed-palettes suit was against the previous incarnations of Macromedia-ware, and not the current MX crop, which don't violate Adobe's patents.
Anyone else wanna sue 'em? Stand up now! Line forms at the left...

allyourbase.swf by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:32 · Score: 0

>Oh, and those neat humourous swf files
>(Can't think of any right now

How about this one?
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~pyang/bas e/ally ourbase.swf

explanation:
http://www.wired.com/news/culture/ 0,1284,42009,00. html

Re:allyourbase.swf by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:34 · Score: 0

It looks like spaces appeared in the URLs I included. Change
ally ourbase.swf
to:
allyourbase.swf

or try:
http://www.scene.org/redhound/AYB.swf
Re:allyourbase.swf by jawtheshark · 2002-05-02 19:46 · Score: 1

Oh, I knew that one. It's a classic, I've been here long enough.
No, I was thinking about those parodies on songs, like for example "Fucking her gently". It's hilarious, or just recently I got the best country song ever "Penis, I don't like you anymore", or even the numerous Boyband/Britney parodies around.
Oh, and I loved the one with the stickmen doing martial arts. I'd love to search for links and post them here, but I'm at work and reading slashot is about the most that is tolerated. (I think that flash is disabled everywhere...not sure though).

--
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Re:allyourbase.swf by Gibbys+Box+of+Trix · 2002-05-02 23:50 · Score: 1

But, apart from all that stuff, it's rubbish, eh?

You sound like that Monty Python sketch... "What have the Romans ever done for us?"
Re:allyourbase.swf by jawtheshark · 2002-05-03 01:29 · Score: 1

Well, I could live without it. It's not as if I would miss those humourus flash animations that much. They are enteraining, that's true...but needed? Nah, not at all.
What I hate is websites that require flash to get the content, or worse have pointless and utter useless complete flash animations. That is despisable. For a quick laugh, flash is okay, for a multimedia CD flash is the thing, for a website it is not suitable at all.
Look at this site to understand what I mean. That is useless flash (as I said, flash is disabled here and I got a normal webpage...so it could be fixed by now) A while ago that wasn't the case at all and you got the flash immediately in your face.
Another one is this this site : it refuses to work without flash. I have to admit that it is neat, but utterly useless from an content-wise view. (Normal images would have done just fine...)

--
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Re:allyourbase.swf by Gibbys+Box+of+Trix · 2002-05-03 01:51 · Score: 1

I really should have added a smiley to my post, as I was just gently joshing you rather than trying to make a massive point.

The Leonidas site now opens on a basic html page with a 'view our flash site' link in the center, the flash looked ugly and clunky, and doesn't do them any favours.

Guideroutier doesn't seem to have any flash at all, though...

But still, there are some wonderful flash sites out there that are a thousand miles away from what can be done in html. They are more like a work of art than a webpage. I admit that they are not particularly 'useful', but then how much of the web is useful? I don't consider Slashdot to be of much use to anyone (except the askers of Ask Slashdots, presumably). Here's another example of a fairly good looking html website that I don't think is particularly useful. ;)

Last time this whole flash/anti-flash argument raged on /. someone posted a link to a hotel booking scheme that ran in flash and made it a much more natural experience than messing with forms and such. It was a very intuitive interface that I don't think could be done anywhere near as well in html. Wish I had the bookmark, but I cleared it out a while ago.
Re:allyourbase.swf by jawtheshark · 2002-05-03 02:43 · Score: 1

the flash looked ugly and clunky, and doesn't do them any favours.
Yup, and some months ago it was their main entry. I wanted to buy some belgian chocolates for a friend of mine online and got that ugly flash. Now I took my business somewhere else.
Guiderouter does have flash: all their maps are based on flash. Well it is kinda neat to be able to zoom, but it's just neat. Not useful. If you have flash disabled (as I have here), you get a "nice" page telling me to download flash.
Here's [www2.vo.lu] another example of a fairly good looking html website that I don't think is particularly useful. ;)
Okay, granted...my homepage *is* useless, to the extent that it doesn't interest anyone who doesn't know me. However it is a neat way to show pics of my family when friends are far away. Or to show my 31337 HTML coding skills ;-) Besides, I had fun making it, and isn't that the whole point? I have not much time now, but I plan to revamp everything someday.
If you find that hotel booking system, I'd be glad to take a look and re-evaluate my feelings about flash.
Oh, and I understood the humour of your post, it's just that I'm really bored at work right now.

--
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Re:allyourbase.swf by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:48 · Score: 0

see above or click: i-Hotelier

--

Gibby

Adobe should respect Macromedia's creativity by bjornte · 2002-05-02 19:34 · Score: 1

Quoting from the CNET article, Macromedia CEO Rob Burgess says: "Ultimately, it is our customers, and particularly our mutual customers, that will be harmed."

That's true; Adobe users are creative ones, and they are not going to like it if Adobe turns into a Law Monster to battle a worthy companion. Macromedia really added new opportunities to the web with the introduction of Flash. I think in this case, Adobe should honor and respect the fundamental creative groundwork behind the concept of Flash, with all it's brilliant aspects, and leave it at that.

They're not preventing it's sale. by DahGhostfacedFiddlah · 2002-05-02 19:44 · Score: 1

They're preventing sale of *infringing products*. From what I can see, all that means is that they'll have to sell a non-infringing product. Getting rid of the infringing behaviour probably reduces to a few comments. All macromedia should be losing is a bit of stock (the already-packaged infringing versions).

--
Last post!

NO! That's trademarks by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 19:46 · Score: 0

nt - just wanted it in the subject line.

Oh, please, please! by nagora · 2002-05-02 19:49 · Score: 1, Flamebait

Can it be true? Can the web be scoured of Flash at last? I can only hope.

Why a system for generating/showing cartoons was ever allowed to spread into page layout is beyond me. Flash is the single biggest Web-standards breach in use today.

Kill it, bury it, and write HTML that people can bookmark, read on text only browsers, and hear on browsers for the disabled.

Isn't that what we all want: a Web that's available to all? It sure isn't what Macromedia want.

TWW

--
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"

Just read Macromedia's patents by Quila · 2002-05-02 19:53 · Score: 2

Admittedly, the graphics editing one I haven't had time to fully understand, and may have merit.

But the ones for editing waveforms I swear I was doing on my Atari 1040 ST in 1987.

Interactive evidence of Corel's patent violation by mcasaday · 2002-05-02 19:56 · Score: 2, Insightful

Visit this Corel trial page and click on the "Try Online" link next to CorelDraw 10 or Corel Photo-Paint 10.

Wait until the demo applet loads.

Click New Graphic from the intro window.

Open a few dockers from the Window -> Dockers menu.

Drag one of the tabs for these dockers into the main work area of the app, so that it acts like a palette.

Now drag the other tabs still attached to the right side of the window over this palette.

You've just constructed a tabbed palette using non-Adobe software.

Now why would Adobe sue Macromedia and not Corel? Is it because Corel's take on the tabbed palette isn't as blatantly derivative as Macromedia's? Or is it because Corel isn't as much of a threat to Adobe's business as Macromedia? Yes, this is a trick question.

what the ... ? by __aahlyu4518 · 2002-05-02 19:58 · Score: 2, Insightful

Why is everybody talking like flash is dead because of this ? The existing product might be taken off the shelf, but that doesn't mean anything.
They lose a lawsuit, take the tabbed palletes out(which btw is not the 'normal' tab feature you see in almost every application, but the abbility to rearrange things to save space or something... read the other posts) and sell the new product just as well... Might cost them a bunch, but flash will still exist.

Re:what the ... ? by imperator_mundi · 2002-05-02 21:46 · Score: 0, Offtopic

I think that point is that if you use a product professionally your know-how worths real money, so any sort of unexpected changes on the software you use may cause you real damages. I don't that the today story will be problematic for anyone, but I can't avoid to think how weak is my position as developper when I rely on a proprietary technology. Maybe part of the problem is the lack of standards for many of the actual Internet technology, I mean at w3.org there are clear definitions about the way to create static internet contents (HTML/CSS/CSS2...) but noothing about e.g. video streaming, nothing about vector graphics (I don't think there is a valid alternative to flash if you want to follow this approach) then is clear that proprietary technologies come and fill these voids.

Re:Bzzzt? If not the patent-holder, then who? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 20:00 · Score: 0

Enforcement is 9/10 of the law.

Oh no! Possession is 9/10 of the law, and now Enforcement is 9/10 of the law, that means there's 18/10 of the law! Aaaiiieeee.... Somebody, help! We have too many laws already without having 180% of them!

This is one case of many by forgoil · 2002-05-02 20:04 · Score: 2

Say what you will about this case, and say what you will about the companies involved, but this happens fairly often. I know very well that a post on slashdot won't change anything, at least not much, but is there anyone who seriously is trying to fight these kinds of software patents?

I belive that if you put millions of dollars into a product, you want it to sell, and not be pirated or ripped off. Because of this I don't belive in removing patents all together, but I belive that they should only be used to protect, not to destroy. In the software field, they destroy, and they last way too long. Put the time down to two years instead of something.

Hmm, I rant too much, maybe I should patent that and sue you all ^_~

Re:Open Source it! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 20:09 · Score: 0

Yeah, but how would they make money? :)

Re:Crap. This is just standard "Drag&Drop". by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 20:12 · Score: 0

The arguments stated are total crap (excuse my strong wording) and they deserve another 20% of pir...er..shared copies among their users just for their arrogance. The true invention here is Sun's. "Drag&Drop", which isn't a real invention, as it just generalizes the original Mac Finder behavior.

As soon as you have a class library that supports "Drag & Drop", there will be a function-per-object to initiate a drag. Without choice, you end up with the question "how do I override this for Tabs". Two totally obvious considerations later ("hmm. just drag the attached view", "well, it might drop into other tabbed layouts"), you have the "invention".

Director MX by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 20:13 · Score: 0

haha this is great.. flash is fuxxing up director and i'm glad to see it getting fuxxed up as well.. hehe

Re:Patents: Defend them or lose them. --- Bzzzt! by Paradise+Pete · 2002-05-02 20:24 · Score: 1

Bzzzt. Try again. This is true for Trademarks but not Patents or Copyright.

Why would you tell him to try again, and then in the next breath tell him the answer? Was it because you wanted to use that so-annoying-you-want-to-slug-the-guy Bzzzt thing?

Doesn't GIMP have a tabbed palate ? by maharg · 2002-05-02 20:36 · Score: 1

..in the layers & channels dialog ?

--

$ strings FTP.EXE | grep Copyright
@(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.

Dog eats dog, news at 11 by bunhed · 2002-05-02 20:37 · Score: 1

Who cares what dogs doo? Copyright nothing and no one will sue you. It's simple.

FUCK YOU ALL by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 20:41 · Score: 0

I don't FUCKING FUCKING care. You can all ROT in FUCKING fuckhell! FUCK YOU ALL. FLASH fuckkkkerrrs! FLASH fuck FLASH fuck FLASH. Yeah. You heard me. FUCK YOU ALL.

There was this hot girl I saw tonight. FUCK HER, TOO. Grammar, drunk and tired. FUCK YOU... FUCK PHYSICS, and FUCK YOU.

hmmmm...... by Lag+Master · 2002-05-02 20:43 · Score: 1

seems as tho slashdot is split 3 ways: 1/3 against flash, 1/3 against adobe, 1/3 against adobe and flash... imho

The lawsuit itself doesn't make any sense... by nulleffect · 2002-05-02 20:46 · Score: 1

The lawsuit itself doesn't make any sense but it might block Macromedia from becoming a monopoly.
Macromedia have shown tendencies to ignore standards and have recently started to bundle their products in a fashion similar to Microsoft Office.

Cup-holders by Taurine · 2002-05-02 20:47 · Score: 2, Insightful

There is no such thing as a cool cup-holder. In any sane country its illegal to drink while driving because its too distracting. One of my favourite features of my E46 BMW is that it has NO cup-holders. Face it, for a cup-holder to be an effective preventer of spilled drinks, it has to be combined with a car engine that doesn't have enough torque to pull the skin off custard, and a driver who doesn't have the will to go round corners above a walking pace. Now I understand why the larger Audis I see often have such small engines - its to save the interior from coffee stains.

Re:Cup-holders by uglyduckling · 2002-05-02 20:52 · Score: 1

Clearly you've never stopped by the side of the road on a long drive to have a drink and a rest. Our little car barely has enough dash space to stand a cup on, and we seem to manage to spill drinks with alarming regularity.
Hail the cupholders!!
Re:Cup-holders by Quila · 2002-05-02 20:59 · Score: 2

It securely held a can of warm Mountain Dew through a trip, and even got it ice cold on the way because the holder is right in front of the A/C vent.
Re:Cup-holders by billh · 2002-05-03 01:09 · Score: 4, Insightful

I take it your country has no traffic? Some countries do, you know. Us Americans sometimes like to sip coffee while we are zooming along at 2mph on the way to work.

I hear some people also like to purchase beverages from restaurants for later consumption.
Re:Cup-holders by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:08 · Score: 0

Just a note, normal people refer to the E46 BMW as 'the cheap BMW'
Re:Cup-holders by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 04:25 · Score: 0

Wow, you're just so cool- driving fast and recklessly and all. You probably wouldn't have a free hand to drink anyway, what with one hand on the wheel and the other on yourself...

I personally invented tabbed palettes in 1986 by Simon+Brooke · 2002-05-02 20:49 · Score: 3, Interesting

Not saying I was the first one to do it, but I did and I can prove it. That predates the patent by ten years.

--
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.

Re:I personally invented tabbed palettes in 1986 by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 21:06 · Score: 0

Well, go on then.. prove it, and if you can, maybe you could arrange with Macromedia lawyers to disrupt Adobe's patent and copyright it under your name, instead.. and then you'd get a bucketload of cash.

Shine bright, little star..

Flash is NOT as bad as ! by Captain+Large+Face · 2002-05-02 21:03 · Score: 1, Offtopic

I don't think this is a very fair comment, although I did find it amusing. Flash is an excellent format for the web, it is just the implementation of it that provides the problem.

There are a great number of fantastic flash movies available on the WWW, and some excellent flash designers out there. The problem isn't with the technology or the design, but the way it is embedded into most sites. Web masters ought to provide alternatives to Flash movies, but most seem to be too lazy to do just that, and therefore risk alienating their audience.

Re:Interactive evidence of Corel's patent violatio by Quila · 2002-05-02 21:05 · Score: 2

That looks infringing. Of course, Corel could have simply licensed it from Adobe. Actually, this Adobe vs. Macromedia case is strange because the usual game is to claim infringement, do a counter-claim, and then cross-license.

Fight software patents well with the GNU GPL. by jbn-o · 2002-05-02 21:06 · Score: 0

So if it was open source it would be just fine... like GIMP!

I suggest against that wording for two reasons:

The GIMP is GNU GPL'd software (the GNU GPL is a copylefted Free Software license). This difference is important particularly in this thread because
when it comes to patents, the GPL does more for you than the most heavily advocated Open Source licenses. The most heavily advocated Open Source licenses—the X11 and new BSD licenses—allow embrace and extend by patenting. The GNU GPL does not allow embrace and extend.

If there was ever a time to understand why the GNU GPL and defending software freedom is so important to the fight against software patents, it's now. The GNU GPL "[makes] it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all." (in the words of the GPL's preamble).

--
Digital Citizen

Re:Fight software patents well with the GNU GPL. by townmouse · 2002-05-03 06:30 · Score: 1

That part of the preamble never made sense to me. How on earth is the author going to be able to ensure that no-one will ever claim they have a patent that applies to the software? All the GPL itself says on the issue is that the original author has the option of prohibiting redistribution where it is already prohibited by patent law. This doesn't seem to solve the problem.

--
Ask me if I've been required to disclose any crypto keys.

Re:If it stops banner ads and other annoying netis by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 21:29 · Score: 0

That's easy. Buy any Macromedia product if you really want to load 'em with ammo.

Microsoft Visual Studio.net does the same thing by palad1 · 2002-05-02 21:31 · Score: 1

This GUI technology is also available in microsoft Visual Studio.net as well. Here's a demo.[45k]

What's the difference there? As far as I can tell, the tabs are on the lower side of the pane, not at the top, but that's all.

[mandatory /. ms bashing]
Now if they could add some sensible scripting language to this thing as well.
[/mandatory /. ms bashing]

Re:In case it's slashdotted! by Dante_H · 2002-05-02 21:32 · Score: 1

Klerck, I know you do this to be irritating but I just want to say thanks. Due to retarded web-proxy access at my workplace I can only read Slashdot, but almost none of their external links. So thanks for mirroring.

Hmm, so UI design is fair game... by MadFarmAnimalz · 2002-05-02 21:37 · Score: 3, Interesting

OK. Idea. Let's see what you folks think about this one.

This case has established a precedent that elements of UI design can be copyrighted, lame as this decision is.

Wouldn't this set up the foundation for a lawsuit against Microsoft for ripping the whole WIMP (windows, icons, menus, pointers) paradigm from Apple? Who in turn could get sued by PARC, I think it was?

If my reasoning here is correct, then we'd have a win-win situation; MS is sued and that damn OS is pulled from the shelves, or MS wins the court case and Macromedia gets the Adobe sentence nullified.

Any lawyers skulking about to comment?

--
Blearf. Blearf, I say.

Re:Hmm, so UI design is fair game... by tjgrant · 2002-05-03 04:40 · Score: 2

This has been going on since Borland developed Quattro and Lotus sued, in what I believe to be, the first "look-and-feel" lawsuit ever.
Quattro/Quattro Pro were far superior to 1-2-3. So instead of improving their product, Lotus sued and won and Borland had to change their interface.
The interesting thing is that this was a copyright case and not a patent case.

--
Stand Fast,
tjg.

Why Flash Ads? by _Sprocket_ · 2002-05-02 21:43 · Score: 2

And now it's being used for obtrusive banner ads that even take up entire pages!

I've noticed more and more flash ads these days. Sometimes its obvious why - animations and interactive productions. But I've also seen very simple ads that would normaly be handled with either a still or animated GIF. So... why Flash?

With the various shenanigans marketing types seem compelled to do these days, I can't help but wonder if there isn't a more nefarious reason Flash is becoming popular.

With that in mind, how do YOU control Flash? I've been looking at junkbuster. I prefer to show banner ads where possible. But when an ad campaign uses technology I find offensive (tracking cookies, stupid java tricks, Flash) I will block it. Let the acceptable banners generate the stats.

Re:Suck it biznatches! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 21:54 · Score: 0

NO JAM!

O frabjous day, calloo, callay! by Ratso+Baggins · 2002-05-02 22:05 · Score: 1

...Flash be removed from Macromedia's list of "products for sale".

I think the "fully automatic weapon" analogy works well here~ Flash is very good at spitting out content rapidly. Target accuracy is appaling if you dont either: fire in very short bursts or controll the "tool" with extreeme force.

--

--
"we live in a post-ideological world..." - Billy Bragg.

Oh, the agony! by kronstadt · 2002-05-02 22:08 · Score: 1

If Macromedia pulls their software, I may never be able to realize my dreams.

Already been done by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · 2002-05-02 22:22 · Score: 4, Informative

It's happened already, ask Google about it.

The result was that MS said "well if you fuck with us, we'll fuck with you- drop this or we'll
stop making Office for Macintosh."

Apple bowed under the pressure, and nothing really was made of it.

--

What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

Re:Already been done by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:43 · Score: 0

apple also signed an agreement saying ms could use their look and feel for any version of windows.. not to mention apple blantantly stole the idea from xerox labs..

Flash has its uses by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 22:25 · Score: 0

HTML text-and-graphics are fast loading, can be indexed by robots, and can go into great depth on a subject. But...if you will agree that there is a place for both books AND movies, then you have to also admit that there is a niche for Flash. I use Flash for web-enabled database-driven interactive learning games, and I find it has no equal.

Great!! by k98sven · 2002-05-02 22:30 · Score: 2

Now this might be a strange position, but in a way,
this news makes me glad.

Flash is software used by a lot of people. Most
of these people are average-Joe windows users.
(Not /. or Linux people)

This is the group we need to get to understand that software patents
are no good. Having a very popular browser plug-in taken off the market
makes for some good anti-patent opinion.

Sometimes the ends justify the means, I guess.

I saw a great Flash animation by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 22:56 · Score: 0

that had a delorean in it, which reminded me of how much you should buy me one.

Software patents protect innovation (hah!) by Craig+Maloney · 2002-05-02 23:11 · Score: 2

If this is how software patents protect innovation, then may I never have a software patent.

I hope this is the catalyst to get software patent reform moving. Unfortunately after the furor of the one-click patent died down, so did the attention on software patents.

Re:Software patents protect innovation (hah!) by archen · 2002-05-03 01:34 · Score: 1

Well the flip side is that if you come up with a good idea, you should patent it so someone else doesn't pull crap like this with your idea (or something similar). Either way it's a screwed up system.

Re:Patents: Defend them or lose them. --- Bzzzt! by streetlawyer · 2002-05-02 23:22 · Score: 2

Bzzt right back atcha. You can't "selectively enforce" patents, which is as near to a "defend or lose" as to make surprisingly little practical difference.

--

-- the most controversial site on the Web

It's the first thing I thought of in 1996 by michaelmalak · 2002-05-02 23:24 · Score: 2

Since I wrote my own extensive GUI (under the Watcom DOS extender) in 1991, my first heavy-duty Microsoft Windows programming was in 1996 using both Visual C++ and Visual Basic. It is my first time playing with a tabbed control, and I thought it was cool and innovative. But since I was programming instrumentation software and different users would prefer to have their instrument control panels arranged differently, I immediately thought of making them dockable.

Like so many software patents, it's about who gets first exposure to new technology and then that person patenting the semi-obvious extensions. Patents were intended to be for those who either finally cracked long-standing problems or who created things in domains no one could ever have conceived of. Patents were not intended to protect market prognosticators.

Patenting dockable tabbed windows in 1994 is the moral equivalent of patenting polymorphic Web Services interfaces today -- perhaps not obvious to every dolt, but obvious to enough of the developer population once people have, say, at least a couple of years to start using Web Services!

Re:Adobe..yeah, they have a Flash counterpart by lokii202 · 2002-05-02 23:26 · Score: 1

There IS an Adobe counterpart to Flash called LiveMotion. Interestingly enough, the product has support for Macromedia Flash ActionScripting. Seems like Adobe didn't have the capability or resources to create (uh, modify or steal) their own scripting language. They musta used that part of the budget for their litigation team...

Macromedia flash security flaw by shird · 2002-05-02 23:43 · Score: 2, Informative

And in other related news, Marc Maiffret of eeye reports over at bugtraq that the Macromedia Flash Activex control contains a Buffer overflow

--
I.O.U One Sig.

Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery. by Wire+Tap · 2002-05-02 23:47 · Score: 2

But, anyway, this lawsuit is ridiculous - just like most of the lawsuits that carry on inside this country.

--

Man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains.

What if it was a GPL violation? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-02 23:50 · Score: 1, Insightful

"We may not all be Flash lovers, but is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?"

If this had been Microsoft and a GPL violation, you would be screaming to have it removed from shelves. But because it makes pretty pictures and it's not as trendy to pick on them as it is to pick on Microsoft, you think it's OK for them to break the law? Just because you may not agree with the patent law doesn't mean they don't deserve protection under it. You can argue with the patent system, but it's fucked up to argue their right to enforce it.

OT: Decent PDF Readers by petard · 2002-05-02 23:53 · Score: 0, Offtopic

On the OS's I use most:

xpdf on anything with X11
preview.app on Mac OS X
ghostscript on most anything (though I mainly use it on OpenBSD)

HTH-

--pétard

--
.sig: file not found

adobe still rules the market by CheezeyWheezy · 2002-05-03 00:09 · Score: 0

i wouldnt say that adobe was 'jealous' because their product didtn take off.. adobe products are still the most used products for web design along with many other things. personally, adobe is 'more important' to the internet community than macromedia...

this just shows one thing by super-flex-o-matic · 2002-05-03 00:12 · Score: 1

patents stand in your way, if you want to produce good software. look at freetype. of course its a nice piece of software, but thanks to apple, which patented allmost any way to render a font, freetype is not allowed to use certain algorithms.
look at gimp - it could have cmyk support allready but thanks to adobe there are loads of patents in the way.
both cases show the misuse of software-patents: an exclusion of a reasonable competition.

one thing would be of interest. what patents does the opensource-community reserve?

Re:Flash is used to cover up web designers' lack o by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 00:19 · Score: 0

If you're too cheap to stump up for Broadband, then you're too cheap to buy their products... This is the 21st Century, for fuck's sake.

I still miss Squigglevision by extra88 · 2002-05-03 00:21 · Score: 1

That's all I had to say.

Re:In case it's slashdotted! by Dante_H · 2002-05-03 00:22 · Score: 1

Done.

Adobemedia? AdobeMacro? by tenaciousdRules · 2002-05-03 00:38 · Score: 1

Two minute resolution: A=Adobe, M=Macromedia A to M: Did you use our technology in your product? M to A: yes. A to M: You have to pay us for that. M to A: ok. A to M: Are you going to continue using our technology in your product? M to A: yes. A to M: You have to pay us for that. M to A: ok. We've got a ton of money anyway, our product is selling like napkins at a barbecue! A to M: You guys are jerks.

--
--Always, I mean never..., No I mean always check your references.--

Adobe Software Patent Policy by StevenYelton · 2002-05-03 00:52 · Score: 1

Adobe Software Patent Policy
Software Patent Institute Members

Tabbed palettes have been around... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 00:54 · Score: 0

Tabbed palettes? When did Adobe file their patent? I saw tabbed palettes used in Aldus Freehand over 5-6 years ago. Damned handy, too. Don't get me wrong though. I can see Adobe's point of view, but I don't think they came up with it first.

sounds like Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 01:05 · Score: 0

psyched... well that makes me fell better, I thought it was yet another acronym or such I was clueless about :)

Considering that the main crux of the DoJ case is basically a bunch of shitty companies that 1) suck ass and could not compete and 2) are themselves guilty of just as much, but with less success.

Oh yeah... its 'the consumer' they are fighting for. Perhaps they should just yell, "FOR THE CHILDREN!" and be complete.

Who puts stuff like this in? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 01:06 · Score: 0

We may not all be Flash lovers, but is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?

No, it's right to do it because they broke the law. Which part of that was unclear to you?

Not a banner! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 01:12 · Score: 0

To all you Flash Haters!

I'm sorry, I didn't realise that the parabolic trajectory plotter (complete with variable launch angle and variable initial velocity) that I just made with Flash for a physics website was actually a "banner".

Deluxe Paint (Amiga) by loply · 2002-05-03 01:23 · Score: 1

With regards to toolbars being a Windows invention, I recall Deluxe Paint for my Amiga something-or-other havint toolbars, and that was 10 years or more ago.

--
loply.com

But what does this mean to ME? by khendron · 2002-05-03 01:28 · Score: 2

Like most developers, when I design a GUI or a web page, I look at examples from similar applications or web sites. If I see an interface I like it, I'll attempt to do something similar, throwing in a little bit of my own style.

Am I ripping something off? Maybe, in the technical sense. But if I know something works, why shouldn't I want to use it?

Now it seems like I cannot do this anymore. If I imitate a GUI feature I see in an application or web page, I might be infringing on a patent. How can I know what is patented and what is not? In the physical world I can turn over a widget and if it is patented it says "USA Patent #xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" on the bottom. I can't do that in a GUI. Oh, the About box might state that the application contains patents xxx and yyy, but that doesn't tell me much.

Aside: does Adobe's Photoshop list any patents in its About box?

The point is I now feel like my hands are tied. I haven't clue if the GUI I am currently working on infringes patents or not, and I see no practical why of finding out.

--
Life is like a web application. Sometime you need cookies just to get by.

Re:But what does this mean to ME? by Reziac · 2002-05-03 02:53 · Score: 2

Some programs DO have a list of "applicable patents" in their "About" box. Sometimes it's only a list of others' patents (obvious since they're listed by name).

--
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?

Insignificant? by Svartalf · 2002-05-03 01:29 · Score: 2

If they have few or no end users, Wall Street doesn't like it because they're supposed to make money at what they're doing (and litigating people out of existance isn't making money no matter HOW you slice it.).

I really don't like Adobe now (as if I liked them before after them pulling the stunt they did with Dimitri...). I'm sure there will be others as they burn up whatever goodwill they have with their customer base suing people over rather stupid things.

--
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas

Re:Insignificant? by jmauro · 2002-05-03 01:50 · Score: 1

Tell that to Rambus.

Not a good idea by shawnmelliott · 2002-05-03 01:32 · Score: 3, Informative

This is not a good idea for Adobe since you have to consider who their market is

Flash does something that most other products are NOT able to do. Make interactive sites easy enough for even GRAPHIC developers to create. Most of the people I find that LOVE Flash love it for it's ease of use. All of those people are graphic designers the same people who buy Adobe Photoshop. Adobe has a bad PR hurricane just ready to brew over this if they decide to push for Macromedia to pull Flash

Also, what I find absolutely hilarious is Adobe's Front Page which, of all things, uses Flash

Re:Not a good idea by tswinzig · 2002-05-03 04:00 · Score: 2

Flash does something that most other products are NOT able to do.

Send me into a blind rage of frothy-mouthed bloodlust, ready to crack open the heads of the idiots requiring this shit to try and read a website?

Make interactive sites easy enough for even GRAPHIC developers to create.

Oh....

--

"And like that ... he's gone."
Re:Not a good idea by macsox · 2002-05-03 07:48 · Score: 2

you fail to differentiate between the flash format and the Flash application. adobe's LiveMotion app exports to the flash file format.

--
go get it

Flash and Windows... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 01:35 · Score: 0

"We may not all be Flash lovers, but is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?"

Hmmm, this quote applies perfectly towards Windows, and Linux users' attitudes.

One message to Adobe by TulioSerpio · 2002-05-03 01:35 · Score: 1

Delphi 6 and Interdev uses the exactly tabs too!

--

I'm from Argentina: Tango, Asado, Mate, Gaucho, Maradona, YPF

Is Flash a "good product"? by Futurepower(R) · 2002-05-03 01:45 · Score: 1

Is Flash a "good product", as the story says?

Flash is nearly always used to provide images that are irrelevant to the content. Except for those who care about content less than bright, shiny things, Flash gets in the way.

Flash on your web site advertises Flash more than it advertises your own content. There must always be some notice that says "Flash", and a link to Macromedia. Flash distracts from your content.

Flash presents unknown security risks. Sometimes Flash and other Macromedia products have been the point of entry of trojans.

Flash often causes long load times. This says that the viewer's time is worth less than the web site creator's love of distraction.

Re:Is Flash a "good product"? by seekohler · 2002-05-03 06:31 · Score: 1

Flash is nearly always used to provide images that are irrelevant to the content. Except for those who care about content less than bright, shiny things, Flash gets in the way.

Hmm. So you shun the technology just because it's misued? Sounds like gun control.

Flash often causes long load times. This says that the viewer's time is worth less than the web site creator's love of distraction.

When used right, Flash can actually reduce load time and improve overall user experiance. It's amaizing what one can do inside a Flash animation in under 20k.
Re:Is Flash a "good product"? by nagora · 2002-05-03 22:58 · Score: 2

So you shun the technology just because it's misued? Sounds like gun control.
Yes, exactly! Just as guns need to be removed from a free society so Flash needs to be removed from a Web which holds to standards. As with guns, the cost of the misuse so outweighs the value of the "correct" usage (cartoons in the case of Flash; I can't think of what the correct useage of a gun is) that society, on balance, is better off without either.
When used right
I've seen that exactly twice in four years.
TWW

--
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"

Oops! by TulioSerpio · 2002-05-03 01:46 · Score: 1

Another history... nothing to see...

--

I'm from Argentina: Tango, Asado, Mate, Gaucho, Maradona, YPF

"just because..." by torokun · 2002-05-03 01:50 · Score: 1

"...just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?"

This is a serious mischaracterization of the situation. You may think flash is a great product, but that doesn't mean that Adobe's motives are anything but justified.

In this country, inventors of innovative systems have a right to control their use, if they get a patent. If you invent something, patent it, and Macromedia steals it and makes a hit, you have a right to fight to regain control of your invention. This is not immoral.

Why is the bias on slashdot so anti-inventor? Inventors created it, so they have the right to do what they want with it.

Flash Bug Fix by sehryan · 2002-05-03 02:02 · Score: 1

I think it is intersting to note that when they found the bug in the Flash player and contacted Macromedia about it, Macromedia had also recently found it, and immediately fixed the problem with a new version. Say what you will about Flash, but Macromedia is an excellent company when it comes to being accountable to their users.

--
The world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.

Toolbars since 1984; tabs since Be by yerricde · 2002-05-03 02:19 · Score: 2

While I am largely against the current patent system, my dislikes for it revolve around the duration of patents, and the inability of clerks to apply or monitor the requirements for innovation.

The argument of the League for Programming Freedom is that until legislators can fix these problems, patents on a generic computer running a specific algorithm do more harm than good and should be abolished.

We managed to get through over 20 years of GUI use without the widespread use of toolbars. Anyone know when they first appeared?

The first product I saw them in was MacPaint, released in 1984 for the Macintosh computer.

Dockable components which overlap to save space ...? That's not a universal GUI concept; showing and hiding tool windows or popping up dialogs in a stack is a traditional means to handle this problem. Arguably Adobe DID innovate in this instance.

Adobe, or Be? BeOS's default theme shortens a window's title bar to just the length of its name plus the size of the close and maximize controls; overlapping these windows creates a tab-like interface. (But who came first?)

--
Will I retire or break 10K?

What Adobe patented in 5,546,528 by yerricde · 2002-05-03 02:23 · Score: 2

Overlapping components are very common in software and in web design. Maybe they should sue Google [google.com] for their use of components which overlap with their tabbed menu of web, images, groups, or directory search. I would say that overlapping components are more common these days than popping up dialogs in a stack. Adobe did not innovate this

Adobe innovated and patented being able to drag and drop tabs from one palette to another. Read the patent.

--
Will I retire or break 10K?

Re:What Adobe patented in 5,546,528 by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 05:05 · Score: 0

We checked out newslavery.org and the toki pona site... You are on our list now. Keep those thoughts to yourself!

Excel was a re-write of Multiplan by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 02:25 · Score: 0

I'm not sure Excel arrived in '84 - Microsoft had a version of Multiplan for the Mac before they came up with Excel.

Excel was just a re-written, re-named Multiplan. Did Microsoft ever sell both Excel and Multiplan at the same time, or are you just being pedantic?

Actually it does by Codex+The+Sloth · 2002-05-03 02:27 · Score: 1

I'm using MSDev 6 and I can drag the output window (or the breakpoints or the stack dump) into a seperate window. In fact, the only thing I can't drag into a seperate window is the editor. Doh....

--
I am not a number! I am a man! And don't you ... oh wait, I'm #93427. Ha ha! In your face #93428!

Re:Actually it does by Armchair+Dissident · 2002-05-03 07:24 · Score: 1

So you can have a separate find files output window, a separate build output window, a separate class view window, a separate resource window etc. etc ?

--

The ways of gods are mysteriously indistinguishable from chance.

Not reading the article by thenextpresident · 2002-05-03 02:33 · Score: 1

As most people here haven't read the article, the lawsuit would not say "Macromedia can't make Macromedia Flash anymore" but rather "Macromedia can't sell the infringing software". A simple redesign of the user interface would suffice, as that is what is at issue. The fact that Macromedia makes Flash is not, and therefore would not be a problem. It's basically the same concept of telling a warez site to take down the warez. You can have a website/application, so long as it follows the rules.

This is not to say I agree with any of this. I just don't agree with people commenting on something when they didn't even read what they are commenting on.

Please, before making comments, at least get the facts straight.

--
Jason Lotito

Re:In case it's slashdotted! by Dante_H · 2002-05-03 02:33 · Score: 1

Not a problem mate. Also, you seem to like Barren Realms, so you're obviously elite. Therefore, I'll add you too.

I was crap at BR though. Although I rocked at LORD.

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2002-05-03 02:35 · Score: 3, Informative

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Macromedia hate and Apple anyone? by theolein · 2002-05-03 02:36 · Score: 1

The article simply states "further legal battles". It doesn't say by whom.

According to the news that Apple is suing Sorenson because of the spark codec issue, it could be that Apple could be the one to get Macromedia to pull Flash if they win against Sorenson, since Flash MX contains the Sorenson spark codec.

I have had a love hate relationship with Macromedia over the years, mainly because I hated the Early Flash/Director and Dreamweaver UI's, but say what one will about them, they make tools that generally are pretty stable, useful, cross-platform in the Win/Mac sense(Some *x too, Flash and Dreamweaver) and above all, affordable. Macromedia's tools were alway a good couple of hundred dollars cheaper than Adobe's. Macromedia's online help was mostly pretty good and they did seem to listen to user issues.

I will be sad to see Macromedia fold, which is a distinct possibility given that they haven't been doing well for a long time and that they are losing in court. Hopefully it won't happen.

Good for Adobe by CousinDave · 2002-05-03 02:36 · Score: 1

I'm not a fan of Adobe mostly because of their aggressive legal strategies, but I'm with them on this one. I've use Adobe and Macromedia products for years, and it's clear to me that Adobe builds excellent apps with extremely well-designed UIs. Adobe puts way more work into UI design, and they should be able to benefit from their innovations. If Macromedia wants to use a good UI element, they should acknowledge the creator, licensing it if necessary. If Macromedia would put as much effort into UI design as Adobe does, maybe the tables would be turned, and maybe they would be more able to compete with Adobe.

Dave

--
It's too late to lose the weight you used to need to throw around.

examples of non-entertainment Flash interfaces by yerricde · 2002-05-03 02:37 · Score: 2

Last time this whole flash/anti-flash argument raged on /. someone posted a link to a hotel booking scheme that ran in flash and made it a much more natural experience than messing with forms and such. It was a very intuitive interface that I don't think could be done anywhere near as well in html.

Macromedia Pushes Flash For All Things Web

--
Will I retire or break 10K?

Re:examples of non-entertainment Flash interfaces by Gibbys+Box+of+Trix · 2002-05-03 02:46 · Score: 2

Thank you.

And from there to specifically what I was looking for: i-Hotelier

Very very nice flash interface.

Perhaps you should look more closely by theolein · 2002-05-03 02:39 · Score: 1

Perhaps you should look more closely because Adobe makes a Flash editor itself which is compatible with the Flash5 plugin - Livemotion2. Adobe would love to see Flash MX canned.

Re:if flash get illegal by super-flex-o-matic · 2002-05-03 02:51 · Score: 1

yeah fuck you stupid moderators.
come rate me down 5 more points

Summary of the reasons not to use Flash: by Futurepower(R) · 2002-05-03 03:01 · Score: 1

Here is a summary of the reasons not to use Macromedia Flash:

Flash presents unknown security risks. Sometimes Flash and other Macromedia products have been the point of entry of trojans, as mentioned in this story.

Flash on a web site advertises Flash more than it advertises the web site's own content. There must always be some notice that says "Download Flash if you don't have it", and a link to Macromedia, so that web site viewers can get the latest version. This distracts from the content.

Flash is nearly always used to provide images that are irrelevant to the content. Except for those who care about content less than bright, shiny things, Flash gets in the way.

Flash often causes long load times. This communicates that the web site viewer's time is worth less than the web site creator's love of distraction.

For web site viewers who do not want to run Flash and other Macromedia software, or cannot, web sites using it are broken.

Users of Flash give the URL of their customers to Macromedia.

Tabbed Palettes Gone In Current Release by brinn10 · 2002-05-03 03:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

The current release of Flash, MX, does not contain tabbed palettes. The Adobe lawsuit forced an innovation in the interface that is in fact superior to the old tabbed palette system. So the assertion that Flash will be pulled from the market based on this case is simply wrong-headed. Almost as wrong-headed as Adobe's response to their own total failure to acknowledge the importance of the web or innovate- the "Microsoft" approcah of buy it or kill it....

It's like watching you mother-in-law drive... by fanatic · 2002-05-03 03:10 · Score: 2

..your new Cadillac over a cliff.

I hate Adobe for how they (ab)used DMCA to abuse Dmitry.

But I hate Flash for how most webmasturbators choose to inflict it on the web.

Woe is me - I don't know what to think here <g>

--
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody

i-Hotelier by jawtheshark · 2002-05-03 03:11 · Score: 1

I saw the link... (Just checking your posts) I'll check it out at home :-) I just fear it might be the exception that confirms the rule.

--
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)

macromedia who? by virtue1 · 2002-05-03 03:16 · Score: 1

I've loved Adobe since the day I first learned about Photoshop. Their team produces some of the best software I have ever seen and used.

While I find Adobe's products to be useful, creative, stable, and always improving, I don't find that with Macromedia products at all. Most of the Macromedia products I've used have proven to be buggy, unorganized, and sometimes complicated to utilize.

I honestly wouldn't be hurt to see Macromedia simply disappear.

Adobe Plays Microsoft's Game More than you Think by arloguthrie · 2002-05-03 03:18 · Score: 3, Insightful

I hate posting this late in the game on a topic -- I worry no one will read it -- I don't think anyone has made this correlation yet.

I agree that Adobe suing Macromedia for cramping their style is and should be a crock. Adobe is playing the same bullying tactics as another large company.

Take, for example, the Photoshop monopoly. Used to be that if you wanted to bevel or automatically add shadows to items, you had to buy a third-party plug-in. Now those features are built in and have been since 5.5

If you wanted to catalog your images, you had to purchase a third-party app like Extensis Portfolio. Photoshop 7 includes those.

Natural media? Used to need Painter. Now Photoshop 7 has that, too.

And somebody must have come up with the idea of slicing images before Adobe did. Hell, before Macromedia did.

Fortunately for us graphic designers, we will use the right tool for the job. We learn that in school when we have to choose between graphite and charcoal in Design 101. Therefore, companies like Alien Skin, Corel, and Extensis aren't hurt dramatically by Adobe pulling the Microsoft "freedom to innovate" integration game.

But my point is that Adobe steals features from everyone else. It's hypocritical of Adobe to sue someone for stealing their feature. And it proves the ignorance of software patents.

Adobe, a company whose products I use every day to pay my bills, a company whose products I enjoy using, abuses their place in the market. Ahh, the idyllic socialist dreams of nerds...

--
----------
Cheese it! It's the FEDS!

Macromedia Blogs by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 03:20 · Score: 0

some commentary from macromedia employees' blogs:

"2.8 million dollars -- that's one way to earn 14,000 sales for LiveMotion.... ;-)"
http://jdmx.blogspot.com/

also some stuff (not much) at:
http://radio.weblogs.com/0106797/

This could be good by Lonath · 2002-05-03 03:22 · Score: 2

If people get this taken away, people may wake up to how stupid pure thought patents are. But then again, probably not.

--
Best. Comment. Ever. Enjoy!

The article submitter hasn't been here long, huh? by dave-fu · 2002-05-03 03:23 · Score: 2

> We may not all be Flash lovers, but is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?

And what percentage of the folks here are against the states' continued haranguing of Microsoft just because Linux hasn't blown up the spot like they'd hoped? Who wants to see Netscape win out over MS/IE in court just because they put out the inferior browser?
Build a better mousetrap and the schmuck who failed to keep up will just lawyer up. God bless America.

--
Easy does it!
This comment has been submitted already, 276865 hours , 59 minutes ago. No need to try again.

Now we see the value of software patents. by crovira · 2002-05-03 03:35 · Score: 2

Patents have ALWAYS been a way of saying "fuck you" to the competition but with the patenting of processes and components, software and class libraries, we run the risk of killing the very industry that spawned the whole mess in the first place.

I think I'll patent a means of recording information about a customer. That will mean that NOBODY ELSE will ever again be able to have a customer. That would dispose of the problem.

--
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.

Re:In case it's slashdotted! by Dante_H · 2002-05-03 03:40 · Score: 1

I preferred Frontier. Now THAT was a classic.

I played that game for hours upon hours for at least two years. Best game EVER.

I wish I was at home now, instead of this god forsaken call-center taking calls from morons. I could be doing a Barnards Star => Sol robots trade route. Or doing military missions out of Faece. *weeps*

I tried to complain to Adobe on their site but ... by crovira · 2002-05-03 03:48 · Score: 3, Interesting

they don't have any feed-back that's not related to SELLING their products.

But it did have their address so I'll write something and send it via snailmail.

This patent/copywrong crap is the type of bad corporate citizenship that Microsoft has taught businesses.

I didn't pay for their Adobe Type Manager on my Mac but I WILL write to Apple and suggest that they look for some open source alternative.
This is getting fuckin' ridiculous.

--
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.

Yes, it is... by Stickerboy · 2002-05-03 05:09 · Score: 2

...but in your case, it's called reverse engineering. Which is completely legal, as far as I know... I guess Macromedia didn't document their process of creating a tabbed palette.

"Something that chops veggies" is also not analogous to "creating another tabbed palette". It's analogous to "creating a UI tool that lets you have the benefits of a tabbed palette without being a tabbed palette".

--
Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Re:Yes, it is... by tps12 · 2002-05-03 07:46 · Score: 2

Exactly, thank you.

--

Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)

What a stupid sentiment by Stickerboy · 2002-05-03 05:14 · Score: 3, Insightful

"We may not all be Flash lovers, but is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?"

Let's see...

"We may not all be GNOME lovers, but is it right to take away XYZ software from so many people who do like it just because it contains GPL violations?"

"We may not all be Netscape lovers, but is it right to take away Internet Explorer from so many people who do like it just because Microsoft is an abusive monopoly?"

The popularity of a software has no bearing or relevance in this case or any legal case involving its use.

--
Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Re:What a stupid sentiment by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 11:24 · Score: 0

Are you a lawyer?

"First thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers"-
William Shakespeare

Flash "a good product"? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 05:41 · Score: 0

Surely thou jest. It's a closed proprietary bloatware that is used for little else than inane animations that painfully demonstrate how little talent the authors have. (Yes, there are professional and/or good animations out there, but they are like a drop in the ocean of crappiness.)

So many flash haters seem to be forgetting... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 05:46 · Score: 0

.. Does anyone remember those HORRIBLE java banners? The ones that would freeze your computer as you loaded the webpage? The ones that can create misburns because you happen to be surfing the web while burning a CD? If you really want Flash to die, be prepared to go back to having the even worse, bandwidth hogging, computer freezing, java banners that used to be around.

Flash might not always be the best, but compared to many other methods of advertising, it is amazingly light on the load, resource friendly, and it looks a lot better then animated gifs tend to.

To lazy to get an account

Toolbars were invented by... Microsoft? by SlashChick · 2002-05-03 06:20 · Score: 2

Even though this will probably get lost in the shuffle, I'd like to add some background on toolbars.

According to Joel Spolsky, toolbars were invented by Microsoft with the release of Excel 3.0 in 1990. Here's a link to his claim. Now, he worked on the Excel team at that time, so I take his claim with a grain of salt.

The "toolbar" that Joel is referring to has two parts: The File/Edit/View (etc.) bar at the top of the program; and the New icon/Open icon/Save icon set below it. This became the de facto standard for most Windows applications, and also a standard feature with most development kits.

I would imagine that many other people can claim to remember a "toolbar" from other types of systems, but I would also imagine that the one in Excel 3.0 looks most like the ones we still use today. If Joel's claim holds up, it appears that Microsoft has been innovative at least once. ;)

--
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!

Multimedia Cave Paintings by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 06:31 · Score: 0

If you actually knew anything about prehistoric cave paintings, Anonymous Coward O Throbbing Beacon of Joyful and Posthuman Wit for the Information Age, you would know that they are often placed so as to be heard!

Find out about acoustic resonance in rock paintings here.

And prehistoric caves in Europe here.

Now you know.

Annoying Skyscraper Adds on Yahoo by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 06:52 · Score: 0

What? I don't see any adds on Yahoo. Is Mozilla broken?

good use of flash by _newwave_ · 2002-05-03 06:56 · Score: 1

www.estudio.com

Good for Flash MX Sales? by Gallo+Nero · 2002-05-03 06:58 · Score: 1

Well I'm off to the Macromedia site to buy it now, just in case ;)

go on, shoot some fish ...

--
Go on, shoot some fish!

Re:Flash is used to cover up web designers' lack o by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 06:58 · Score: 0

Missie, I have broadband connection. As a business owner, you don't want to limit your reach to only those that do. You want the maximum possible exposure. As web designers who use flash, and limit web sites to users who only use flash, and as posters such as yourself demonstrate, there is a lot of growing up that needs to be done.

Macromedia was Sued before by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 07:00 · Score: 0

by Adobe, with their tab use in FREEHAND. this is nothing new and Im suprised that Macromedia doesnt know better!!!! BAD SOFTWARE company. BAD. ! And this is why a thousand palletes in Freehand or any other Macromedia product are a pain to manage. And this is why I have preferred Illustrator over freehand. Same tool - different ease of use. But you know FLASH is a different animal all together-Adobe doesnt have one like that. And there are such steap learning curves with these types of softwares that once you learn it from one publisher you rarely switch. The real pain in the Azz is that these software packages are getting really expensive, this will just make it more expensive, which in turn will stimulate more theft. Stupid software companies, they make great products and want body parts.
mark-

Show Me by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 07:03 · Score: 0

When used right, Flash can actually reduce load time and improve overall user experiance. It's amaizing what one can do inside a Flash animation in under 20k.

I read this claim, but have yet to see it demonstrated. Where's the beef? Under 20k. Let's see it.

In the real virtual world, Flash is a distraction. And the use of Flash detection scripts, assuming they actually work across all platforms, slows load times. It's wasteful. Bandwidth matters.

Re:I tried to complain to Adobe on their site but by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 07:04 · Score: 0

As if anyone is going to listen to you.

Re:Flash is used to cover up web designers' lack o by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 07:05 · Score: 0

Missie, not everyone has access to broadband. Or mommie's pocketbook.

Re:Flash is used to cover up web designers' lack o by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 07:09 · Score: 0

I guess you must be right, and all the studies done on web surfing habits indicating that web sites must load in six seconds or less or you lose the user are wrong. They should have consulted you instead. You are right, and they are wrong. And you are special.

Unfair Question by Eric+Damron · 2002-05-03 07:17 · Score: 2

"...but is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?"

No, of course it isn't. But that's not the reason it would be removed. The reason it would be removed is because parts of it were used in violation of patent laws.

The author's statement totally ignores that fact and makes an assumption.

--
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!

Hypocrits! by shokk · 2002-05-03 07:27 · Score: 2

"is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?"

The same argument can be made *for* Microsoft. Should Microsoft have to suffer just because that other crap out there isn't selling as strong as Windows? There are plenty of people out there who actually like it. Try to use your friggin brain in a consistent manner, folks.

--
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."

Re:Hypocrits! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-04 21:41 · Score: 0

There are plenty of people out there who actually like it

Try to use your friggin brain in a consistent manner, folks.

Using your brain is not often used in the same sentence as "liking Windows".

;)

Okay, that's too harsh. I can understand Joe Sixpack liking it in some sense, but not developers ... I try to avoid Windows porting as much as possible due to the clearly broken nature of it.
Re:Hypocrits! by shokk · 2002-05-05 03:32 · Score: 2

Do you think the world of computing is geared towards the people who make the programs or the people who buy the programs the programmers make? Which do you actually think is the bigger percentage? Sure, the programmers pay unreal amounts for the developer packages, but they each should very well hope that they at least represent 100 or more buyers just to cover their salary. And Joe Sixpack determines what the market bears.

--
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
Re:Hypocrits! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-05 17:29 · Score: 0

Do you think the world of computing is geared towards the people who make the programs or the people who buy the programs the programmers make?

I'd say both have an influence. I'd also say there is a heavy bias towards the producers. For example, if the computing "industry" were totally customer driven there would be no "this software is not fit for any purpose whatsoever, and if it breaks too bad" legal disclaimers.

It also depends entirely on the actual target market. If you're selling to people who, buy and large, have Windows, then you must cater to their need. You don't have to choose to do that, however.

The whole argument over whether people are really "choosing" Windows I'll leave to the courts ...

Which do you actually think is the bigger percentage?

That's a spurious argument, as I explained.

Sure, the programmers pay unreal amounts for the developer packages, but they each should very well hope that they at least represent 100 or more buyers just to cover their salary. And Joe Sixpack determines what the market bears

And JS is heavily influenced by what is made available. Not only is it more difficult to obtain an MS-free Intel-based computer, it is not widely known that this can even be done. (And there is really no viable alternative for the average user due to all potential rivals being OEM-ed out of existence)

But I digress. There will always be room for sensible computing, so I'll happily occupy that space and others can take the Flash/MS/Javascript/Other nonsense pain.

Adobe does have a competeing product by theolein · 2002-05-03 07:28 · Score: 1

It's called Livemotion2

Simulation/emulation is not innovation. by Ungrounded+Lightning · 2002-05-03 07:31 · Score: 2

There is a tendency, especially in the OSS/FSF world, to under-estimate the significance of innovations in software. While I am largely against the current patent system, my dislikes for it revolve around the duration of patents, and the inability of clerks to apply or monitor the requirements for innovation.

There is a single invention that, IMHO, constitute prior art for most of the offensive patents: Find a useful technique in the non-computer world and emulate it on a computer.

One example:

Real world: Record your customer's name, address, and/or credit card number. When he calls in and places an order, fill out the forms to bill him.

Computer world: "One-click shopping."

I'm sure anyone here could come up with a dozen others.

The point is that "automating a well-known process" has already been invented. Unless there's something NEW and NON-OBVIOUS about a particular way to automate yet another task, simply doing so should not be patentable.

The PARTICULAR CODE would be a COPYRIGHTable work, just like the words of a manual of instructions. But trying to copyright the program's operation as a "performance", or its interface when it consists of a straightforward clone of realworld objects or an obvious application of a standard interface toolset, should also be rejected.

--
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way

No, but it might due to the Apple Lawsuit by theolein · 2002-05-03 07:42 · Score: 1

beacause of the Sorenson codec lawsuit

Can't find any reference.... by YadaMan · 2002-05-03 07:46 · Score: 1

I'm beginning to wonder if there is any truth to the claim that Adobe is forcing Macromedia to take Flash off the shelves. I have seen no other news site the even supports the idea. Where did the info come from?

Movable Tabs... by gnovos · 2002-05-03 07:47 · Score: 2

Look suspisciously like MANILLA FOLDERS. This is not "innovation", it's just some guy who looked at the tabbed folders in his dek drawer and noticed that you could move them around, so he transferred that concept to the computer. Transferring a very common concept to a computer is NOT INNOVATON any more than the concept of reading words from a computer is no more innovative than reading them from the printed page!

--
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"

yes, it is by stonewalljack · 2002-05-03 07:47 · Score: 1

"is it right to take a good product away from so many people who really do like it just because another company's product isn't taking over the market like they hoped it would?" If I owned a patent and someone else used my innovation, I would be pissed off. I know you damn socialists can't understand it, but a BUSINESS is trying to make MONEY. Not trying to help the community, or just try to make enough to get by on. They are after profits, the bigger the better. The reason innovation takes place is because the creators know that it will make them money. They are not trying to give something to the community, or change the world of technology like you wish they were. Just my thoughts on this

It's easy to complain... by Hibernator · 2002-05-03 09:28 · Score: 1

...but have you ever actually tried to make a living by selling your own software? If not, then you are not qualified to comment.

UI Designs should be patentable by elb · 2002-05-03 09:49 · Score: 1

I assert that GUI innovations SHOULD be patentable (although I'd like to see a much shorter duration on all software-related patents).

When I was a CS undergraduate, I took the designing user interfaces course. ... Some of the ideas we came up with were great.
... New developments in the software world would grind to a halt. ... The argument that interface innovations that appear obvious now weren't at the time they were invented is I believe a poor one. A creative person can sit down with a pencil and paper and come up with lots of ideas for possible user interface designs - it's relatively easy for those people who have an inclination for it. ... The world would be a poorer place if all these designers patented their ideas and prevented other people from using them.

When *i* was an undergraduate, I majored in human-computer interaction and am currently an interface director and usability practicioner.

Good design is not easy. If it were, why would so many software interfaces be unusable crap? Good interface design is EXTREMELY complex (for most people: difficult) if you are attempting to design an implementable software system that doesn't require the engineers to figure out holographic mind-reading displays (or otherwise add significant engineering overhead).

Name a software product that you would consider to be "excellently designed" -- I can guarantee that the people who built it spent a huge amount of time doing user-centered thinking and design iteration. For example, the Palm Pilot. Its simplicity seems obvious; its functionality seems apparent. That design was the end result of a long process of prototyping, usability testing, and creative brainstorming.

THIS is why user-interaction elements and systems should be patentable. The entire process of usability engineering is to make things that are so effortless and that make so much sense to the user that the user doesn't have to think twice about the software -- they can think instead about their work and their job. Unfortunately, this requires a ton of work, observation, and effort.

Finally, sure, the world would be a poorer place if anyone couldn't go to my website, see a "Gee whiz!" interaction mechanism that someone has paid me to design, test, and build, and then-and-there copy the code into their own software system. Or does that just make ME poorer because someone is expropriating the fruits of my labor without my permission?

This brings me to another interesting point about open-source usability. I've long toyed with the idea of getting a bunch of usability people together as part of the open source movement to do usability testing for open-source software products, at the request of whatever engineers are working on the software. Any thoughts on this?

Re:UI Designs should be patentable by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 12:41 · Score: 0

Good interface design is EXTREMELY complex
I disagree. Good interface design should be simple and usable. Any complexity should be within the tool (program, webpage, car dashboard etc etc) not its interface. If the user spends lots of time trying to figure out how everything works, and struggles to use use it because of its "EXTREMELY complex" interface then the whole point of having an 'interface' is lost anyway.

I have always found the best interfaces to be simple.
Re:UI Designs should be patentable by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-04 05:08 · Score: 0

Aww crap. And before you think, 'yeah? What does the AC know?' it so happens that I'm also a professional interface designer.

Yeah, right, interface design is hard. Palm Pilots should be patentable. Nobody ever claimed otherwise; but there's one hell of a difference between patenting a Palm Pilot (which, by the way, was not a flawless design. For example, the Notepad on the Palm III had a limit of a few kilobytes, and no indication other than suddenly ceasing to accept input that the limit had been reached... In fact, I consider the Palm Pilot to be a solution looking for a problem - it just turned out that unlike hundreds of similar designs that failed, this one made it) and patenting a stupid little tabbed interface.

People don't seem to be able to tell the difference between a device and a single interface component. I quite agree that a software package might include novel forms of interaction, and I fully support the concept that the designers of that package have some kind of control over whoever copies it - but there's a big difference between 'Hey, I just designed this radically new and different form of interface' and 'Hey! I was the first person to think of using [say] colour highlighting on pulldown menus! Anybody else who dares break out of monochrome must pay!!!!'

Oh, and about copying your website - you just told us you were paid to create it. Are you trying to say that you expect to be paid again as though you had to go through the whole process of its creation every time somebody typed CTRL-A, CTRL-C, CTRL-V? You're no poorer because they copied it - they're richer. Unless you're being paid following the completion of the design process, based on the uncopiability of the site. In which case, your employers are stealing, and I would sue if I were you.

===

On the second topic, I'd really like to see usability testing on open-source software products - although, if you ask me, by the time the product is designed and built, it's a bit late.

What would perhaps be more useful is a bit of experienced direction in the design stages eg. task analysis - I'd say that a great deal of OS software is very well designed, from the perspective of the person who wrote it, but that person was almost certainly doing it just to 'scratch an itch'. Being programmers, we seldom have an urge to tackle other peoples' jobs and, without a competent design process, we never will.

Remember, one person's 'unusable crap' is another person's preferred interface.I, for example, have never enjoyed compilers with anything other than a command-line UI.... Whereas Gnome/KDE style programs selfconsciously attempt to emulate previous desktop incarnations, and therefore fall into the same trap as the originals did - they're based more around, 'look what I can do with this toolkit!' than 'look! The solution to your secretary's IT problems!'. Now, I would agree that a large amount of OS software shows trivial design flaws, such as lack of feedback, misplaced interface components, lack of consistency, obfuscation and so on, but it is important to realise that even if you were to eliminate these flaws, it would not make it, at the core, a good piece of software.

If we're ever going to actually innovate, eg. produce something that the target audience would appreciate, we have to start over from a very different perspective. And that's probably where HCI professionals could come in most useful.

I'm kaiidth, when logged in (kaiidth@OBLIGATORYSPAMREMOVALaltern.org)... if you go any further on the usability thing, let me know. :-)

Flash is a Joke by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 11:11 · Score: 0

Flash is such a cumbersome way of looking at websites. Whenever have an option of HTML vs. Flash version I always choose HTML... and the general public is finally catching on.

The Flash MX showpiece was a hotel reservation system that had so many bugs it was taken down, even though it generated thousands of visits a day. Flash is such a poorly designed software package and cumbersome development enviornment

A"dough"b sux by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 11:12 · Score: 0

that's why I bootleg all their products ^_^ . Good product bad decision making.

dough=money, for you laymen

File Formats and Programs by lostchicken · 2002-05-03 11:24 · Score: 1

We haven't used the original WWW app for some time, yet HTML isn't dead.

Flash will be the same way.

--
-twb

No low hanging fruit by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 11:39 · Score: 0

Look, the whole problem with patents today, and with the pressure on people to have patents granted (to their employers) on their creations, is that the low hanging fruit has all been plucked.

How often is something truly innovative invented, in this post-modern world we live in? Things that matter directly to the everyday person, I mean? Very rarely, I say.

But the pressure to get the same number of patents under your belt as a person in the previous generation is enormous!

Don Hopkins on Adobe's Patent Grab by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-03 12:03 · Score: 1, Interesting

He makes a good arguement that he implemented similar interfaces years ago.

Bring the champagne! by berimbau · 2002-05-03 12:15 · Score: 1

Finally I'll be free from the plague! The web will be a better place without 20MB flash intros and banners.

Can some Flash lover please... by RallyNick · 2002-05-03 16:33 · Score: 1

...explain me how I can set up Internet Explorer so it doesn't pop up between 1 and infinite number of windows asking me to dl and install Flash 6 (which I won't) on every page that uses it? There are three options dealing with this issue in the Security Settings, under "Download signed ActiveX controls". They are: "Enable" (which would just do it), "Prompt" (pops up 1 or more windows asking for permission to install), and "Disable" (pops up one or more warnings telling me the page can't be displayed properly since this thing is disabled).

If you succeed in this endeavor then I will revard you with removing Flash 6 from my most hated software list.

Re:Patents: Defend them or lose them. --- Bzzzt! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-04 03:53 · Score: 0

No its not, its NOTHING like a "defend or lose". Moreover, the confusion in the original post is obvious, as "defend or lose" is usually SPOKEN about for trademarks, and so people who actually know what they are talking about are intelligent enough to avoid confusion by not using the term for things that it does not even apply to. You CAN selectively enforce patents, you CAN ignore your own patent (and then wait for something to become common and then start enforcing your patent, witness .gif). Big companies do it every day, and its done to maximize profit. Its obvious from your post that you *were* confusing trademark and patent law, so why not just admit it?

Re:Bzzzt? If not the patent-holder, then who? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-05-04 03:59 · Score: 0

The guy made an obvious (and common) mistake (confused trademark law and patent law), and now he's trying to claim the argument really just reduces to semantics (which it does not), instead of just admitting he was wrong. I say let it go :/

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2002-05-04 04:13 · Score: 2

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Proof that NetBeans should patent theirs by linuxislandsucks · 2002-05-05 02:00 · Score: 1

Well, this is proof that netbeans should patent their customizable tool bars in their ide..so that then MS can be sued..

Is this how it goes?

--
Don't Tread on OpenSource

Re:gross assumptions by gregarine · 2002-05-05 11:51 · Score: 0

How the hell am I a troll? Everything I said in my comment is true?

--

I like traffic lights

Yes, patent laws need to be revised. by wessman · 2002-05-06 01:10 · Score: 1

This is just one more example of why U.S. Patent law needs to be revised, and not in baby steps. Any government dept. that allows for the patenting of a person's name (e.g., Peter Frampton) or graphic toolbars that a pre-teen could have designed ... well, you get the point.

Besides, I believe Quark Xpress and other Mac programs (besides Adobe) had those toolbars before Adobe came along and won a patent for them. Hmm, who's the real crook here!

Slashdot Mirror

Will Flash Be Taken Off The Shelf?

488 comments