Slashdot Mirror


Adobe Makes Products Harder to Use, More Expensive

An anonymous reader writes "This is a follow-up to an earlier story on slashdot about Adobe releasing their Creative Suite package. It seems that Adobe has decided to go they way of Intuit's TurboTax last year and add activation to their products. Legitimate users are up in arms. For Adobe, they follow the steps of other companies, macromedia, quark (who coincidentally shipped their entire engineering offshore) in the graphics biz. Now since in theory they'll be making more money, I hope at least the price goes down (oops, it did not, looks like the upgrade price even increased)."

616 comments

  1. looks like i am not upgrading by Cyberglich · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Perhaps if we don't update there get the hint

    1. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by xluserpetex · · Score: 2, Interesting

      who knows, maybe even they will get the hint.

    2. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by noewun · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Just had the same thought.

      In my opinion, Adobe's been on a slow, downward spiral for several years. Each new "upgrade" brings a few new features and countless bugs and problems. I can't remember an Illustrator release since 5.0 that didn't add some new, serious problems, including problems to the color model and handling. It's no wonder that most large organizations wait six months to a year to upgrade their Adobe products - let other people guinea pig them.

      At the same time, each release gets more and more bloated and takes an increasing severe performance penalty. I have spent a lot of time in Photoshop, but it looks like 7.0 may be my last upgrade.

      --
      I am a believer of momentum and curves.
    3. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      why do you care if jobs are shipped overseas? do you understand the concept of free trade? it benefits everyone even if you lose your job now. quit being selfish. thank you and have a nice day.

    4. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's always Paintshop Pro if you MUST go the commercial route, and for the tinkerers who don't use a lot of PS functions, there's always The GIMP.

      I was considering switching to Paintshop Pro anyway, and Adobe pulling this shit... Well, it's just another in a long line of transgressions that show they're assholes and deserve to lose customers. (Dmitry Skylarov anyone?)

    5. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i hear the new gimp version support vector graphics and all now. i think it might be an even more viable replacement for those not completly dependent on adobe. now if the could just give us the ability to dock the tool bars into the object window like most windows programs do the transition would be a little easier.

    6. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Loconut1389 · · Score: 1

      I'm still happily using 6.5, and even then I'd only be on 6.0 if 6.5 hadn't come as part of a package deal my company set up.

    7. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by zenbamboo · · Score: 1, Funny

      6.5? There is no 6.5 of Photoshop. There is only 6, 6.01, 7.0, 7.01. Sir, please put down the crack pipe and no one will get hurt.

    8. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by EricTheRed · · Score: 1

      Same here. I've upgraded once from Photoshop 5.5 to 7.0 (didn't like 6.0 when I used it at one of my previous employers) however I'm probably going to stick to 7.0 as the upgrade price is too much and I rarely use it these days (starting to prefer the Gimp instead although there are still some things that Photoshop is better at).

      --
      Java gaming nut - http://www.retep.org/ or for the rail http://uktra.in/
    9. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Nexum · · Score: 2, Insightful

      PaintShop Pro is not an alternative to PhotoShop.

      Truth be told, there is no viable alternative to PhotoShop.

      You'd be laughed out of a studio for suggesting using PaintShop Pro in a commercial design environment. It's like suggesting to a building contractor that they use Tomy's My First PowerTools Playset to equip their employees.

      --

      This sig has been deprecated.
    10. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Nexum · · Score: 1

      He's referring to Illustrator.

      --

      This sig has been deprecated.
    11. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by saden1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If Gimp is good enough for Hollywood special effects studios it is good enough 90% of the people out there. You over estimate the value of Photoshop.

      --

      -----
      One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
    12. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Shadowmist · · Score: 4, Informative

      GIMP is worthless to the commercial advertising and print field. It's fatal weaknesses are.

      * Lack of color profile support
      * Lack of CMYK support
      * Lack of LAB color space support

      Just one of the above is a deal breaker, not to mention the power editing features of Photoshop which have made it the Quark of image editing. If you're only doing web quality/RGB work then you can do okay work with GIMP. But to say that GIMP is a drop in replacement of Photoshop betrays an utter ignorance of the professional prepress requirements.

    13. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Maestro4k · · Score: 2, Insightful
      • At the same time, each release gets more and more bloated and takes an increasing severe performance penalty. I have spent a lot of time in Photoshop, but it looks like 7.0 may be my last upgrade.
      That's for sure, when I upgraded from Acrobat 5 to 6 (full version), the time to create a PDF increased 10-fold (literally, no exageration here), and it takes nearly 2 full minutes for the damned program to load, even to view a bloody PDF! Granted I don't have the world's fastest computer, but when a new, improved version works worse than an older one, there's something seriously wrong. In fact, I'm going to downgrade since I can't take it any longer.

      On the graphics front, I gave up on Photoshop and went to Corel Photopaint about a year ago. It loads much faster than Photoshop ever has, and the interface makes more sense. (It seems that Adobe changes the interface in each version of Photoshop just enough to introduce a new learning curve.) Personally I think Adobe's gotten way too cocky about their software, and product activation might be the straw that breaks the proverbial camel's back. I wouldn't be surprised if their sales drop drastically.

    14. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ones who bitch about activation are those
      who never intended to pay for it anyway.
      THey're pissed cuz they have to spend 3 hours
      combing serial generator web sites looking for
      the new crack.

    15. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Squareball · · Score: 1

      And let's not forget that Photoshop handles large images much much better than the Gimp. If you're doing print production, Photoshop is really a must. :(

    16. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Almost-Retired · · Score: 2, Insightful

      From the looks of it, Intuit sure got the message. The onerous validation procedure, and customers voting with their checkbooks cost Intuit at least 50 million last year. So its gone for this year. Too bad every company who thinks they are the king of the heap has to re-invent their own version of this square, rough riding wheel. Seems they ought to be able to read the history books without the company legal dept filtering their reading list. I would save them a bunch of money in the long run.

      --
      Cheers, Gene

    17. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Upgrading was never really a need.

      you can do almost everything with Photoshop 4 that you can with photoshop 7... sure ther eare some "web nicities" in there, but photoshop is designed for print and professional graphics, not the low quality internet graphics. so CMYK seperation, layers, etc.. are still there in 4.0 and you can use it to get your job done easily.

      same as Premiere and After Effects. AE4.5 and Premiere 5 are excellent video tools, Sure premiere 5 doesn't handle DV files well but DV files can be used with it with the right canopus plugins... plus the canopus titler for premiere 5 maes the titler in premiere 7 look liek a complet e joke.

      Personally, If I ever upgrade (I use premiere 6, AE-5 and filmgimp) I will switch to either final cut pro or AVID's DV lineup. both of which make premiere's lineup of software look like a complete joke.

      BUT, if Linux video editing and Effects software were at the level that Premiere 5 was I'd switch in a second... but, cinderella and main actor are very VERY far from being useable and stable.

      Adobe is not going to get any money from me ever again. because I dont need them anymore, so their tactics only hurt their position further.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    18. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Greyfox · · Score: 1
      It can be a drop in replacement for the average home user who just wants to add text to their home photos or something.

      One of the problems with the above is that there are patents in those areas. It'd be next to impossible for them to be implemented without someone getting their ass sued out from under them.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    19. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Safety+Cap · · Score: 2, Interesting
      7.0 may be my last upgrade.
      I can tell you unequivocally that 7.0 IS my last upgrade. As far as I'm concerned, I will never purchase another product from Adobe. Yes, this is a hysterical rant and I can be a vindictive SOB, but that's how I get when someone punches me in the face.

      Adobe has, in effect, said that they don't want me to use a program that I purchased to fit the way I work. They're greedy bastards. They haven't learned from history about what happens when companies get greedy . They've lost at least one customer forever.

      Let me explain.

      Over the years, I purchased Adobe Photoshop 4.x, 7.0, and Adobe Elements 1.0. I use them both at work and at home, as I refuse to buy into the BS that I must fork out hundreds of dollars for the convenience of not doing the uninstall-on-one-install-on-the-other dance twice a day (most EULAs are really 'end machine license agreements').

      Last week Adobe did an "audit" at work. Prior to that we had an email that said, in effect, make sure we have no unlicensed Adobe software. When I checked with my boss about my situation, he said as long as it was a licensed copy, I was okay. Well, Adobe had a problem with that. They insisted that since I was using my legally-licensed copy at a place of business, that the business would have to own the license in its name. If you knew where I worked (when referring to the company off-premises, one typically substitutes the word "cheap" for part of the name), you'd understand that getting them to crack open their wallet for a copy of Photoshop has between zero and no chance. For about 10 seconds, I toyed with the thought of selling my license to the company in exchange for some office supplies (trade in kind for a staple or a paperclip or something), but then I thought, "screw 'em -- I'm not giving up my license at home."

      So, here's my present course of action: I already uninstalled Photoshop on the work box and installed GIMP. I will use GIMP for the stuff that I need at work and Photoshop for the stuff at home, but I'm done with any new versions of Photoshop.

      --
      Yeah, right.
    20. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by dipipanone · · Score: 1

      THey're pissed cuz they have to spend 3 hours combing serial generator web sites looking for the new crack.

      Not at all. I've always found that the thoughtful distributors of warez via p2p invariably take the trouble to package the serial number or generator along with the app.

    21. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Perhaps if we don't update there get the hint

      And that is why Adobe put the "Remote Deactivation" in the previous versions. ;-)
    22. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Loconut1389 · · Score: 1

      Apparently 6.5 was a beta release that got renamed to 7.0.

      "What's Ahead
      In Dec. 2001, MacOSRumors.com reported, "PhotoShop 6.5 is advancing rapidly and a beta is planned to be seeded in the coming months. Photoshop 6.5 has many new enhancements added, among these are, a brand new antialiasing engine that utilizes the quartz engine in OS X, live transformation previews, and a new text tool that lets you wrap text around shapes. One of the best things stated about Photoshop 6.5 is its speed. With OS X's speed enhancements since the release of 10.1 Photoshop 6.5 is outstanding. According to my source Photoshop 6.5 will ship with ImageReady 3.5..."

      By Dec. 10, Adobe had decided to rename the software Photoshop 7.0. ImageReady's version number had also been updated to 7.0. See www.thinksecret.com for a preview of the new versions."

      http://thetechnozone.com/macbuyersguide/software/g raphics/Photoshop6.html

    23. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by bobbyt · · Score: 1

      I picked up 7.0 upgrade from amazon for $100us after rebate a little over a year ago. The price hike on 8.0 is enough to stop me from upgrading for a while. The new features are nice and might be worth $100, but not $170 :)

      I'm glad Adobe is taking steps to prevent warez kiddies from hindering profits. But if anything, shouldnt this lower the price? Maybe we'll see a price drop with 9.0 if adobe hasn't chased away all its business (warez kiddies included).

    24. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Volmarias · · Score: 1

      Even Acrobat is horrible. I particularly don't like the fact that it insists on loading up a bajillion different modules for every possible file in existance and taking two minutes to open a .ps file that ghostview would open in under two seconds. Whoever came up with the "Is it better to give or to recieve a PDF" advertisement is going to find themselves wondering "Is it better to give or to recieve mailbombs?"

    25. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Magic5Ball · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1. By the standard you gave, MS Paint is a drop-in replacement for Photoshop. Many things are good enough, few things are great.

      2. CMYK/LAB are not patent-encumbered. Any press/art text book will describe how they work, and free algorithms are available and implemented in ImageMagick.

      3. Colour profle support is a bit harder, though it is less of a requirement in many educational/semi-pro environments.

      -M5B

      --
      There are 1.1... kinds of people.
    26. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by jedrek · · Score: 1

      You know what... I really, really like the following functions added since 4.0:

      * multiple undo
      * history palette
      * layer folders
      * pattern maker
      * type-on-screen
      * etc.

      yeah, those are really web nicities.

    27. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used both Photoshop and Photopaint for years and always though Photoshop was over rated and WAY overpriced. The learning curve is just too high with each new release and interface just isn't as intuitive as photopaint. Granted there are some things photoshop can do better but the same can be said for photopaint. I've always worked faster in PP and come up with better results....its also cheaper and isn't as bloated

      What with this new activation crap....HELL, just use photopaint. I'm sure we're all getting sick to the teath of 'arrogant' software companies who feel that their software isn't expendable.

    28. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by a.deity · · Score: 1

      Me, I like Liquid Sky and Eelpout. Beats numbering, especially that "CS" stuff.

      --
      Option-Shift-K.
    29. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "That's for sure, when I upgraded from Acrobat 5 to 6 (full version), the time to create a PDF increased 10-fold (literally, no exageration here), and it takes nearly 2 full minutes for the damned program to load, even to view a bloody PDF!"

      I've gotta agree that Acrobat 6 is terrible compared to earlier versions. Now I've only used the reader, but it's like Adobe deliberately tried to suck the life out of the product and make it miserable to use.

      Their search function is broken beyond repair. Sometimes it finds nothing when the search term is obviously in the document. They instroduced this ultra-lame search sidebar instead of a dialogue box. And for some reason, when you're scrolling around a document from page to page trying to find some text after doing a search, it randomly changes zoom levels. No kidding. And they added some little text area in the top right that's constantly flashing text advertisements for reasons you should upgrade to the Paid Version.

      I have no idea why, but it seems like Adobe is TRYING to drive people away from their products!

    30. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > At the same time, each release gets more and
      > more bloated and takes an increasing severe
      > performance penalty.

      Hmmm, reminds me of KDE and GNOME.

    31. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 2, Informative

      GIMP has supported CMYK (colour selector and RGB conversion) since 1.3.17.

    32. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just checked here at work... 4.0 has multiple undo and type-on-screen.

      it also has *etc!

      so you are telling us that you CAN'T do your job without those features???

      wow you really are a lame graphic person. let me guess, you BS'd your way in the interview....

    33. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by willy134 · · Score: 1

      I agree that photoshop is over-rated and over-priced. There are many $100 image editing software titles that do about 80% of what photoshop does, and you can do at least 98% of common image editing with it. I don't think the final %20 percent is worth another $600. I could possibly imagine paying $300-$400 for it. They may have spent many long hours working on it, but is it really worth the extra dough--I don't think so.

      --
      Can you ping me now?... Good!
    34. Re:looks like i am not upgrading by OsamaBinLogin · · Score: 1

      I also upgraded to 7.0, from 4.0, which seemed to be suiting me fine, until I got my hands on 7. I don't use the highest-shelf wiz bang stuff, though.

      7 Will probably do me until this whole thing blows over, or by then I can move over to Gimp I guess. (Have they got a mac version?)

      --
      Marketing-driven companies end up over-marketing their products. Engineering-driven companies end up over-engineering
  2. EDU Price still good.... by TiMac · · Score: 3, Funny

    The EDU Price for the Suite is $399 (where I am, anyway)....so its a steal over the retail....activation or not.

    --

    1. Re:EDU Price still good.... by LauraW · · Score: 2, Funny
      > The EDU Price for the Suite is $399 ....so its a steal over the retail

      Hmm. A year ago the education price was USD $299. "Steal" is right, though not in the sense you meant.

    2. Re:EDU Price still good.... by kaybi · · Score: 1

      It used to be $299, and before that $249.

    3. Re:EDU Price still good.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At some point it just becomes cheaper to break down and pay for that week long vacation in Hong Kong, spend one day at the "mall" picking up all the software you need, pre-cracked for your convienence.

    4. Re:EDU Price still good.... by Yartrebo · · Score: 1

      [cough and gags]
      400 bucks is at least twice the depreciated value of my computer (750 MHz Athlon, 128MB RAM, Mandrake 7.1).

      400 bucks is the tuition for one of my classes, or books for 6 months, if I bought all my books and didn't sell any afterwards, or about 18 months of books the way I handle it.

      400 bucks is food for a year if I really stretched it (no meat, dry cereal, or imported fruits, only stuff like pasta, rice, corn, apples, grapes, potatoes, etc).

      400 bucks is enough for 9 months of cable modem service (which is shared by 3 computers, so for my share, it would be 27 months).

      And this is in New York City. I'm sure that in Bangalore, India (where my cursed future tech job is probably going), incomes are much lower, and 400 bucks would seem like even more of an outrageous price.

      I did try to run it (got a free copy off of P2P) back when my computer was running WinME, but it took several minutes to load and my poor 128MB of RAM proved woefully inadequate.

    5. Re:EDU Price still good.... by darkgreen · · Score: 1
      Yeah, but when you think about it - they're making tools for something that will earn you more money. you could argue that the books you're spending money on are over-priced, or your tuition, because you could use it for food or internet access.

      One of the things that I think people forget when looking at software like this is that it's a tool at the professional level. I'm not saying that it's under- or over-priced for the industry, but I do think that people lose sight of the fact that people in the industry make money with this software.

      you pay for schooling, you make money with the investment (well, in theory). look at an air-hockey table in a bar - it's not what you'll find in your local game shop or at somebody's basement game room - different requirements, different purpose. different ballpark

      if you don't have a need for it, it's a waste of money. If you're just making $400 a year because of Adobe CS, it's a waste of money. But if your living requires good tools, you pay for them. The quality is there for me. I'd say it's a fair price, and a hell of an upgrade path (you only need any previous version of Photoshop to get the /entire/ suite).

      but as anything, if i'm just painting the shed, you don't see me spending $400 on my brushes.

      (ugh, i actually just read that, and i need to wake up some more before i try to put a sentence together) =]

      --
      You don't need Geeksintraining if you're on Slashdot.
    6. Re:EDU Price still good.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? For 5 applications? Still, it's less than $100 per app upgrade price which is quite nice. But it seems people like to get paid but do not like to pay a fair price so that others get paid.

  3. Where's the slant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone tell me, should I love or hate Apple for this?

    1. Re:Where's the slant? by rworne · · Score: 1
      Love Apple. The activation procedure is specific to the Windows version only:

      The activation process is currently included only on the Windows(R) version of Adobe(R) Photoshop(R) CS software licensed to end users at retail. Photoshop CS software may also be a part of the Adobe Creative Suite or the Adobe Video Collection Professional version 2.0. If you are unsure whether your copy of Photoshop CS requires activation, please check the outside of the software box.
      --
      I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
    2. Re:Where's the slant? by Maxhrk · · Score: 0

      I am not sure, that if as if Apple mocking Microsoft for their activation type(My not very accurate if it is different kind). Probably because microsoft booed at their music online product, so their add it to it for window ONLY. I don't mean to troll, but it just assumption i want to speak of. :) Funny. Apple don't likes Microsoft anyway I think.

      Likewise, IBM loathe MS and will find a way to take a revenge on MS someday.

      Just my .2 cent.

    3. Re:Where's the slant? by Maxhrk · · Score: 0

      my mistake, I should talking about Adobe here. bah

    4. Re:Where's the slant? by BWJones · · Score: 1

      Love Apple. The activation procedure is specific to the Windows version only:

      Now, this is why you have got to love Slashdot. In-between all the noise, there are little gems like this that are loaded with concise information that is quite helpful.

      Please mod parent up and support consumer choice for activation free software by switching to OS X.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    5. Re:Where's the slant? by ncr53c8xx · · Score: 1
      Please mod parent up and support consumer choice for activation free software by switching to OS X.

      Wonderful. And how do you know that they won't require product activation there too? In fact, they say in their web page that they are considering activation for the Mac.

    6. Re:Where's the slant? by Bull999999 · · Score: 1

      Maybe they figured that Windows users will be more willing to put up with the activation procedue, as demonstrated by Windows and Office XP.

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
  4. Re:Free Mumia Abu-Jamal!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shut the fuck up.

  5. Why are users "up in arms" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the big deal about activation if you actually got a copy. I could understand for administrators who need to install it on a lot of machines but I imagine there would be something similar to XP Corporate that doesn't need activation.

    1. RE: Why are users "up in arms" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Yeah sure. I love the fact that everytime I do a disk format I have to get Microsoft's permission to reinstall my legal copy of Office, while the many people I know who just have a pirated copy can do whatever they want to.

    2. Re:Why are users "up in arms" ? by LoneIguana · · Score: 1

      The problem is, or was at least with TurboTax, was that the activation method they used was a little sketchy. It employed proprietary software that caused lots of headaches and strange problems. There were also concerns of the software containing spyware.

    3. Re:Why are users "up in arms" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yes, I just love it when I upgrade my RAM or hard disks and find my fucking LEGALLY PURCHASED COPY of a software requires me to call up some damn fucker on a telephone and swap 16,000 digit security codes for forty-five minutes. Guess what happened the next time it came time to upgrade the computer? Yes, you guessed right. I called Apple and gave M$ the middle finger. Now I dual boot OS X and Linux. Product activation. Hah.

      Bastards.

    4. Re: Why are users "up in arms" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yeah sure. I love the fact that everytime I do a disk format I have to get Microsoft's permission to reinstall my legal copy of Office

      and you reformat so often that this becomes a problem, why?

    5. Re: Why are users "up in arms" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should it matter?

    6. Re: Why are users "up in arms" ? by Mistlefoot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So I'm Joe Average user and I get home from work on a Friday to find out I've been hit by this nasty new virus. I spend a while trying to fix it, but can't. I call up my friendly neighbourhood computer shop who tells me he wants 3 figues to fix it and he tells me it may end in a format.

      I decide that I can backup my stuff myself and as I have disks for all my software, this isn't too big of an issue. So I format, install windows and with a new sound card find myself on the phone dealing with product activation. That's frustrating as it's past midnight and the phone lines aren't staffed as well as they could be.

      This by itself is frustrating......but imagine this is the norm....imagine I have graphical software, tax software, a few games and several apps...all paid for and all requiring activation. How happy do you think I'd be?

      As long as activation isn't the norm it's not too big of an issue...more of an inconvenience....but it has the potential of being much more of a problem in the not to distant future.

    7. Re: Why are users "up in arms" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "and you reformat so often that this becomes a problem, why?"

      what? you have to ask that about an operating system that self-destructs in 2 months max?

      idiot

    8. Re: Why are users "up in arms" ? by cscx · · Score: 1

      But since Windows and Office both give you 30 days until you need to activate, your "finding yourself on the phone w/ product activation" argument falls apart. Also, in most cases you just activate over the internet which just takes mere seconds so I don't really see where the big problem is. It's not really an inconveience either.

    9. Re: Why are users "up in arms" ? by lanswitch · · Score: 1
      I still use W98 on one of my machines. Has been running for over 2 years now.
      Ofcourse, one has to know what one is doing with windows, but it can be stable.

      Anyone disagree??

    10. Re: Why are users "up in arms" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YES

    11. Re: Why are users "up in arms" ? by lanswitch · · Score: 1

      cool.

    12. Re: Why are users "up in arms" ? by Vargasan · · Score: 1

      "Also, in most cases you just activate over the internet which just takes mere seconds so I don't really see where the big problem is."

      Connecting to the internet without updates?

      You are either very brave, or very stupid.

      --
      Putting the romance back into necromancer.
  6. yuo fail fag! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL pretty limp now I'll bet.

  7. Re:Free Mumia Abu-Jamal!!! by TiMac · · Score: 1

    Rot in Hell with this BS.

    --

  8. I for one by Bobb+Sledd · · Score: 0

    I, for one, welcome our new foreign software overlords...

    --
    "They said I probly shouldn't fly with just one eye," "I am Bender. Please insert girder."
    1. Re:I for one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      *groans*
      I, for one, would welcome new jokes.

      To get it off everybody's chest, whether trying to be funny or otherwise:

      "All your foreign software are belong to us."

      "In Soviet Russia, program activates you!"

      "Paying for Photoshop: Priceless.
      Paying for an upgrade: More."

      "Photoshop? Nice. But does it run the GIMP?"

      "<Beowulf - nuff said>"

      "1. Sell product for too much.
      2. Sell upgrade for more.
      3. Profit.
      4. ??????
      5. Activation!"

      And last but not least, one that seems to be gaining popularity:

      "Why is this news?"

    2. Re:I for one by Maxhrk · · Score: 0

      i reread this jokes several times now and it cause serious loophole laughter in me. IT KILLING ME! *cant help but to laugh more. Laughter continues*

    3. Re:I for one by Felipe+Hoffa · · Score: 1

      Sheesh... you must be new here!

    4. Re:I for one by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      You left out Natalie Portman covered in hot grits you insensitive clod!!!!

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  9. OS X Version by sailgreg · · Score: 0

    the OS X version doesn't have this junk!

    1. Re:OS X Version by synonymous · · Score: 0

      Yeah, My buddy installed Primere and some other stuff that he downloaded PTP with no troubles whatsoever on OS X

    2. Re:OS X Version by wo1verin3 · · Score: 1
      Actually Adobe products on the mac phone home and I was not notified prior to purchase. I own PS for Mac so i wasn't terribly concerned, just annoyed enough finding out after the fact that i won't be purchasing any upgrades.

      More Info...

  10. j00 FAIL IT!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All your pist are belong to someone else.

    In Soviet Russia, FROST PIST GETS YOU!!!

    This post has NOT been brought to you by the GNAA (cause they ain't gay and they're not even black).

    This post was NOT made using a Macintosh.

    This post is NOT low-carb or low-fat.

    You may now exit this post. Please lower your head and watch your step.

  11. Pirate Price still good.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Pirate Price for the Suite is $0 (where everyone is, anyway)....so its a steal (literally) over the retail....cracked activation or not.

  12. just like.... by _RiZ_ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    all the other products requiring "activation", someone will release a hack and there unbeatable, perfect scheme to get people to stop piracy will fail.

    There is only 1 way to stop piracy.....

    DROP THE HIGH PRICES ON SOFTWARE!

    Simple enough.

    1. Re:just like.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I own a 100% legit Avid editing system, however I downloaded a crack and use it on my system.

      The reason?

      If you lose the hardware key (dongle), or it gets stolen, Avid helpfully suggests you buy another full copy of their software to replace it.

      So I use the crack on my system and have the dongle locked up somewhere safe where nothing is going to happen to it.

      Just another example of legitimate users who are inconvenienced by additional copy protection.

      I'm sure Adobe is trying to stem the casual copying of their products, as it will do absolutely nothing to stop hardcore hackers from breaking the protection in the course of a few hours and releasing a patch for everyone else.

    2. Re:just like.... by Buzz_Litebeer · · Score: 1

      I know you are nidded 0 as an AC, but i often find myself doing the same thing, I use no cd cracks on software i have purchased legally, the software tends to load faster, run better, and perform top notch, and if i have to shut it down and restart... well that aint half bad.

      I have always been annoyed, especially when the CD checking algo sometimes didnt work! Like when i first got UT 2k3, it kept saying i didnt have the disks, as i stared at my 3 perfectly legitimate non warez disks, i went on to a popular hack/crack site, and was able to get a no cd patch, and it worked fine.

      In fact, I rarely launch a game I buy now with the CD, even the first time i install it, its just a lot less headache to go get the patches, then grab the nOCD crack for the game then it is waste time swapping CD after CD out of the tray.

      I though support the use of dongles, just not dongles like the one you have which only works for one product. If everyone could move over to a unified dongle such as WIBU new Codemeter dongle, you could just stick the dongle in and it would work after you had product activation, and it would work on your computer no matter what, even if you had to reformat.

      The only hassle is if you break the dongle and then you have to get it replaced, and the update stage there is handled all on-line while your new dongle is plugged in.

      I dont know, i just think the CD checking thing is not reliable enough, and current dongle stuff are evne harder to use (some software makes you plug the dongle into each hardware slot on your computer which takes time).

      its bad stuff, and its a lot easier to simply use a hack or crack than worry about using your legitimate copy.

      If they come and hunt you down and say "hey you stole this" and you have your 3 freaking owned disks, what are they going to do?

      --
      If you don't vote, you don't matter, so don't waste your time telling me your opinion
    3. Re:just like.... by littlerubberfeet · · Score: 1

      The iLok dongle system supports multiple authorisations...I don't know much about them though, having to only use one.

      I have seen tons of people do what you describe, myself included. Buy the legit version for the support (and ethics if that's your thing) and use a superior pirated version.

      --
      Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
    4. Re:just like.... by gujo-odori · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Absolutely correct, this PITA from Adobe will do nothing to stop illegally copying of their products.

      I lived in Viet Nam for a while and did some consulting there, and I noticed a very peculiar thing. Everywhere I went, installed versions of Windows, Photoshop, MS Office, Exchange, whatever, almost always had the same serial number. If a new version was released, regardless of any protection that version might have, a crack was on the street at CD shops in no time. People tell me China is the same way, and most of the stuff in Viet Nam probably actually comes from China, at least orginally. Then it gets locally duplicated. The better ripoffs actually have the manufacturer's art duplicated on the CD. The cheaper ones were just plain old CDRs.

      If you can't already buy cracked versions of this latest scheme there, I'm sure they'll be available shortly, and as with most anti-copying schemes, this one will only inconvenience the legit users, while bothering copyright violaters (those aren't pirates; pirates hijack ships, for crying out loud) not in the least.

    5. Re:just like.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure Adobe is trying to stem the casual copying of their products, as it will do absolutely nothing to stop hardcore hackers from breaking the protection in the course of a few hours and releasing a patch for everyone else.

      Yeah. They advertised it during the Super Bowl. What, you missed it?

      What horseshit...

    6. Re:just like.... by Jesrad · · Score: 1
      There is only 1 way to stop piracy.....

      DROP THE HIGH PRICES ON SOFTWARE!

      I think it should read:

      DROP [...] SOFTWARE!
      --
      Maybe we deserve this world ?
    7. Re:just like.... by Maestro4k · · Score: 1
      • Just another example of legitimate users who are inconvenienced by additional copy protection.

        I'm sure Adobe is trying to stem the casual copying of their products, as it will do absolutely nothing to stop hardcore hackers from breaking the protection in the course of a few hours and releasing a patch for everyone else.

      I seriously doubt it'll discourage much casual copying either, as the newsgroups and IRC will likely be full of no-activation-required copies within days. It happened with Windows XP, XP SP1, and even last year's Turbotax. When are these companies going to learn all things like product activation do is annoy their legit users?
    8. Re:just like.... by mutewinter · · Score: 1

      Its unfortunate that you can legitamantly purchase a license and the company could care less. It seems about as pointless as paying $50 for a pirated version of a $500 software title.

      The more convoluted a copy protection scheme becomes, the more disincentive there is for an otherwise legitimate user to follow the law. Break one law, why not break another, and so there is a cascading effect.

      It *really* shouldn't be easier to obtain and use cracked software than it is to purchase and use legitimate software. This is the exact reason the music industry is fucked right now. Napster was way easier to use than going to a CD store. Non-compliant CD copy protection scheme? Suddenly MP3s become alot more than convenient -- they become the only option. When the software industry does this, its more than just shooting themselves in the foot -- its shooting themselves in the head.

    9. Re:just like.... by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If they come and hunt you down and say "hey you stole this" and you have your 3 freaking owned disks, what are they going to do?

      In today's climate, prosecute you under the DMCA.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    10. Re:just like.... by ncc74656 · · Score: 1
      I own a 100% legit Avid editing system, however I downloaded a crack and use it on my system.

      The reason?

      If you lose the hardware key (dongle), or it gets stolen, Avid helpfully suggests you buy another full copy of their software to replace it.

      So I use the crack on my system and have the dongle locked up somewhere safe where nothing is going to happen to it.

      I do something similar with FineReader Pro...there's no dongle associated with that program, but the try-before-you-buy CD I picked up @ Comdex loads CDilla spyware (the same crap Intuit used with TurboTax, which was about the time I learned about the problems with CDilla). I had already paid for FineReader by the time I learned of this problem. (It's a fairly decent OCR program, actually...it did a better job of scanning in articles & programs from Nibble than most other programs I've tried.)

      Before my next system nuke-and-reinstall, I obtained a CDilla-free version of the program (probably ripped from a retail-box CD) and a crack from one of the usual sources. Instead of reinstalling from the try-before-you-buy CD and reactivating with the key for which I forked over a C-note (saved to CD-R when I bought it), I install the downloaded version and patch it with the crack. It runs the same as it always did, and I don't have CDilla phoning home from my computer.

      It's a bit of a problem when software publishers take steps that actually make it easier/better for people to keep using warez than to go legit...the warez crowd will almost always find a workaround after some (frequently short) length of time. Abbyy got my money once, but after this abuse of trust, it won't be getting my money in the future. I've already passed on one upgrade "opportunity," but I don't think I'm missing out on anything. I suspect the users of Adobe's higher-end products will come to a similar conclusion. (As for me, I only use Acrobat Reader...Ghostscript does a good job converting PostScript from the "MS Publisher Color Printer" driver to PDF. I could use GSview and have no Adobe software at all, but Acrobat Reader makes manual-duplex printing a little bit easier and handles some broken PDFs a bit better.)

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    11. Re:just like.... by Stevyn · · Score: 1

      Yeah right, drop the high prices on software and then complain when the jobs are being sent overseas to save money. Photoshop is a professional program, if you want cheap substitutions, then you have a bunch available.

  13. Re:Free Mumia Abu-Jamal!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't it about time someone pulled a Fr. Geoghan on this nigger already?

    Oh, and Adobe Sucks!

  14. Who needs it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Graphics pros buy it if you like, but for everyone else, why bother? If you just want photoshop on the box to feel cool, then steal 7.0 and be done with it. You are not their audience. If you make a living with the crap and need the new features, then upgrade and quit yer bitching. Maybe Adobe finally figured out how many of those boutique graphics shops were using one copy for every computer they own. For everybody else, Paint Shop Pro or Gimp it.

    1. Re:Who needs it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you know a decent replacement for Illustrator? Sodipodi is usable, but very lacking, and the others are less pleasant to draw with then fresh dog turds.

  15. Ummmm... by phillymjs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Shouldn't Adobe wait until they actually steal more of Quark's XPress customers away, before they start doing the same shit Quark did to drive their customers away in the first place?

    ~Philly

    1. Re:Ummmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? Where are they gonna go? Back to Quark?

    2. Re:Ummmm... by chartreuse · · Score: 1

      You seem to have misspelled "GIMP". HTH.

  16. Re:Free Mumia Abu-Jamal!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean he isn't free yet? I've had this goddamned bumper sticker on my car for a month now, what's taking so long?

  17. 3.1 95, 98 NT 2K XP? by Mechamse · · Score: 1

    Wow, this sounds like windows version modeling. Make each one more expensive and less convienent...

  18. New interface "features" by djward · · Score: 1

    I have not used it yet, but I hear that they have kind of dummied down the Photoshop interface to make it more consumer-software-like (eg iPhoto, PhotoDeluxe). Anyone with experience with this? 'Cause if it's true, I'm sticking with 7 anyway...

    1. Re:New interface "features" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wouldn't shock me in the slightest. Adobe has been shafting users with "upgrades" that are barely worth the discs they press them on and butt raping professionals with extremely high upgrade fees for years. Photoshop 7 was a prime example. Ooooo, coloured buttons and re-organized dialogs. That was worth the multi-one-hundred upgrade price -- but of course these graphics "pros" fall for it and suck the cocks of Adobe anyway.

    2. Re:New interface "features" by TitanBL · · Score: 1

      The interface really has not changed at all. Still looks like it was designed by a focus group comprised of librarians, accountants and a laywers. There are a few new features, but nothing exciting - stick with 7.

      You know, sometimes, I wish Apple would just go ahead and put photoshop to sleep. FCP stompes Premier, and Combustion make After Effects look like mickey mouse bs. I would not miss Adobe one bit.

  19. Is this a suprise? by placeclicker · · Score: 1

    Photoshop is one of the most widely warez'd things around. Plus it retails for a good $100 or more.

    --

    Browse at -1, because trolls are often the most creative part of /.
    1. Re:Is this a suprise? by Publicus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's widely warez'd, and I think that's part of the reason it's the industry standard. So many people get their start using photoshop on a pirated copy. If that weren't the case, I don't think Adobe would have the market share that they have now.

      Being bastards like this will probably do them more harm than good.

      --

      My Karma was at 49, then they switched to words. All that work for nothing!

    2. Re:Is this a suprise? by S.Lemmon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "or more" is right much, much more. Sadly, Photoshop has gone from being just "very expensive" to being one of the most absurdly overpriced pieces of software around. If it was *just* $100 I'd sure buy it - as it is, I'll make do with cheaper alternatives.

    3. Re:Is this a suprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US$649.00 Full
      US$169.00 Upgrade

      what a bargain.

    4. Re:Is this a suprise? by Txiasaeia · · Score: 1

      By your own admission, your argument doesn't work. If most people get their start on a warezed version of Photoshop, then they wouldn't need to activate the product. They would use it, and as time went on would become familiar with its interface. When they have a job or have the cash to buy the product, they'd be more likely to buy something they're familiar with and an activation code than another product without such a code.

      --
      Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
    5. Re:Is this a suprise? by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1
      hmm, everything in my business is pretty well "over-priced", but their professional tools and yes, we make money from them. Let's see here:

      Quick Books Pro for Mac - USD 300
      DVD Studio Pro 2 - $500 Soundtrack - $300 Final Cut Pro - USD 1000
      QuarkXpress - $900
      Adobe Web Collection - $1000 Discreet Combustion 2.1 - USD 1000
      QuickTime VR - $400
      Blender - Free

      Total: $5400
      # of Machines: 4
      Total: $21,600

      Amount of money my company made last year: $719,000.

      Welcome to the wonderful world of professional media arts. Granted, my company does consulting and marketing/advertising for small businesses and I didn't add in M$ office on all 10 of our company's computers. Add in another $4000 to that total for software.

      Now if your a home user, then chances are you can get by with PSP. The only boxes in our company that are not Macintoshes are our company file, and firewall/router, which all run from FreeBSD white boxes.

      Bottom line, Photoshop is not designed for "the average user". So about 3% of our budget went into software investments that yielded a return of 27x's the amount invested. Granted we also have 15 employess and after all expenses paid we only saw a $45,000 profit, but consider an average contract is about $8500 for our company and we get about 3 - 4 of those a month. These businesses expect that we have the professional tools and these are all quality tools and so long as the quality is there, we will spend the money. Its when we spend that amount of money and see a product line dropped, like 3D studio Max (which was $2500 per machine) that we get mad.

      The only OSS tool on the list is Blender, and that is because our rendering in 3d animation is limited, and Blender is one of the few OSS tools that make it to production/professional quality.

      We *could* use openoffice, but kinda pain in the ass since there is not a native OSX build. Plus we recycle units. These dual 1.25Ghz G4's will make from the video production folks to the graphic artists and their ageing dual 500 and 867 G4's will go to the secartaries and office workers and their old single G3's and g4's given to charity. Although we won't be getting in any dual G5's till at least first of the year...

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    6. Re:Is this a suprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      when i warez something i usually never buy it..

      i mean why when it is free.

      now i don't usually warez something but i know alot of people that do and have that exact opinion.

      my bigest problem with activation it when i switch it from one computer to another. i usually upgrade about 3 time a year to 2 diferent systems. how is that going to play with al this activation bull. microsoft already gives me shit over it. they even threatend to not allow me to reactivete once but i returned the threatend of contacting the states atourney general about them seeling the os as a fraudulent buisiness practice. i don't know if this scared them or if the next guy i talked to (they imeadiatly switched me to a supervisor) understood what i do a little better.

      now i will need to screw with this process in yet another app.

    7. Re:Is this a suprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yea....like it's harmed microsoft? (lax antiwarez policy, and in some cases encouraging it...only to bitch slap everyone years later after their product has become the standard...helped, in part, by distribution via warez)

    8. Re:Is this a suprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now if your a home user, then chances are you can get by with PSP.

      If your grammar is no better than that, you won't be getting my business. I don't want people laughing at my ad!

    9. Re:Is this a suprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you forgot: US$0.00 Stay with current version which does everything I need

    10. Re:Is this a suprise? by radixvir · · Score: 1

      I totally agree. Its the same with Microsoft. This is why they have such huge market shares. Haven't they heard of the phrase By Hook or by crook? If adobe/microsoft were to come out with some kind of method that made their software invincible to cracking(ha) then everyone who pirates copies would be forced to switch and use another program. and then they would buy/recommend that software they are familar with.

    11. Re:Is this a suprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      norton is using product activation in it's 2004 products...i am running 2004 norton system works pirated edition totally activated and the live updated does not expire until the next century...in other words the photoshop activation will be cracked and i will be happy

    12. Re:Is this a suprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Students and other beginners need access to certain "industry standard" software tools. They neet to get practice/experience so they can get a job in said industry. Once they have a job, the company will pay for the tools. Until then, they may not have enough access to these tools in computer labs or whatever in order to get enough experience to get the job, and since they don't have a job yet they almost certainly can't afford the tools necessary to get the job. Sort of a catch-22.

    13. Re:Is this a suprise? by .com+b4+.storm · · Score: 1

      It's widely warez'd, and I think that's part of the reason it's the industry standard. So many people get their start using photoshop on a pirated copy. If that weren't the case, I don't think Adobe would have the market share that they have now.

      IMO, Adobe should do something like Alias|Wavefront does with Maya - release a free, 90% functionality version so people can learn the tools. I can't tell you how many graphics classes I've been in where the instructors say "Yeah, most people just warez [insert product here] until they get their first gig and can buy it legit." I think it's ridiculous that a student should have to pay $400(!) for Adobe After Effects with the educational discount. There should be a free (or insanely cheap) learning edition for such software.

      The best way to get marketshare is to get the software into the hands of the students easily and cheaply. Then when they get scooped up by some company who wants to make use of their talents, that's another copy of Photoshop/Illustrator/etc sold.

      --
      "Wow, you're like some kind of superhero able to ward off happiness and success at every turn."
      -- Ryan Stiles
    14. Re:Is this a suprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do? Well, Linux and BSD and a lot of software are available for free. In fact it is legitimate to copy the software at will. So if Linux software is so much easier to get a hold of, why does Microsoft still lead the industry?

    15. Re:Is this a suprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      kinda like microsoft's entire product base, huh? ;)

    16. Re:Is this a suprise? by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1

      Well I have a tendancy to 1) Not give a shit what cowards say. 2) Not be at the top of my spelling game at 3:13AM...

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  20. Editorial? by BWJones · · Score: 1

    "This is a follow-up to an earlier story on slashdot about Adobe releasing their Creative Suite package.

    Follow up? What follow up? I don't see any new information, rather, all I see is an editorial ranting about big ol bad Adobe. Also what the anonymous reader who submitted this apparently does not know is that Intuit apologized and removed activation from their products.

    Now, for some real questions: Does anyone know if Adobe is going to require activation for large corporations or educational users? I myself am not a big fan of activation, but the thing I want to know is, why do not companies producing high dollar software not simply use hardware interlocks? They are quite effective, do not add significantly to the price of the software and with USB, they are simple as can be.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:Editorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe because most sys admins prevent users from using usb. See the last 1,000 windows worms for the reasoning.

    2. Re:Editorial? by The+Spie · · Score: 1

      Intuit may have removed activation from their products, but there's no comparison here to Intuit, which makes most of their money from TurboTax and thus suffered greatly from a consumer backlash, and companies like Adobe and Symantec, who have much broader product lines and can withstand a backlash against their products having activation, even their flagship products like Photoshop and Norton Anti-Virus. I personally think that activation is moronic and ineffective, but that's really true of any kind of rights management scheme that software producers have come up with.

      However, the original submitter is a moron for bringing up Intuit in the first place. But so are the Slashdot editors, which is the best reason why I think it was posted.

      --
      If using Linux is about choice, how come people complain when I choose to use Windows?
    3. Re:Editorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Corporations probably get site licenses. I work at a small graphics firm, and we have site licenses for Adobe products. I'd be curious to know exactly what you asked, how is that going to work with activation? What if two people crash their computers and I have to re-activate their software? Does that count against the site license seats? If the site exceeds, do I have to sit on the phone for two hours reading ten thousand digit numbers back and forth to some guy in India from that point on into the future?

      These companies make me sick. If I had my way I'd get Gimp on all the workstations. For what we use it for, it would be just as good (we do broadcast and multimedia, not print). But trying getting a herd of graphics geeks to leave their blessed Adobe behind, right.

      Fortunately for now, this isn't a "feature" on the Macintosh platform, but it is only a matter of time. Never underestimate the greed of Adobe.

    4. Re:Editorial? by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      That's great until you need to go out and buy a zillion-port USB hub just so you can run apps.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    5. Re:Editorial? by tftp · · Score: 1

      An average hardware USB dongle is sold to ISVs for about $50 apiece. I'd say it seriously affects prices of any software that is iself sold below $500. Business-wise, even that 10% overhead is significant.

    6. Re:Editorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i thought it was spelled adope

    7. Re:Editorial? by MacJedi · · Score: 1
      Er, do they really? Are you saying that USB is a security risk. I don't see how it could be any worse than a floppy, zip disk, or even CD.

      With that said, I'm certainly not a fan of dongles, USB or otherwise.

      --
      2^5
    8. Re:Editorial? by littlerubberfeet · · Score: 1

      My MOTU MachFive dongle from iLok has a loop for a keychain or lanyard. It could be easly attached to a security badge, just like those wireless RSA? laptop security transmiters.

      To tangent: I don't like dongles, but they serve their purpose, and far better then some authorization method involving an internet connection. I know people who refuse to connect workstations to the internet because they A-don't want to deal with security and B-have already deleted all things internet so they can store a few more minutes of audio or another frame of a Lightwave project on a local disk.

      --
      Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
    9. Re:Editorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Maybe because most sys admins prevent users from using usb.

      I think you meant to say that most sys admins *don't* prevent users from usb. If you meant it the way you wrote it, you must be completely clueless. How many mice/keyboards do you see selling these days that don't connect with USB?

    10. Re:Editorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there are lots of problems with dongles:

      - price
      - need usb on computer
      - incompatible with new OS versions
      - problem if software on central server with set amount of active instances allowed to run

      and, last of all:

      - program will be cracked anyway.

  21. boy... by jtilak · · Score: 1

    I'm glad I don't use Adobe software.

    1. Re:boy... by jester · · Score: 1

      i'm glad i don't use *commercial* software

  22. And in other news... by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

    ...software pirates just shrugged and mentioned that they'll continue to provide you with the Adobe software you know and love, for a price you can afford with none of the annoying activation features.

    "Up in arms" must mean "I'm getting the next version on Kazaa", no doubt.

    --

    ---
    DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    1. Re:And in other news... by Eric_Cartman_South_P · · Score: 1
      LOL. Nice post. Reminds me of when Homer Simpson was reading a pamphlet titled "So You Decided To Steal Cable" and Marge asks if they can afford this new service. His response was, "Zero dollars a month? Yeah, I think we can swing it."

    2. Re:And in other news... by spacecowboy420 · · Score: 1

      I love your sig - I once inadvertly subjected the neighborhood cats to a eugenic experiment with antifreeze. It sucked because my cat failed the experiment. I learned about antifreeze though.

      --
      ymmv
  23. They're not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its just people faking cause everyone warez's photoshop.

  24. I would boycott Adobe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But damn, I don't own any of their products. Microsoft Image Editor was enough for me, I am not a graphics professional, some stuff for the Web occasionally, and my own pics.

  25. For FREE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try alt.binaries.cd.images and alt.binaries.nl

    Two reputable places to get this software for free.

  26. Who cares . Use opensource. by zymano · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Learn to write your own damn software !

    Try Gimp.

  27. WHAT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WHAT?

  28. The problem with activation for legimitate users by tcd004 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I use quark and various adobe products for DP work and I have to meet deadlines. When it's 8 pm and I have to ship files by 8:45, I can't spend time troubleshooting an installation of a product that just went haywire. I don't have time to spend 2 hours on the phone with customer support figuring out how to RE-activate. (the activiation codes in quark are roughly 40 numbers long. 40 numbers!!!. Try communicating that over the phone line with a guy in india.

    My old solution: I have another computer with the same software installed. When one goes down, I drop it like and empty bic lighter and fire up the other one. No problem.

    With software activation, I can't set up this failsafe without blowing my department's budget.

    softare activation wankers

    tcd004

  29. Re:Free Mumia Abu-Jamal!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Oops! You misspelled fry. Here's the fix:
    Fry Mumia Abu-Jamal!!
    Hope this helps.
  30. Motivation for the GIMP by GoldenShale · · Score: 1

    Maybe this neverending stream of corporate BS will push people in the direction of the gimp. As time goes on it might even be cheaper for companies to pitch in and help developers improve something like this rather than deal with activation schemes etc...

  31. Intuit by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


    > It seems that Adobe has decided to go they way of Intuit's TurboTax last year and add activation to their products.

    I read somewhere recently that Intuit had issued an apology to their customers about that.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:Intuit by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      I read somewhere recently that Intuit had issued an apology to their customers about that.

      I read that too. Too little too late in my opinion, the damage is done, they've already lost me as a customer. If they'd recanted when people first started complaining about it it might have mattered, but a year later just doesn't cut it.

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    2. Re: Intuit by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > If they'd recanted when people first started complaining about it it might have mattered, but a year later just doesn't cut it.

      Presumably the timing has something to do with a sales cycle based on the annual tax cycle.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  32. What choice do you have? by Fjord+Prefect · · Score: 0

    The thing is, what choice do you have? I use Premiere all of the time in my business. I use Photoshop. There is no open source alternative (don't even get me started about GIMP -- yes, it's good, but it doesn't withstand the rigors of professional filmmaking). The only other serious option that my business has is Mac, but even there, you're using Adobe Photoshop! And the cost to migrate our entire system would be huge, even just to use Final Cut Pro.

    Thanks Adobe. Your loyal customers really deserved this. :p

  33. Fuck them... by BurKaZoiD · · Score: 1

    ...there are a million products out there that will create pdfs. XmlPdf is a quite excellent and robust one, IMHO.

    1. Re:Fuck them... by pixelgeek · · Score: 1

      Photoshop is a bitmap editing application. XMLPdf is probably quit good at what it does but unless it allows you to work on multi-layer CMYK bitmap images then the comparison isn't all that apt.

    2. Re:Fuck them... by eMartin · · Score: 1

      Adobe's Creative Suite consists of more than just Photoshop.

  34. Looks like it's time for OPEN-SOURCE alternatives by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1



    Yep, it sure looks like the open season for proprietory software products that keep on distancing themselves from their users.

    Will the open-source alternative fill the void ?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  35. alternatives? by xilmaril · · Score: 1

    Anyone know of any non-adobe windows pdf viewers? I've looked a bit, but I've yet to see any that don't involve cygwin

    1. Re:alternatives? by LucidityZero · · Score: 1

      Sure. I know of a bunch.

      http://www.slackware.org/
      http://www.redhat.com /
      http://www.gentoo.org/
      http://www.debian.org/
      http://www.mandrakesoft.com/

      You won't have to use Cygwin for any of those!

      --
      Sig.i>
    2. Re:alternatives? by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      Dude, he said: "non-adobe windows pdf viewers"

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    3. Re:alternatives? by lgftsa · · Score: 1

      gsview and ghostscript provide native win32 PS/PDF viewing. gv is much better, but it's not available outside X11/unix.

    4. Re:alternatives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you might have had a point if he had put "Windows" rather than "windows".

    5. Re:alternatives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple's "Preview" handles PDFs great.

    6. Re:alternatives? by Yartrebo · · Score: 1

      Well, all of the above support a windowing enviorment (XWindows, with KDE or Gnome running over it).

    7. Re:alternatives? by LucidityZero · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure these all support the use of windowing environments. If he had said Windows it would have been a different thing.

      --
      Sig.i>
  36. One word...GIMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are plenty of high-quality professional image editing applications out there like Paint Shop Pro ($99.00) or even better, GIMP (FREE!). Screw the greedy bums and the gold plated dildos they rode in on.

    1. Re:One word...GIMP by S.Lemmon · · Score: 1

      Paint Shop Pro has gotten much, much better over the years, and for the price is a passable alternative. Unfortunately last I looked Gimp was still missing features as basic as a k-line selection tool (which is odd as it has both a freehand selection tool and k-line drawing tool).

      Mostly I notice Gimp lacks features that most professional photo editors have, but may not be apparent from their menus (like tool variations that only happen when you hold a control or shift key down). The problem may be that programmers often aren't graphic artists, so Gimp maybe hasn't had the same kind of user feedback a program like Photoshop has had.

  37. Problems with product activation by FattMattP · · Score: 5, Insightful
    [I originally posted this on a digital video forum so I'm reposting it here on slashdot]

    I have a problem with product activation because it puts too much control into the software publisher's hands over how I use the software I've paid for. There are a lot of legitimate reasons to need to reactivate. I want to plan my software and hardware upgrades according to *my* schedule, not some vendor's. Fortunately, some companies are already learning hard lessons about product activation. Check out this story on Intuit: http://money.cnn.com/2003/05/19/technology/techinv estor/hellweg/

    The company I work for bought a program called Stream Anywhere from Sonic Foundry a while back. It's great. We use it on every streaming media production that comes out of our video edit suite. But Sonic Foundry doesn't sell it anymore and they were just bought by Sony. Will Sony issue me a new activation code in the future if/when I move to a new computer? Will they even keep the key-generator around for an end-of-life product? What if I upgrade my computer in two years and I need to reactivate but they can't or won't give me a code?

    We also spent $6,000 on a product to let us sync PowerPoint slides to live streaming video. When you install it and run it for the first time, it wants to connect over the internet to register. When we installed it on a different machine that we bought just for this purpose, I had to call them and talk them into letting me activate it again. This isn't an activation code -- it actually talks to their servers to activate.

    What do I do if this small vendor goes out of business and I have to reinstall Windows for whatever reason? Am I just SOL? I wouldn't be able to reactivate even on the same machine because of the method they use. This isn't as much an issue with someone big like Microsoft or Adobe, but smaller companies usually follow ideas of the larger companies. I could see in a few years where everything from big commercial apps down to small shareware programs require activation.

    Even with a big vendor, what's going to happen when they end-of-life the product? Will I still be able to reactivate PhotoShop CS or Windows XP several years down the road when there's a newer verison out? Or will they refuse to reactivate it and tell me I have to purchase a copy of whatever newer program they are currently selling? I wouldn't be surprised if it was the later. They have everything to gain yet the customer stands only to lose.

    Anyway, for what it's worth, I'm writing to Abode to let them know I don't like it and won't purchase any of their products that use product activation. Most importantly, I'm going to vote with my wallet (and my company's wallet where applicable).

    --
    Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    1. Re:Problems with product activation by _|()|\| · · Score: 1
      I don't like it and won't purchase any of their products that use product activation.

      I endured weeks of pain when a product activation scheme broke. In fact, it helped me to convince my boss to get rid of the software.

      I reluctantly put up with a hardware dongle for LightWave, but I will not use product activation; not for Windows XP, Office XP, TurboTax, nor Photoshop. I use Windows 98 at home, Windows 2000 at work, and Linux at both. When my hardware no longer has drivers for an activation-free version of Windows, I will switch to Linux full time.

    2. Re:Problems with product activation by Mr.Spaz · · Score: 1

      The small business I work for has already run into this problem once. We had purchased a very nice piece of software to handle our business phone lines and act as our voicemail system. The software used several hardware IDs to construct a "key" that you would have to send to the software mfg. in order to receive your activation code. Needless to say, we went through the hassle a few times of having to reinstall the software when we upgraded the system or when it crashed. A little over a year into ownership, we needed to reinstall again and guess what; the company had been purchased and the new mgmt. had developed a new product line. They refused to provide an activation code and instead suggested that we buy their new (costlier) version (no upgrade pricing, so sorry). We didn't, and instead opted for another, slightly less feature-rich but still functional product. Apparently we weren't the only ones, since the new Co. is no longer in business.

      Nowadays we're stuck with a certain public records access system that requires activation in a similar fashion. You can bet that we keep a vigilant watch for an alternative. As soon as we spot a good one, the switch is in.

      So your scenario has played out already, at least to my experience. Like you, I don't forsee any other outcome from other software corps. In fact, I wouldn't put it past them to eventually start requiring online-only activation with expiry dates, ensuring that at some point they can pull the plug on the software and twist your arm into buying the latest version.

    3. Re:Problems with product activation by robson · · Score: 1

      But Sonic Foundry doesn't sell it anymore and they were just bought by Sony. Will Sony issue me a new activation code in the future if/when I move to a new computer?

      Boy, you said it.

      I bought a copy of Lightscape 3.0 in 1998. Lightscape (the company) was then purchased by Autodesk, which slowly starved the product to death. So now the infrastructure necessary for product activation (which involved putting a serial number into Lightscape, getting another number back, calling a human being and reading them that number, getting yet another number from them, and putting that into Lightscape) no longer exists.

      So what does that leave me with? A $500 coaster. (And I was a poor man in 1998! That's like $1500 in adjusted 2003 no-longer-poor dollars.)

      But really, the worst part is that the product wasn't replaced with anything. There's nothing out there (that I know of) that does what Lightscape did as well as it did it. And it's lost in time because of a kooky, useless activation scheme. (Well, again... virtually "lost" because I'm holding the CD in my hand right now.)

    4. Re:Problems with product activation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      say it with me

      everything software is crackable.
      -olg h4xx0r proverb

      i have never found any popular piece of software that wasnt cracked. the new norton for instance has activation and 2 code sets. kazzaa has this up now and a crack.

    5. Re:Problems with product activation by blincoln · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Small companies (at least in my experience) used to be even worse about this than big ones. I guess they figured they had more to lose every time someone pirated their software, but some of them took it to ridiculous extremes.

      A few years ago I worked in tech support, and I thought it would be cool to set up an IRC server so everybody on the phone could "talk" to each other and pool troubleshooting resources while they were on the phone. The company I work for is very much against free software (because of support issues), so it had to run on Windows. I managed to convince them to let me use a free port of ircd for the test, but for the real rollout they insisted on something that cost money (and didn't crash every twenty minutes).

      I found two commercial IRC servers for Windows. One was very overpriced, and the other seemed like what we were after. It cost about $100 for the number of clients we were going to have, had support, etc.

      So I got a license, and installed it on a server. But hey, it needed to connect to the vendor's website to validate my unlock code. Okay, fair enough, I got security to open up a few ports for fifteen minutes. It validated itself, and then I noticed some kind of timer that said it would need to do so again... in a day or two. I emailed the vendor, and confirmed that yes, that ridiculously short interval was by design, and couldn't I set up some kind of perpetually recurring window to open in the firewall to allow the machine to revalidate itself? After I explained to them that this was not the case, they agreed to send me a file that would validate the app for six months if I put it in the install folder.

      Anyhow, it seems that the big companies are now catching right back up. Entering a serial number is one thing, but I'll buy an app and then download a crack for it before I have thirty dubious authentication systems running in the background on my machine.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    6. Re:Problems with product activation by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      I got lucky - My college had a deal with MS where you could get any of their software for $5. I got Windows XP, and since the version that they give out through the college always uses the same CD-Key, there's no activation whatsoever.

      -- Dr. Eldarion --

    7. Re:Problems with product activation by HungWeiLo · · Score: 1

      We also spent $6,000 on a product to let us sync PowerPoint slides to live streaming video.

      Can be done for nearly free with QuickTime ($30)

      --
      There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
    8. Re:Problems with product activation by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      But really, the worst part is that the product wasn't replaced with anything. There's nothing out there (that I know of) that does what Lightscape did as well as it did it. And it's lost in time because of a kooky, useless activation scheme. (Well, again... virtually "lost" because I'm holding the CD in my hand right now.)

      This sounds like an opportunity for an enterprising programmer - $100 = installable crack. $250 for a hard crack. Pool with 4 buddies and it's only $50. Geez, I sound like a streetwalker.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    9. Re:Problems with product activation by LaissezFaire · · Score: 1
      I've seen the registration over-eagernes before, too. My company has a perpetual license for a product, and the vendor expires the key every year. We asked him why he did that, and he said he wanted to ensure his customers talked to him every year.

      I guess he didn't mind that they were angry with him when they had their annual "chat."

    10. Re:Problems with product activation by uptownguy · · Score: 1

      Even with a big vendor, what's going to happen when they end-of-life the product? Will I still be able to reactivate PhotoShop CS

      So people running pirated copies of their programs might not be thrilled about this, but let's refrain from setting up straw men, shall we?

      From Adobe's Website:

      Q: What happens if the product is discontinued?

      A: Adobe is fully committed to honoring the terms of its product license agreements. In the event that a product is discontinued, Adobe will enable automatic approval of all activation requests for that product or provide a means to remove activation outright. In either case, the customer will not experience any change in software capabilities.

      --


      I would have to say that explosives are the most abused technology in all of history.
    11. Re:Problems with product activation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your solution was very creative. I was just wondering, though. Why not use AOL IM or MSN IM ot even Yahoo IM? I work tech support and that's how we communicate while on the phone with each other. Was this years ago before IM came out or am I missing something? I'm not being critical, just want to know. Also, are you sure that "pool[ing] troubleshooting resources" doesn't really mean, "hey, prairie dog up and check out the ass on that girl who just walked in"?

    12. Re:Problems with product activation by f0rt0r · · Score: 1

      He is looking for something with persistent chat "rooms" where everyone can see what every else is saying, and they "rooms" exist on the server whether or no anyone is logged in. With IRC, you can still send private messages to people, but generally most of the chat goes on in the "room" created for a specific purpose. In addition, there are all kinds of server/client side filters and security restriction available validate someone is who they say they are and filter out bad language ( well, mos t of it ) . Anyhow, if you really wanted to know, why did you post as anonymous?

      --
      I can't afford a sig!
    13. Re:Problems with product activation by FattMattP · · Score: 1
      So for $30 does it have a plugin for PowerPoint that will send realtime slide change information to the encoding server wich will encode the slide change information which I can then pull out of the stream on the client computer using Javascript to display the next slide (which is a PNG) in an iframe?

      Even if it did, my company is standardized on Windows Media Services so quicktime doesn't help me solve my problem.

      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
    14. Re:Problems with product activation by FattMattP · · Score: 1
      I believe that about as much as a politician's campaign promises. There's no guarantee that three years from now that promise will be kept. They could yank that web page and pretend it never existed.

      I don't make purchasing decisions based on vapourware and promises. I make them based upon the fact of what I get for my money *today*.

      --
      Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
  38. Re:Who cares . Use opensource. by littlerubberfeet · · Score: 1

    With all due respect, if I had to write the software that i use every day, i would be broke. Not all of us have time. I have to make a living. I agree, use open source when possible.

    I would gladly use open-source if there were an equivelent to MOTU's MachFive and Digital Performer. While a DP equivelent exists in Audacity and something else, it is not complex enough for my work.

    To tangent, every musician should get ahold of the Bosendorfer piano sample set included with MachFive. It's the most amazing thing I have ever heard.

    --
    Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
  39. Sorry that they've impeded your efforts to steal by mlazarov · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    What the fuck is this attitude? Photoshop seems to be the most copied piece of software out there, it was only a matter of time till they started covering their asses. They've been entirely too permisive, I mean a Photoshop 2.0 key worked with Photoshop 4.0. This post is probably born out of the frustration with there not having been a cracked release of Creative Suite yet.

  40. Sick of this activation garbage! by Cap-America · · Score: 1
    I'm getting really sick of this activation garbage. First Windows now Adobe. Now I rarely download software off the P2P I only do it if I need something for 1 project or to try it out.
    But even when I buy the software I still hate having to doing the activation crap. I don't even register my software, all this is doing is forcing you to do it. Users should have a freaken choice if they want to or not and I personally don't!

    Thankfully I uses my Mac for work 99% of the time and don't have to deal with this yet. Sadly my PC won't be getting upgraded to the Newest version of Photoshop now.

    --

    -------- -Cap
    ~Bommers, Why did it have to be Bommers!?!

  41. aw... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    not like it matters. all you pirates will just warez it anyhow.

    or maybe some of you oss zealots will code free replacements (not).

  42. How about the GIMP ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 0, Flamebait



    The GIMP is an alternative to Photoshop.

    It is free.

    With that unbeatable price, you even get the source code !

    If there's a bug, you can do the debugging yourself.

    Plus, if you think you wanna tweak the code to your own liking, you can do it.

    With photoshop, you don't get the source code.

    Plus, if you want a legal copy, be prepared to fork over your hard earned money.

    Also, if you find a bug, you can't do anything about it, because you are at the mercy of Adobe.

    So why are you using Photoshop ?

    Download GIMP now !

    You won't regret it.

    Ever !

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:How about the GIMP ? by PurpleFloyd · · Score: 2
      Kneel, Taco Cowboy.

      (taps sword to shoulders)

      Rise, Sir GIMP Pimp!

      Okay, the GIMP is truly great and a credit to the Free Software community. However, the industry standard remains Photoshop. People have a lot invested into it: all their previous work is in PSD format, and they probably have all sorts of custom filters and such. Also, if you want to collaborate with others, it's much more likely that they will have and know how to use Photoshop rather than the GIMP. While it's easy to get the GIMP, it can be confusing at first (just like Photoshop) and people don't want to have to relearn everything just to work with you. In short, the GIMP is a wonderful piece of software and is gaining on Photoshop rapidly, but it just doesn't have the same position as an industry standard.

      --

      That's it. I'm no longer part of Team Sanity.
    2. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Kombat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The GIMP is an alternative to Photoshop.

      No it's not. GIMP for Windows (and possibly for all platforms?) can't (won't) save as GIFs. That's a pretty big gap for a product that professes to be an alternative for Photoshop!

      It is free.

      Do you think the people who sell multi-thousand dollar ads using Photoshop give a crap about the $900 sticker price?

      The bus is cheaper than my car, but you don't see me on the bus, do you? I could wipe my ass with last week's newspaper, but I'll spring for the toilet paper instead, thanks. "Free" doesn't automatically mean "better." I could eat dirt for free, or chicken for a couple of bucks. Hmm...

      With that unbeatable price, you even get the source code !

      Do you think the people who buy Photoshop give a shit about the source code? Do you think they even know what "source code" is?

      If there's a bug, you can do the debugging yourself.

      I've been using Photoshop for several years now, and haven't found a single bug. The few days I spent fighting with the GIMP, on the other hand, it crashed several times. But hey! I've go the source code, and it was free! I can spend days and days fixing it myself, instead of earning the tousands of dollars I would otherwise have earned from the graphics I could have been designing! Surely that's worth the $900 I saved, right? Not!

      Plus, if you think you wanna tweak the code to your own liking, you can do it.

      Photoshop already has more features than I know how to use. I'd rather use the software as it is to create products I can sell, rather than donating my time improving a sub-standard product for free.

      With photoshop, you don't get the source code.

      Yah, that's a big deal. I think that's what's hindered Windows from gaining widespread adoption. The lack of source code. That must be it. Windows could've been huge, if they'd only included the source code.

      Plus, if you want a legal copy, be prepared to fork over your hard earned money.

      Do taxi drivers bitch about spending money on the car they use to earn their living? Do airlines consider stealing the airplanes to use to earn their revenue? Do mechanics bemoan the few hundred bucks they spend on their tools, so they can charge you $80 an hour to change your oil?

      Here's a clue: when you use something that costs $n to perform services that can bring you $(n*100) per day, you don't bitch about the $n. Saving the $n isn't even a factor. The only thing that matters is how easily and quickly it allows you to perform theh tasks that earn you the dough.

      You definitely don't spend your valuable time fixing bugs and making the "free", sub-standard product functional, while your customers wait patiently for you to take their orders.

      Also, if you find a bug, you can't do anything about it, because you are at the mercy of Adobe.

      We're up to version 7, pal. All major bugs are fixed. All minor bugs are fixed. We're in the "continuous improvement" phase now.

      So why are you using Photoshop ?

      Because it's stable, works, is affordable, generates money for me, has a wealth of published materials documenting it, is supported, mature, reliable, and well-known.

      Download GIMP now !

      Uh, no thanks. You have fun with your buggy little "free" toy. While you're busy implementing features that should already have been there and fixing bugs that never should have made it into the "stable" tree, I'll be taking care of your customers.

      You won't regret it.

      Spring for the professional software that lets you forget about all the meaningless things like tweaking the hundred-thousand line source code and focus on delivering what your customers want.

      You won't regret it.

      Stay in school, kid.

      --
      Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
    3. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh now you've done it, you've gone and insulted something open-source on Slashdot. I'm sure hundreds of Slashdotters are out of their seats now, fuming with rage that you just insulted the GIMP and it's ugly mess of an interface.

      ...and now they're sitting back down, panting heavily. (with apologies to Penny Arcade)

    4. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      We're up to version 7, pal. All major bugs are fixed. All minor bugs are fixed. We're in the "continuous improvement" phase now.

      OK. I call bullshit. :-)

    5. Re:How about the GIMP ? by ducomputergeek · · Score: 2, Informative
      Well said. I recoup the upgrade costs usually within 1 job. I am waiting really for the next version of Final Cut Pro to use 64-bit extentions and get a dual G5 and upgrade GoLive and then whole 9 yards with the CS suite.

      Around Photoshop 4, yeah, I thought GIMP could become a contender against Photoshop, but the GIMP I saw 4 years ago and the GIMP I see today look a lot alike, only today's can't save to GIFS (well can now due to patents expiring). There are some high promised about GIMP 2.0, but if it still takes 16 steps with layers to Bevel text & add a drop shadow that takes about 4 mouse click in PS, what's the bloody point?

      Again, nice job on that response.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    6. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then name a bug.

    7. Re:How about the GIMP ? by arvindn · · Score: 3, Informative
      No it's not. GIMP for Windows (and possibly for all platforms?) can't (won't) save as GIFs. That's a pretty big gap for a product that professes to be an alternative for Photoshop!

      Just checked on my linux box, it saves them just fine. Don't know about Windows though, don't have one. Can't see why it won't on some platforms and will on others. Perhaps it has been enabled after the GIF patent expired.

      Do you think the people who sell multi-thousand dollar ads using Photoshop give a crap about the $900 sticker price?

      That's true. However there is a large audience to whom $900 matters a lot. eg:
      1. Students
      2. Companies that want to purchase several licenses
      3. Most of the third world

      The few days I spent fighting with the GIMP, on the other hand, it crashed several times.

      Never crashed on me. Maybe you used a development version? (odd minor version number ==> development version)

    8. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GIMP for Windows (and possibly for all platforms?) can't (won't) save as GIFs.

      The LZW patent has expired in the US, and it will expire within a year in Europe. I know for many tools, they don't have GIF support enabled by default yet, but it is available as an option and will probably be built in soon. I wouldn't be surprised if the GIMP worked the same way.

      (And, of course, the official line is that PNGs are better anyway. You don't have to agree with that, however.)

    9. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quoth the poster:

      That's true. However there is a large audience to whom $900 matters a lot. eg:
      1. Students
      2. Companies that want to purchase several licenses
      3. Most of the third world


      Let me field this one.

      1. Piracy.

      2. Licenses get cheaper the more you buy. If your company needs multiple licenses of Photoshop to continue running, price is irrelevant.

      2. Piracy.

      Now, anything else you'd like to ask?

    10. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Besides how I put two uh...2's. ;P

    11. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      1. Students

      Two words: Education pricing.

    12. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but that was great. Really, really, great. I couldn't have said it any better. Bravo.

    13. Re:How about the GIMP ? by cc_pirate · · Score: 1, Interesting

      For every advertising a$$hole like you who NEEDs to kiss Adobe's a$$ and suck down Photoshop, there are a thousand or more people who just want to be able to modify some snapshots. GIMP ain't Photoshop by a long ways, but then again, there are about 3 guys who wrote most of the GIMP code, while Adobe has 300 or more supporting Photoshop (when they aren't out abusing the DMCA by suing Russian developers). Adobe is evil, and you contribute to that. Think on that one you professional a$$hole.

      --

      "There are laws that enslave men, and laws that set them free. " - Sean Connery as King Arthur

    14. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Assembler · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've been scanning, then saving several >150mb (uncompressed) images as JPEGs using v7 of Photoshop. Every 15t or so image gets corrupted. When I try to open it, Photoshop complains about an invalid JPEG header. No other programs are able to open the file.

    15. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uh... yeah, and the people who just want to modify some snapshots have no reason to use photoshop... OR gimp. Which is called that for a reason, the damned thing is crippled with one of the worst user interfaces every to disgrace a piece of graphics software.

      People who just want to edit some snapshots can use free software like irfanview to do what they want quickly and easily, or inexpensive software like PSP for somewhat more in-depth editing. Or whatever free piece of software came with their digicam or scanner in the first place, usually photoshop elements.

      So... like... shaddup. Open Office is fine. It's usable. It has a pretty standard interface. Gimp is just... an abberation that only a unix developer could love.

    16. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plus, if you want a legal copy, be prepared to fork over your hard earned money.

      The horror!

      Find it ironic that you used the words "hard earned money" while promoting a free product?

    17. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so explain why Photoshop is one of the most warez pieces of software around, Mr. Smarty Pants.

      Surely the people who make thousands on ad design aren't the one's doing it.

    18. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      while(student)
      if (price > $0) then
      student->ignore=1;
      do

      Real life. Free != Free+delta$

    19. Re:How about the GIMP ? by binary+paladin · · Score: 1

      Step 3 was Profit!!

    20. Re:How about the GIMP ? by nmos · · Score: 1

      No it's not. GIMP for Windows (and possibly for all platforms?) can't (won't) save as GIFs. That's a pretty big gap for a product that professes to be an alternative for Photoshop!

      Gimp by default doesn't (or at least didn't) ship with the ability to save as GIF due to the GIF patent, not any technical problem and at least on Linux it was still possible to get an add on to do that.

      Do you think the people who sell multi-thousand dollar ads using Photoshop give a crap about the $900 sticker price?

      No but I think that's a pretty small fraction of the people using Photoshop and when the rest are gone the sticker price is going to have to go way up to make up the difference.

    21. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Piracy is not viable for the third world or companies, because they intend to make money. If market is global, they are screwed.

      Freedom from legal issues matters.

    22. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      those are fancy arguments.

      highly exagerated, but fancy.

      let me ask you one question:

      How many of these "Photoshop BadAsses", which you claim can absorb the $n/yr with no problem, do you think there are in the world?

      Don't tell me. Cause you'll lie through your f'n teeth.

      The answer is NOT NEARLY ENOUGH to put Adobe in the position it's in now.

      People who don't need Photoshop's level of power, people who have no business spending that much money on a bitmap editor, and people who used it twice and put it on the shelf....far outnumber your $n statistical bullshit rant.

    23. Re:How about the GIMP ? by binary+paladin · · Score: 1

      Am I the only person that likes the Gimp's interface? Mind you, I'm using the current development version (which, ironically hasn't crashed on me once since I installed it months ago).

      It doesn't do everything Photoshop 7 does (I miss effects... how much I love effects) but aside from that it gets the job done and it's free. Given that I'm using heavy CSS and actually code sites to web standards now, I use my painting program A LOT LESS now.

      But seriously... About 1 in 10 people that I know that use Photoshop actually use a legit version. Almost no one pays for it which is one of the reaosns it's become a de facto standard.

    24. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      gimp on windows insn't stable. The window manager of windows isn't useful for gimp either.

      How stable is the macosx version?

      Gimp on linux with a suited window manager is brilliant. You can have ten copies opened in different workspaces. For different projects, or parts of projects.

      It saves .gifs even on windows. You just need to get the extra pack. Allthough the patent has expired, so if you are in a country where that applied, it no longer does. Maybe they have or will release a windows version which doesn't need the extra pack.

      Gimp is easily scriptable by a few different major scripting languages(scheme, perl, python, etc). Which is a major advantage for those doing web graphics. Lots of web monkeys know perl for example. You also have full access to the source, adding even more extensibility.

      So if a web/film/game monkey writes a script in ten hours which saves 1-10 of 50 people one hour a day, for one year. You have just saved thousands of dollars, and gained a competitive, and/or artistic advantage.

      This can be done with photoshop too, through plugins. But my point is that your simple formular is not as comprehensive as it could be. There are too many factors, and many different jobs/people to take into account.

      Some people use gimp, and photoshop and... Right tool for the right job and all that.

      Do you really want to do a standard drop shadow bevel, which everyone has seen a billion times? Drop shadow/bevel with little effort is available in gimp-1.3 available on debian with one command:
      apt-get gimp-1.3

      Gimp does have its dissadvantages, but some people make use of its advantages.

      anyway...

      Have fun :)

    25. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Lando · · Score: 1

      I'm actually having a few problems following this conversation, but still figured I could drop in my two cents.

      This is what a free market is about, using the product that best suits your need. RMS of course thinks that all software should be free, however most people feel that proprietary software does have it's place in the world.

      So if Photoshop fills this person's needs, he is perfectly sane and reasonable to use the product. There is nothing wrong with that at all. If in the future Adobe is not meeting his goals, he will likely download the gimp to look at it again... There is no "law" in GPL software that says you have to use it.

      As for the people insulting him, he states his opinions and why he made his decision. Not being able to save gifs though not a technical problem is still a reason to purchase commercial software merely to license the ability to produce gifs... There is no or was no getting around the license. It's no insult to the gimp that he doesn't choose to use it.

      --
      /* TODO: Spawn child process, interest child in technology, have child write a new sig */
    26. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Bryce · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do you think the people who sell multi-thousand dollar ads using Photoshop give a crap about the $900 sticker price? The bus is cheaper than my car, but you don't see me on the bus, do you? Spring for the professional software that lets you forget about all the meaningless things like tweaking the hundred-thousand line source code and focus on delivering what your customers want.

      Sure, assuming everyone who needs to use a graphics program is up to their eyeballs in these thousand dollar contracts, then yeah, invest in your tools.

      But this is like saying "There's no need for bus service since people who need transportation to work can afford a car." Some don't work. Some work but don't make enough to buy a car. Some don't want a car. Some aren't going to work. And a few actually like *being* on a bus.

      Today, creating art is not the exclusive realm of professional artists, nor should it be. For many, expensive art software is simply beyond what they can justify for their modest needs. But There simply aren't a lot of alternatives to Adobe.

      Without programs like Sodipodi and The GIMP, the choice wouldn't be between a car and a bus but between buying (or stealing) a car or not being able to go anywhere at all.

      As to complaints about the community nature of open source development, think about it like this. Community software is like going to a potluck at your friend's house. Instead of having to pay $60 for a dinner at a restaraunt, you get the food for free, but the catch is that you're expected to bring something to share. If you like making stuff, it gives you a chance to show off your skill. A potluck may not be as convenient as a restaraunt but can be a lot more fulfilling and fun.

      While I would love to see it be true, I doubt that software like Gimp, Sodipodi, Open Office, Linux, and so forth would ever completely replace proprietary alternatives. If nothing else, professionals will always need to have that edge beyond what 'the masses' can do, and will be more than willing to invest in obtaining that edge. But I think it is critical that we also have the alternatives freely available for those who can't have or don't want the dominant player.

    27. Re:How about the GIMP ? by LX.onesizebigger · · Score: 1

      I don't see what the big fuss about GIF is about anyway. Who needs it? Don't tell me large advertising firms use GIFs in their production. And if you're a professional Web designer, you should know damn well that PNG is a better alternative anyway (Microsloth not getting off its ass to implement transparency in IE ra ra ra, you shouldn't depend on that anyway).

      That said, I agree the Gimp, as it stands, is not a viable alternative. To the extent that you can work with paths at all in the Gimp, it sucks. Brush configurability stinks. No layer effects. Utter blatant lack of shortcut keys.

      That later point really makes the Gimp hard to work with, given the depth level of any useful menu items. Arguably, this depth level is needed to accommodate the paradoxical feeping creaturism from which the Gimp suffers so badly (while still lacking some vital functions -- herein lies the paradox)).

      The Gimp needs some basic functionality added to it and needs to have some design decisions utterly reversed, but most of all, the UI needs an overhaul. Perhaps things would be better if the Gimp was more of a collection of libraries for which frontends could be easily developed for the different environments. GTK++ isn't bad, but the Gimp's insisting on using old versions of it makes it non-conforming and awkward.

      I would love to see a Gimp with KDE-style configurable shortcuts and toolbars with an (Open)Office-style configurable menu interface.

      Yes, I know, I know. I don't know a lot about programming in the wild (though I am trying to learn), but I know enough to know that the above would constitute an enormous effort. I don't believe it is unprecedented in the realm of OSS, though. We've got the kernel. We've got the desktop. We're getting there with the sound and the games. Let's get there with graphics as well.

      --
      I for one welcome our new SCOviet Russian overlords to whom all our base are belong.
    28. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Trogre · · Score: 1

      We're up to version 7, pal. All major bugs are fixed. All minor bugs are fixed. We're in the "continuous improvement" phase now.

      Really?

      It must be cosmic rays then that keep quietly screwing up my multi-layered images then.

      And they somehow know not to penetrate my computer when it's running the GIMP.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    29. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Two words: Education pricing.

      Two more words (and a mathematical symbol):

      Educational pricing > State funding

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    30. Re:How about the GIMP ? by WoTG · · Score: 2, Informative

      And companies that just want to hack up a couple graphics twice a year... $100 something for Paint Shop Pro is a good deal for a lot of these people...

    31. Re:How about the GIMP ? by lewp · · Score: 1
      For someone who "only really started using Photoshop around the end of 2002" I must say you're about the most smug idiot I've ever seen on Slashdot. Congratulations.

      For the record:

      • You don't know anything about Photoshop.
      • You know even less about the graphic design industry.
      • You smell like shit.
      Have a nice day, kid.
      --
      Game... blouses.
    32. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What am I going to do with source code? I'm a pixel jockey - not a programmer.

    33. Re:How about the GIMP ? by foo12 · · Score: 1

      Problems with that:

      1) Students who actually need Photoshop (i.e., art and design students) are going to use Photoshop. Anything else in place of Photoshop is a career-limiting move.

      2) The company I work for has 16 artists. We just bought a 20 seat license of the Adobe CS through our VAR. We'll make-up the entire cost in about 4-5 days. (Note this is a relatively small company). The efficiency gains from one of the new features in Illustrator will actually make us money and save us time

      3) The third world is doing one of three things: i) pirating regardless ii) using older versions because of older hardware iii) having better things to worry about than computers, let alone Photoshop.

    34. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even RMS doesn't think that. He is against COPYRIGHT on code (which, when the code is called DeCSS is not expressive).

      The copyright on code is an imposition that is too great for code - copyright for a few years would not have started RMS looking for the GPL as an antidote. But, no. Copyrights for 95-150 years on code that has a useful life of 10 years is what we get

    35. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're absolutely right, that couldn't possibly be an OS or controller probem.

    36. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I regretted downloading Gimp for windows.
      It was shit. Every window and pallette has a taskbar button, lol.
      Its always seemed "ok" on linux but there is no competition there.

    37. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You stupid piece of shit. A polite "No, thanks!" would have been enough! But you prefer to kick someone who wanted to help you by pointing at GIMP into the face.

      I hope you'll never need to switch. Even when GIMP *WILL* catch up with the latest Photoshop hype.

    38. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i agree, fvck em all, i refuse to buy anything from Adobe, Micro$oft, and any other company that shows selfish greed to be more important over the human spirit...

    39. Re:How about the GIMP ? by WWWWolf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The GIF and TIFF plugin binaries are separate downloads, at least on Windows and Debian. This was because of the LZW patents. I'm not sure how future releases handle them.

      Regarding GIMP's crashiness - Linux 1.2.x version is rock solid and not even the mightiest powers known to humankind could shake its foundations, but Windows version is slightly unstable. (Not much - one or two crashes in a week, and it's usually only happening when I'm running out of disk space...)

    40. Re:How about the GIMP ? by KikassAssassin · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure about the Linux version, but with the Windows version, you have to install a seperate plugin that allows you to save as GIFs. Not a big deal.

      That said, I just decided I'd try out GIMP and see what it's like, since people are recommending it. The first thing I noticed is that it has horrid support for my Wacom tablet. I can't click on menu buttons using my stylus, and the brush looks awful when I draw with it (it draws as dots, rather than a connected line). Perhaps there's a way to fix this, but I didn't get a chance to look for one, because the whole program crashed when I tried changing my brush's blend mode.

      I downloaded a so-called "stable" release, so this isn't an issue of me using a development version. I seriously cannot see any kind of professional graphics artist using this program for more than ten minutes before giving up and going back to Photoshop. I'm sorry to say I won't be recommending it to anyone, either, at least not until it's been majorly improved.

    41. Re:How about the GIMP ? by oolon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think its great you pay for your software and you like the product you buy. What annoys me is when companies let people get away with using products for free just to increase the user base, cutting out other cheaper alturnatives which would have been tried IF people had to pay for the software. Sorry to everyone else here, but I am PRO product activiation. Irs about time people see the true price of the software they use, rather than getting a free ride. More people that try and use alturnatives the more "acceptable" it will be not to use the "professional" product.

      James

    42. Re:How about the GIMP ? by thinkninja · · Score: 1

      Very well said! A bit harsh, mind you but the GIMP is not the replacement for PS that every zealot claims it is.

      I'm not professional but my father does prepress for the likes of Pepsi on the east coast. All the shops that I've visited him at have the same set up: The latest Photoshop running on the latest Macs. There's occasionally an SGI station kicking around but he never uses it (except to play cds -- that got modded -1 Troll last time. sigh). I think they use *nix on the fileservers mostly (they were locked in a clean room at GammaOne so I couldn't look).

      My rather roundabout point is that the GIMP has no place in a professional graphics house. For amateur use it may be okay to have a limited feature set and bugs (to be fair, I haven't had 1.3 crash on me at all) but not when it's costing you money. I would love for it to be a viable alternative but it isn't yet.

      --
      "The number of Unix installations has grown to ten, with more expected." (Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd ed.; june 1972)
    43. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GIMP is a very powerful program, but the interface sucks big time. Why doesn't somebody fix it or just shoot it to put us out of our misery?

    44. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I would love to see it be true, I doubt that software like Gimp, Sodipodi, Open Office, Linux, and so forth would ever completely replace proprietary alternatives.

      I think this was the poster's point: for a graphics professional, tools like FS like Gimp that require additional effort and maybe even source code editing are not a wise business choice. The result is that the people who work with and on Gimp are people who's design time is not worth $1000/hr, but a mixture of students, amateurs, coders, and struggling professionals. These are the people who both define the requirements of Gimp and get those requirements implemented. On the other hand, the commercial software developers have people who are exclusively users defining the requirements for a completely other set of people who are exclusively coders. One can argue that the pro-coders who write Photoshop are, as a group, more effective than the amateur phtographers who tweak Gimp; or that separating the coders and the users helps generate a friendlier user interface (since the users can't be told to RTF-source-code).

    45. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      think they use *nix on the fileservers mostly (they were locked in a clean room at GammaOne so I couldn't look).

      How would looking at the steel case of a server tell you what operating system it's running?

    46. Re:How about the GIMP ? by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      The GIMP will presumably start supporting GIF once the patent expires in the EU and Japan next year.

    47. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gimp only lack one feature that a pressing house needs, and that is color management (you know, so the IBM blue stays the same color of blue, no matter what).

    48. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His x-ray vision actually erased most of the files on that *nix fileserver.

    49. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Cereal+Box · · Score: 1

      How many of these "Photoshop BadAsses", which you claim can absorb the $n/yr with no problem, do you think there are in the world?

      Don't tell me. Cause you'll lie through your f'n teeth.


      Come on, get real. It's a couple hundred dollars, not a king's ransom. If a graphics shop can't manage to make more than whatever $n is every year, they obviously aren't doing much business whatsoever.

      How old are you? Thirteen? Perhaps a few hundred dollars seems like a lot to you because it took you two months of mowing lawns to save up $50.

      The answer is NOT NEARLY ENOUGH to put Adobe in the position it's in now.

      Huh? Obviously there are "enough" people willing to pay whatever $n is to put Adobe "in the position it's in now" because how else would Adobe have earned as much money as they have?

    50. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Spring for the professional software that lets you forget about all the meaningless things like tweaking the hundred-thousand line source code and focus on delivering what your customers want.

      You won't regret it.

      Stay in school, kid.


      Obviously, if I work hard and learn from a pirated copy of Photoshop, I'll be able to work a testy graphic designer's job where I need to troll to sound like I'm worth something. I've never even looked at a line of GIMP and it does all the simple functions I need like layers and brushes just fine. Aren't I glad I'm not forced to cop an attitude like a graphic designer to make a decent living as a programmer? Given how many programmers like me use plain, old, original vi, you can't blame the tools. If you're reliant on that weak little Adobe crutch, you'll be obsoleted by a newer model sooner or later.
    51. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It saves to GIF with a plugin, fool.

      Oh, and by the way.. I'm the guy that egged your house this holloween.

    52. Re:How about the GIMP ? by JamesP · · Score: 1

      Agrred!

      I like free software and stuff, but sometimes it's plain ridiculous...

      GIMP is NOT a replacement for Photoshop.

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    53. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The GIMP is an alternative to Photoshop

      ahahahahaha, you're a goddamn LAUGH RIOT

    54. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Reverend528 · · Score: 1

      I use the GIMP on a regular basis for digital photograph manipulation. It's extremely stable. The only times I've seen the GIMP crash, it was running on Windows XP, which itself is buggy, and crashes. I also sometimes use Photoshop 6 on a Mac for a publication that I work on. When we were running OS 9, PS would frequently lock up the computers for no reason. Now that we're running OS X, it only locks up when we try to import scanned images.

      While it is apparent that Apple is attempting to make a better platform for graphics editing (though at the same time taking the backwards step of sticking LCD monitors on everything), for the time being, Linux running GIMP is the most stable platform I've found for graphics work.

    55. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Snaller · · Score: 1

      We're up to version 7, pal. All major bugs are fixed. All minor bugs are fixed. We're in the "continuous improvement" phase now.

      Not the least of which is a new mechanism that means you'll be a slave to Adobe for as long as they stay in business. How cool.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    56. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Snaller · · Score: 1

      >It is free.

      Do you think the people who sell multi-thousand dollar ads using Photoshop give a crap about the $900 sticker price?


      Probably not, since they are also amoral people trying to milk the moral copyright system. However if they paid a fair price, they could reduce the price of those multi million dollar adds to a more decent price.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    57. Re:How about the GIMP ? by stubear · · Score: 1

      OK, here's the endorsement from someone who has worked with Photoshop since v 2.5 and has a MFA in Graphic Design. While I don't agree necessarily with his overall tone, his points are rather accurate. Also, I'd like to point out that while Photoshop does not come with the source code, it does come with an excellent SDK and scripting plug-in that will allow you to extend the features of Photoshop quite nicely. Putting this stuff into the source code is not the answer, adding it on through plug-ins and scripts is.

    58. Re:How about the GIMP ? by stubear · · Score: 1

      "He is against COPYRIGHT on code."

      And what will protect software once copyright is removed? Licenses? Good faith? Fairy and pixie dust? Yeah, contract law is going to improve the system for the better. RMS is the most short-sighted, ignorant person I know if he thinks eliminating copyright is a good idea.

    59. Re:How about the GIMP ? by smchris · · Score: 1


      My wife's a company web developer. She says The GIMP isn't there yet, so I have to take her word for it. For my use, it is more graphics software than I need. But she has two points:

      1. Features. T'ain't Illustrator.
      2. Standard. It's hard to justify learning another program when it isn't the industry standard. Especially when it doesn't offer superior features yet.

      To her credit, I've seen her looking through the PeachPit GIMP manual, but if it wasn't for Win4Lin for Illustrator, Flash, and, to some extent, Dreamweaver, she wouldn't be running linux at home.

    60. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Nept · · Score: 1

      chill winston...

      --
      "Teachers leave us kids alone ..." - Roger Waters, Pink Floyd
    61. Re:How about the GIMP ? by flossie · · Score: 1
      And what will protect software once copyright is removed?

      The FSF view, as I understand it, is that nothing will protect software if copyright is removed. That is, after all, the ultimate purpose of copyleft - to create an environment in which free (libre, not gratis) software flourishes.

      Free software developers already operate in an environment in which copyright does not have any adverse impact on them while operating entirely within that environment (i.e the free software community). The abolition of copyright for software would just be an extension of this environment to cover all software.

      You may disagree with RMS's aims, but to call him short sighted is an unfair criticism. Even those who disagree with what he is trying to do must surely agree that the GPL is a stroke of genius - the use of copyright to undermine the copyright system itself in the long term (and entirely legally too!).

    62. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1


      That's true. However there is a large audience to whom $900 matters a lot. eg:
      1. Students
      2. Companies that want to purchase several licenses
      3. Most of the third world


      A) Adobe has educational licenses (as an example you can get the entire cs suite for 300$ as a student - thats well over 5000$ worth of apps normally)
      B) Adobe has volume lincensing programs
      C) Yeah you got me there. But then again - where do most pirated apps come from?

    63. Re:How about the GIMP ? by arodland · · Score: 2, Informative

      Asstroll.

      * GIMP, for every platform, saves GIFs.
      * GIMP has several features that I've been searching for in Photoshop for years, and haven't been able to find.
      * GIMP is incredibly stable.
      * I've only run into one worth-mentioning GIMP bug. Ever.
      * I use GIMP daily, and have never seen the source code
      * Photoshop is not "Continuously Improving" -- it's just continuously getting larger and slower. I find Photoshop 6 a good deal easier to actually get work done with than 7, and I can't find any worthwhile new features anywhere.

    64. Re:How about the GIMP ? by euler2323 · · Score: 1

      1) This is the problem with printing biz these days (I work at a newspaper publisher). Young people don't learn what they need to do to print something well, they learn "Photoshop", or whatever the new cool program is. If someone knows how to have color reproduce correctly on a press, they will know how to do it with Photoshop/gimp/corel etc... I work with a guy that is an old hat at color printing, no computer training at all. And he can take his knowledge and apply that with photoshop or any other raster image manipulating software. 2). You are right about larger companies not caring about the initial cost. But, having to work around bugs, having ads/art print like shit far out weighs that. And, Adobe being Adobe, we always have some shitty bug to deal with on EACH upgrade. This has gone on since we starting using a mac based ad layout/art design based system. So, the initial cost isn't the barrier, its knowing Adobe produces shitty software.This is where gimp, or anyother alternative will come in. 3)who cares

    65. Re:How about the GIMP ? by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      Why does it have to be an either-or choice anyway?

      Buy Photoshop *AND* use Gimp for free.

      Just because I have some high-quality ketchup in my fridge at home doesn't mean I don't accept the little packet I get with my fries at McDonalds, you know.

      I'm a big fan of Photoshop, and also a big fan of Gimp. I don't see this as strange, any more than I see it as strange that a person might have a car AND a bicycle. Or that I might have a $800 bike and still have a freebie beach cruiser too,
      or that I keep my late model Volvo but I also keep my aircooled VW. Just because the Volvo is a better, more reliable, more expensive, etc. car, doesn't mean I shouldn't keep the VW, does it?

      I get tired of people making these pointless arguments. You can either have Gimp for free, and not buy Photoshop, or you can have Gimp for free AND buy Photoshop.

      For whom is this a problem, and why?

      By the way,
      the few graphics folks I've worked closely with, have indeed used every feature of the Photoshop software, and have expressed that they did reach it's limitations. I don't mean anything personal by that, but the way you said that you don't use every feature of PS makes it sound as if it's got everything everybody could want, ever, which is not the case.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    66. Re:How about the GIMP ? by oconnorcjo · · Score: 1
      For every advertising a$$hole like you who NEEDs to kiss Adobe's a$$ and suck down Photoshop, there are a thousand or more people who just want to be able to modify some snapshots. GIMP ain't Photoshop by a long ways, but then again, there are about 3 guys who wrote most of the GIMP code, while Adobe has 300 or more supporting Photoshop (when they aren't out abusing the DMCA by suing Russian developers). Adobe is evil, and you contribute to that. Think on that one you professional a$$hole.

      I think your attitude is wrong. "the professional" explained that Gimp is not good enouph to replace Photoshop because time and convenience is money and he is right. One may wish for this to not be true but it is. You should be berating the "average joe" who pirates Photoshop instead of using the Gimp ("average joe" certainly don't need Photoshop and could do quite well with the Gimp). The user who needs to do things fast and efficiently with graphics to earn a living should not be concerned about Photshop like price tags for thier tools.

      --
      I miss the Karma Whores.
    67. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well played, sir.

    68. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Assembler · · Score: 1

      I've tried reinstalling Windows, saving to a different type of filesystem, even saving to a network share. I haven't had any other unexplained system problems. Also, the problem doesn't happen when saving in a different format.

      So, no. It isn't an OS or controller problem.

    69. Re:How about the GIMP ? by SynKKnyS · · Score: 1

      $99 each for Photoshop, Macromedia MX series, Visual Studio, MacOS X, Windows XP Home, and Codewarrior is quite reasonable. This is how much they cost at my institution. Office is the most pricey of all at $199.

    70. Re:How about the GIMP ? by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1
      I don't see what the big fuss about GIF is about anyway. Who needs it? Don't tell me large advertising firms use GIFs in their production. And if you're a professional Web designer, you should know damn well that PNG is a better alternative anyway (Microsloth not getting off its ass to implement transparency in IE ra ra ra, you shouldn't depend on that anyway).

      The very fact that 80% of the people DO use IE and it doesn't render PNG's correctly is the very reason WHY I don't use them for web stuff.

      I code to standards and use whatever is the most compatiable. Everything reads GIF's without a problem and Jpeg's too for Photo's. PNG's have their place in, but until MSIE renders them correctly and no major browser has issues with Gif's, I'm sticking with them.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    71. Re:How about the GIMP ? by LX.onesizebigger · · Score: 1

      As far as I know, the only thing about PNGs that IE doesn't do properly is the transparency, and GIFs are pretty inferior in that aspect anyway. Since GIF doesn't support alpha transparency, GIFs can't be layered and still provide proper anti-aliasing.

      As far as animation goes, GIFs are unfortunately the most widely supported format, but I haven't seen animated GIFs on a respectable Web site in years anyway... so I fail to see the use for GIF. JPEG, certainly, but not GIF.

      --
      I for one welcome our new SCOviet Russian overlords to whom all our base are belong.
    72. Re:How about the GIMP ? by Dekortage · · Score: 1

      If you're a student (or teacher), you ought to be buying your software academically anyway. Photoshop 7 is around $270 academically -- still not pocket change, but much better than $900. (Macromedia offers even more of an academic discount; you can get their whole Studio MX suite for $190, versus $900.)

      --
      $nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
    73. Re:How about the GIMP ? by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1
      Well, when you are looking for a transparent object. Example, one of our client's website has several differnet backgrounds for different departments, but they needed their logo to stay the same. Logistics made it much easier to create a transparent GIF and that has worked perfectly.

      We tried PNG first, and well it looked like shit in IE. When some 80%+ of the world uses IE, you can't have that.

      Now I have had professional photographers that we manage sites for give me pictures for the web in PNG's, and everytime I have to go into Photoshop and convert to Jpegs in order for the file size to be managable for dial up users.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    74. Re:How about the GIMP ? by LX.onesizebigger · · Score: 1

      I sincerely have to wonder what said transparency looks like given GIF's said inability to do any form of anti-aliasing, but perhaps you can enlighten me with a link so I can see for myself? (Reportedly, IE's implementation does actually support most GIF-style single-transparency indexed PNGs.)

      If you're worried about download size for dialup users (and good on you for that), please tell me you at least use PNGs rather than GIFs for graphics with continuous areas of single colours!

      Finally and admittedly, for photos, JPEG still is king most of the time, but you can achieve good results if you know what you are doing and don't use Photoshop. For optimising PNGs, use ImageReady and/or pngcrush (regardless of the type of image you are saving/converting). Really, though, other than filesize (at least in some cases) and the appeal of having one image format to rule them all (almost, as it only covers static pixel graphics), there is much less reason to phase out JPEGs than there is to phase out GIFs.

      --
      I for one welcome our new SCOviet Russian overlords to whom all our base are belong.
  43. Who cares, when there is free software? by Trolling4Dollars · · Score: 1

    Although many of the free programs that compete with the Adobe products aren't 100% comparable, they do an admirable job for us folks at home. I stopped buying Adobe software with Photoshop 4, since I don't have to go to print unless you count my Epson (which is great for the home photos, but little else). Now, they've bought Cool Edit Pro (and Syntrillium software) as well, so I guess it's time to start exploring Ardour. The basic point here is... it's not going to affect me or people like me, so there isn't much of a story here... Especially considering that the best folks on /. are very much like me. Spread that free software goodness mates.

  44. Re:Who cares . Use opensource. by 24-bit+Voxel · · Score: 1

    While I admire your spirit, tying to code something as complex as Photoshop by yourself is laughable. Vox

  45. Re:Adobe R0x0rz m4h b0x0rz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    H0w 4b0u7 y0u ju57 5hu7 7h3 fuck up 4nd 60 5uck 4 d1ck? Qu17 |y1n6 4b0u7 7h3 b33r 4nd 73|| 7h3 7ru7h - y0u'r3 b0r3d, 47 y0ur fr47h0u53, 4nd 4ch1n6 70 5uck 50m3 fr47b0y c0ck.

  46. Not Just CS by KagatoLNX · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I recently felt really good about deploying Acrobat 5.0 with a customer for in-house forms work. Basically, they had 45 people. 2 stations had Acrobat so they could make forms, everyone had the free reader, and the 10 few who needed to save or sign forms had the $50 Acrobat Approval. This worked wonderful, was affordable, and I could feel good about PDF as an "open" format.

    So what happened? Acrobat 6.0 came out. Sure enough, they left out Approval. Their customer service tells me to either get Adobe Acrobat Elements (1000 licenses or more only!) or "upgrade" to Acrobat 6.0 (mind you, they have a Standard or Professional version now). So I just went from:

    2x$250 + 10x$50 = $1000

    to

    12x$250 = $3000

    That was not cool and makes me look like a dork for recommending Adobe as being somehow "more open" than, say, MS Word. To this day, they won't even say that there will be no Approval version. All I want is for them to say "we don't plan on it" so that I can just tell my customers to abandon it--they won't even do that. They just say "stay tuned to the website for the next exciting release".

    This mentality makes me wonder when PDF will become a closed format.

    Adobe is plummeting rapidly on my list.

    --
    I think Mauve has the most RAM. --PHB (Dilbert Comic)
    1. Re:Not Just CS by gblues · · Score: 1

      Acrobat 6.0 Pro can export to a 5.x compatible PDF that can be worked on by your existing Approval users.

      Nathan

    2. Re:Not Just CS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are complaining about a $2000 price licensing cost difference?!?!??! That's a fraction of what that company would pay even the lowliest of admin assistants.

    3. Re:Not Just CS by RedWizzard · · Score: 1

      Why do you need to upgrade to Acrobat 6? Has Acrobat 5 suddenly stopped working?

    4. Re:Not Just CS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Approval was phased out because Reader 6.0 has the same save / sign features. Basically, Adobe actually LISTENED to their customers #1 complaint (reader users not able to save form data, only submit to servers), and gave more control to the author as to what can be saved / edited.

    5. Re:Not Just CS by smarthippy · · Score: 1

      Adobe licensing: $1000
      After reshuffle and markup: $3000
      OpenOffice.org one-click-export-to-pdf: $0 I mean, Priceless.

    6. Re:Not Just CS by Snaller · · Score: 1

      Its still amoral.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    7. Re:Not Just CS by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      so my question is ... why the hell MUST you upgrade to 6.0?

      if 5.0 is working fine for them then leave it alone.

      this "ooohhh shiney new number! must have it" mentality with users and IT people is mind blowing...

      leave it alone, tell the customer to leave it at 5.0 and call it good upgrade the readers only.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    8. Re:Not Just CS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice rationalization. With a dash of ?!?!? garbage you really rise above your 12 year old brain.

    9. Re:Not Just CS by evilviper · · Score: 1
      This mentality makes me wonder when PDF will become a closed format.

      PDF is a published format, and there are plenty of open source programs (such as ghostscript) that allow creation of PDFs.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    10. Re:Not Just CS by KagatoLNX · · Score: 1

      Uhhhh, try it.

      I sure as heck can't get it to save it. In fact, as soon as I hit save, it pops up a box WARNING me that it won't be saved and that I need to upgrade to standard.

      --
      I think Mauve has the most RAM. --PHB (Dilbert Comic)
    11. Re:Not Just CS by KagatoLNX · · Score: 1

      Right now, yes.

      When Adobe's revenue stream gets smaller, what stops them from forking the format into something that is "open" but patent encumbered?

      Nothing.

      It just points to the problem of an Open standard depending on the goodwill of a publically traded company.

      --
      I think Mauve has the most RAM. --PHB (Dilbert Comic)
    12. Re:Not Just CS by rhadamanthus · · Score: 1

      pdf995 will make you very happy. Google it.

      --
      Slashdot needs to interview Natalie Portman.
    13. Re:Not Just CS by evilviper · · Score: 1
      what stops them from forking the format into something that is "open" but patent encumbered?

      What stops anybody from doing the same? (Not just Adobe)

      Nothing.

      It works out just fine really. People want compatibility, and won't buy a product that works only with an incompatible format. It works with all open protocols.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  47. Legitimate users are up in arms... by fafalone · · Score: 1

    and non-legitimate users are not at all concerned because a crack for the activation system will become available quite quickly.
    Good call Adobe.

  48. Re:Free Mumia Abu-Jamal!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well damn, here I am a canibal and I am fucking starving... So I got really excited about eating some free Mumia Abu-Jamal but wouldn't you know it, he's going to be prepared fried. I've got my waistline to think about, damnit! Kinda makes you long for the days of tying prisoners to a log and roasting them over an open flame. Yum. Sigh...

  49. what about the mac version by b17bmbr · · Score: 1

    from the website:

    "Product activation applies only to the individual retail version of Photoshop CS for Windows...". there's no mention of the os x version. hmmm...

    --
    My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
  50. Funny!!! by Rick+and+Roll · · Score: 1

    This is funny, because it's making fun of how much apple stuff is talked about on slashdot. It's totally unrelated. A joke guys, get it?

  51. Adobe Photoshop Elements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you referring to Adobe Photoshop Elements? Its $99 and you can probably get it for less with rebates or online stores. It isn't as full featured as the regular Adobe Photoshop, but it does have a dummied down interface. It also does image correction automatically.

  52. I'm sure cracks will we available soon... by baywulf · · Score: 1

    so the only people who suffer are legitimate users.

    1. Re:I'm sure cracks will we available soon... by DarkEdgeX · · Score: 1

      Yeah, product activation ranks right up there with gun control laws in my mind. The only people who have the guns after you implement and enforce gun control laws are the criminals.

      In this case, as you say, the only people who don't have to activate are the very people the activation is supposed to be suppressing.

      --
      All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
  53. What drove me to Mac in the first place by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1
    I used to beta test M$ Office packages, then I got Office XP beta, which required registration. No biggy, not uncommon for Beta products they want in the hands of certain people. (I was the IT advisor for a company at the time). Well then Office XP was released and I installed on my laptop. Only problem, I never used my laptop to get online because it didn't have an ethernet card. So I had to call M% and get a registration number.

    I saw where everything XP was going that direction and decided, "I don't like this", so when it came time to replace my laptop, I bought this iBook.

    Now Photoshop is the most pirated software on the face of the earth. When I was in college, EVERYONE had it. Granted my school Drury College had a good architecture school and the archies needed the program, but given the private school cost, could barely afford tution, books, and art supples, let alone even the EDU priced stuff.

    Real world: we use Photoshop nearly everyday to help design web images and other artwork along with GoLive. Video editing, well we have one machine with Final Cut Pro 3, but 90% of the time we use iMovie & QT pro for importing client's movies for conversion to web.

    We are still debating whether to purchase a couple dual G5's and upgrade to CS, but I don't think we will. Most of out boxes are a little of a year old and dual 1.25Ghz G4's with 1GB or 2GB of ram.

    I think honestly we will wait until some more 64-bit apps, like a new version of FCP and some other tools, before we take the plundge. And this really brings it into question because if we upgrade now, then ditch these machine in say 6 months, reinstall, how much of a pain in the ass will it be to reinstall our copies of PS 6 or 7 then apply the upgrades?

    --
    "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  54. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by gblues · · Score: 2, Informative

    Err, no.

    Adobe lets you activate on two computers. In fact, most Adobe licenses allow you to use their software on a "primary" and a "secondary" computer, as long as you don't use it at the same time on both machines.

    Sheesh, talk about overreacting..

    Nathan

  55. Have to admit it's moving me that way by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I am thinking about buying CS, mostly for the new 16-bit editing features. Even though I am running a Mac (which lacks this activation) I'm not sure I want to buy into the product knowing that activation is not far off in the distance for the Mac either. So, I'm going to check out CinePaint (formerly FilmGimp) to see how well that meets my needs.

    Of course, I'll have to run CinePaint in X11 for a while as it seems a long time until an Aqua interface is planned.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Have to admit it's moving me that way by sxpert · · Score: 1

      that's where the X11 server on MacOS X 10.3 comes into play ;)

  56. Here's another word: SHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Face it, Gimp ain't no PhotoShop.

    Sure, Gimp competes will with similar-level apps: mspaint and photo editor (both free with Windows) but as an editor as a whole, Gimp is a piece of shit.

    1. Re:Here's another word: SHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shuft the FUCK up. How about you LEARN how to use the software before flamign it. I find GIMP EXTREMELY usable and EXTREMELY powerful. READ, BITCH, READ!

  57. not suprising by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    Adobe probably has the most widely pirated software in the world. I mean it seems like everyone has a pirated copy of Photoshop at least.

    But that doesn't necessarily mean that all those people would convert to paying customers, after all not too many people could justify the $800 price tag required, and would either find a cracked version, or move to the GIMP.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:not suprising by afidel · · Score: 1

      or more likely Painst Shop Pro. PSP Has 90+% of the features of Photoshop and basically all of the ones that anyone who is not a pro will use. Not only that but it's cheaper than even the Lite version of Photoshop.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    2. Re:not suprising by scottgfx · · Score: 1

      Paint Shop Pro? Yuck! I would rather go back to DeluxePaint on the Amiga. I would like to know more about the Paint application developed by NYIT back in the '70's. The Ampex AVA was based on it's code, but I haven't found a direct descendent.

      --
      It's mandatory to wash your hands before returning to the land of Dairy Queen.
    3. Re:not suprising by Dj · · Score: 1

      And for many people using it, they'd be just fine and dandy with Photoshop Elements for $99....

      --
      "You know you want me baby!" - Crow T Robot
  58. Re:Sorry that they've SLOWED MY efforts to steal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There will be a cracked version on the web soon enough. Until then, I will stick with what I have. I will pay for an upgrade, then crack it. Fuck re-activation. I have had to re-activate XP over the phone 3 times now.

  59. Mass Insanity by soundofthemoon · · Score: 1

    Macromedia's recently released Studio MX also uses product activation.

    The RIAA, MPAA, and now software vendors are going crazy! I wouldn't hesitate to plunk down $50 for Studio MX, but $900 (or $500 for the upgrade) is just complete bunk. I don't make money on my personal web hacking. Why don't software companies get real and offer hobbyist pricing? Or even reasonable pricing across the board, there's a thought.

    1. Re:Mass Insanity by tftp · · Score: 1
      It costs more than $50 to make the box with a CD, to ship it to stores, and to sell it to you. In other words, they would have loss on every box sold. Remember how RedHat abandoned retail recently? Same reason - not profitable. Too few people buy, not enough volume to get even.

      Nowadays if something is cheap, it has been made overseas. I bought speakers for $4.65 - and they even work! Incredible. In USA it would cost $2 only for the labor to package them, not counting even making the speakers :-)

    2. Re:Mass Insanity by soundofthemoon · · Score: 1

      Why the hell would I want a box shipped to me? I'm happy to download stuff from the web. The Powers know I pay enough for a fat pipe so I can download big installers fine.

      I happen to work for a software company that does most of its business selling software from our Web site. We have a free version that is actually quite useful, then a for-pay upgrade, a few add-ons, and an enterprise product. We charge under $50 for most products, and our business is fine. Last quarter was our best ever by a large margin.

      We do happen to use license keys to activate our products, but all that does is unlock the for-pay features, and even our for-pay products run for at least 30 days on a free trial period. But I think someone in our company realizes if you make things too hard for customers, they go over to the competition pretty fast.

    3. Re:Mass Insanity by tftp · · Score: 1
      Yes, I was referring to boxed products. If you have only soft copy to sell then you don't have that overhead, and any price > 0 would be profitable.

      But big companies like Adobe don't like this approach. First of all, their overhead is extreme. Your $50 will go through ten accountants, this alone will cost more than $50. Then there are tons of support people (HR etc.), they want their salaries too. Then the company probably owns the building and the land, so taxes and loans come into play. Productivity of developers also drops, since they are constantly at meetings discussing nothing.

      All said and done, a large company needs large income. A company of size of Adobe won't even see your $50, it would evaporate before reaching the bank account, very much like rain in a desert. You also must consider the cost of technical support which is usually provided on a limited basis (30 days or so). A product that is available as download only may generate a lot of support calls.

      Yet another catch is that most mature companies have to compete with their own products of earlier release. Photoshop 7, as people say, is as good as it should be. Same with Windows 2000. So what is the reason to upgrade? Companies have to come up with all kinds of schemes to force the customer to buy newer stuff. But proliferation of low cost copies will be working against this desired pattern - more and more little people will have the older, but still functional software, and they definitely won't upgrade - thus holding you back. You can't offer upgrade incentives to little people as you can do to big companies.

      Yet another reason I can think of at the moment is how do you tell a difference between a hobbyist and not a hobbyist? From legal POV, once you buy a product you can use it to its full capacity (without cracking it.) So if someone buys Photoshop for $50 and then starts printing commercial materials and earning big money, Adobe would want to have a piece of the action. Now they do it by selling Photoshop for a lot of money. What will they do if they already made a $50 sale? They can't go back and undo the deal. Even if they put some conditions into the license, it is not likely to be enforceable given millennia of practice of using tools for any purpose you want as long as you bought them. So it's trouble however you put it.

    4. Re:Mass Insanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It costs more than $50 to make the box with a CD..."

      really? what about all those games that sell for less then $50?

      moron.

    5. Re:Mass Insanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So am I basically stealing when I buy these $25 and $40 misc. software boxes at the local computer store?

    6. Re:Mass Insanity by Slack3r78 · · Score: 1
      It costs more than $50 to make the box with a CD, to ship it to stores, and to sell it to you.

      Where the hell did you get that idea? The cost of packaging + CDs for a piece of software runs $5 a copy. Even with fairly hefty manuals, I'd be surprised if you broke $15 a copy. Granted, there are other costs, but it'd be kind of hard for value software companies that sell boxed product in the $20/copy range to exist if your insinuation were true.
    7. Re:Mass Insanity by tftp · · Score: 1
      It depends :-) Some products are sold as loss leaders, with intent to promote other, more expensive products. Other software is just cheap by design, and thus costs less. Other software is mass marketed (games are in this category), and the high volume allows you to drop costs.

      Basically, there are only few factors that stand in your way when you want to sell your software through retail channels. Some are listed below:

      • Store chains love to get exclusivity on your product. And they will get away with that if you are small.
      • Store chains want 50% or more of sale price. You negotiate. If your volume is low, you get nothing.
      • Stores won't buy the boxes outright, but want them on consignment instead. You are stuck with ownership.
      • Boxes get damaged, returned, etc. You have to repackage and repair them.
      • Unsold merchandise does not bode well with your balance sheets.
      • There are minimum quantities of everything - boxes, CDs, plastic inserts, books / leaflets, etc. You can't just go and order 100 aluminum CDs stamped - you have to order something like 100,000 and that is a lot of money.
      • If you insist in lower quantity, prices shoot through the roof. Instead of chinese factory, your boxes will be made in Mexico or in USA, and the costs are much higher.
      • Product support. Like it or not, people will be calling with stupid questions. You'd better allocate some staff to answer them.
      • ... there are more. I am not even aware of all of them.

      Some of that $25 software that you see on the shelves is triply discounted already, slated to be sold at any cost or just be thrown away. Shelf space costs money, and no store owner will waste it.

      If we apply these constraints to RedHat, for example, then we see that they invested into lots of real CDs, and made a lot of cheap boxes. So they avoided those two pitfalls. But the low sales and high returns bit them very painfully. Myself, I bought RedHat boxed set only once, and that is probably not that bad compared to the rest of computer users.

      So again, everything depends on the type of software, on the target market, on the advertising, on the cost, on the perceived need for the software... and still companies make pricing and product development mistakes all the time.

    8. Re:Mass Insanity by dnahelix · · Score: 1

      It costs more than $50 to make the box with a CD, to ship it to stores, and to sell it to you

      No the Hell it does not! You don't know what you're talking about!

      --
      Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
      They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
      I Hate \.
    9. Re:Mass Insanity by soundofthemoon · · Score: 1

      You have a bizarre notion of what overhead is. Overhead is a fixed cost of expenses incurred by the entire company, though it is often expressed as being amortized over the number of unit sales. In other words, the company is paying those bean counters and support people whether or not I buy from them, and there is little additional cost to handle my sale (except perhaps for support). If a company has an automated sales system in-house, the incremental overhead on each sale is negligible. So my $50 is close to $50 of incremental profit. I'd be willing to accept that my hobbyist purchase didn't include tech support or any other of the goodies. I just want the software.

      As for conditions on the software, think of it this way. There are already tons of people who use the software without paying for it because it is too expensive, including companies that make money on it. This is a way to let those of us who would like to pay for it have an affordable option. If I started making money, I'd certainly upgrade to a professional version, because then I'd have a revenue stream to fund it.

      Software vendors can treat their customers as potential criminals, or they can treat us as supporters. I'm happy to pay what software is worth to me, but I'm not going to fork out close to a thousand dollars for a hobby. If I were going to do that I'd spend it on a hardware upgrade or scuba gear or a new bike, not on software that will cost me another $500 to upgrade in a year.

  60. are you kidding? by sydlexic · · Score: 1

    they've got only one master and it's wall street. steady quarter on quarter growth or your stock price gets a cap in the head. and that means senior management bonuses and stock options are in the toilet and under water. what, it's not all about senior management's compensation? you're naive. they'll put the screws to you for an upgrade at a higher price as long as they're not insanely growing their customer base. and since they're not investing in new products and the old ones do everything we need ... looks like you're screwed.

    1. Re:are you kidding? by BizidyDizidy · · Score: 1

      I know your rant is a common one, but nonetheless, I'm going to try responding.

      They should only have one master, and it should be Wall Street. In fact, they are in a relationship of fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders, and ONLY to their shareholders. The extent to which any consideration of customers enters the equation is, and remember that this is by law, only insofar as that consideration helps their bottom line.

      Corporate executives act on the behalf of everyone in the country (world?) who owns shares of their stock. They are trusted with maximizing value for THIS constituency.

      I guess you might not like the system in general, but capital investment is probably the cornerstone of an effective economic system. Trust me, you're better off in the long-run. Nonetheless, it's probably easier for you to complain about a meaningless activation.

      --
      The safest way to approach lava is to have another person with you and he goes first.
    2. Re:are you kidding? by Casshan-Robot+Hunter · · Score: 1

      Actually, capital investment, and the stock market system that we have now is one of the worst foundations for an economic system. Sure, it looks good now, but it is inherently unstable, and is built on the premise that there is an infinite amount of funds and resources. Most of the wealth in this country is tied up in less than 1% of the population, while the rest of the population is at the mercy of that 1% when it comes to prices and quality.

      *begin sarcasm* Yep, a truly great system. *end sarcasm*

      --
      Why oh why didn't I take the purple pill?
    3. Re:are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders, and ONLY to their shareholders.

      Fiduciary responsibility does not mean quarter on quarter growth. Period.

      Stocks at their most basic are ownership of a company's EARNINGS which are paid out in the form of DIVIDENDS. Their face value is secondary. The most valuable stocks are those which pay a steady dividend, and steady dividends do not require constant double-digit growth.

    4. Re:are you kidding? by shepd · · Score: 1

      >Most of the wealth in this country is tied up in less than 1% of the population, while the rest of the population is at the mercy of that 1% when it comes to prices and quality.

      You're completely wrong.

      Not happy with the quality and prices?

      Open a store and fix it. I did.

      And no, you don't need $100+k to open a shop. Even saving one year of McDonald's slave labour funds will get it going. Get a friend to help you, then just 6 months of McDonald's slave labour.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    5. Re:are you kidding? by Casshan-Robot+Hunter · · Score: 1

      Completely wrong? Somehow, I don't think so. For example:

      (now, don't anyone take this as flamebait or anything, I intend NO disrespect or insult)
      Sept 11. Other than the absolutely tragic loss of life and the major hit to the national state of mind, what was harmed that day? Was any company's physical ability to produce goods harmed? Were any factories destroyed? No. But, some investors on Wall Street got real scared, and because of that, our economy took a downturn. Because companies are responsible ONLY to their shareholders (and most only barely pay service to that), their entire focus is on growth and profit, with no thought given to the concept that they are part of an economy that is interdependent, no thought given to their employees (after the customers, the lower employee is the first to get screwed), and no thought is given to stability. Look at companies like WorldCom and Enron, willing to do anything to increase their stock prices. Look at SCO.

      Unfortunately, this problem is difficult to fix. There are no easy fixes. One fix is to, as suggested by the prev. post, to start your own business and run things right, which is a good, active fix.

      Something I propose is this: pay attention to what services and products you buy. I am amazed at some of the advertising I see, especially for service companies (which shall remain nameless *cough* qwest), where companies not only try to tell you that the exorbitant prices they charge you are good, but that they treacherously bad service that they give you is actually really good service. And our country (the US) on the whole is buying it! As I have seen all over the place on Slashdot, we need to start talking with our dollars.

      This would take a lot of dollars, though, considering again that over 90% of the funds in this country (excluding the gov'ment) belong to the controlling 1% of the people.

      This is all just my opinion, but I ask that whoever reads this just pause for a minute or two and really consider what I have said... you might notice something you never saw before... maybe that black cat will cross the room twice.

      --
      Why oh why didn't I take the purple pill?
    6. Re:are you kidding? by shepd · · Score: 1

      >now, don't anyone take this as flamebait or anything, I intend NO disrespect or insult

      I wouldn't worry about it. :-)

      >But, some investors on Wall Street got real scared, and because of that, our economy took a downturn.

      Yes, I can see where you're going with this.

      However, if one looks at America's reaction to this event as a whole, you'll see that it was widespread, unnecessary panic on all levels nationwide. It was't isolated to just economics, but continued on through government, and even all the way down to regular joes that bought plastic flags to fly on their cars.

      All in all, with proper accountability (no, not "green" equity, etc, but actual "don't steal money" accountability) the system simply reflects what society as a whole feels; be this good or bad.

      Of course, that's just my opinion.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    7. Re:are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      All in all, with proper accountability (no, not "green" equity, etc, but actual "don't steal money" accountability) the system simply reflects what society as a whole feels; be this good or bad.


      Utter nonsense. Example: A bank president makes a thosand times as much money as a bank clerk. There might be some people who try to rationalize this disparity, but I doubt that there's a lot of people who'd actively and explicitly support such a scheme, if they were given a choice. Unless those people happen to be bank presidents.

    8. Re:are you kidding? by sydlexic · · Score: 1

      Fiduciary responsibility does not mean quarter on quarter growth. Period.

      thanks for being the only one who actually understood the post. incenting upper management with stock as a measure of performance causes them to make, by and large, the wrong long-term decisions for the company.

    9. Re:are you kidding? by shepd · · Score: 1

      >A bank president makes a thosand times as much money as a bank clerk.

      Yes, because without a president, there is no bank. Without a clerk, it takes a little longer to get served.

      >There might be some people who try to rationalize this disparity

      Like me.

      >but I doubt that there's a lot of people who'd actively and explicitly support such a scheme, if they were given a choice.

      I would support it. The more important and useful you are to society, the more you are paid. Seems perfectly fair to me.

      >Unless those people happen to be bank presidents.

      If only! :-)

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    10. Re:are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, if only! If only David Shepherd were not a stinking troll!

      He declared that he could build a computer that would be as good as but cheaper than any Mac. When challenged, rather than admitting his mistake, or even taking a swipe at it, he just turned and ran away.

      David Shepherd is an anti-Apple zealot and a troll. Please moderate his posts accordingly.

  61. Heh by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    Well, you could use a front-mounted USB port and plug in the key for the app you want to use, just like the old Atari days where the programs came on cartages :P

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Heh by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      So much for the era of multitasking!

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  62. Mac is activation free by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Informative

    for now. They say though that if acceptance of activation goes, it will be added to other products and platforms. So even if you buy it now and it has no activation, thats not to say a patch in six months will add it on (though, will you be forced to accept such a "patch")?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Mac is activation free by b17bmbr · · Score: 1

      but could there maybe somehting in the architecture of os x that makes it not possible? i have an ibook, so i ain't gonna be running photoshop, but, i do plan on buying a g5 or a PB within a year. well, i still ain't gonna buy photoshop, don't need it. what is funny is that mac has not put any reg crap in jaguar, nor it seems upcoming panther. and hasn't put it into keynote either. is os x drm resillient? now, that'd be sweet.

      --
      My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
    2. Re:Mac is activation free by ChicagoBiker · · Score: 1
      No, OS X is not DRM resistant. What do you think iTunes and the iTuens music store does? Try taking those AAC files you bought at iTMS and putting them on your new Mac and playing them without connecting to the internet first to "activate" that copy of iTunes.

      Anyway, all that aside, Quark 6.0 for OS X does this same activation thing that Adobe is doing here, before it will run it has to "activate" by phoning home over the net, if your computer doesn't have a network connection you are instructed to call a 1-800 number (which connect to a call center in India) and read them your 40 character validation number off the card that ships in the upgrade box and at that point they will then issue you a 40 character "activation" code. Once that's done the software will finish launching and you can work. If you can't provide the activation step it quits before getting past the splash screen when loading.

      The kicker most people are finding with this is, the "activation" seems to marry itself to the hardware connected to the machine at the time of activation. Changing an Ethernet card or adding a hard disk will cause the activation to change and fail, at which time you have to go through the whole activation process again. You only have three chances to do this over the net, the third time you have to call the 800 number and explain why this is happening.

      Basically as a poster above mentioned, they want to control how you use and where you use this software package that they've charged you $800+ to "purchase".

      No big deal right if you're using the software legally, have a readily available internet connection etc. Well, what about the unforseen. I have Quark 6.0 installed on 37 PowerMac G4's at work that I'm responsible for. In 6 months these workstations will be upgraded to G5's. That's 37 copy's of Quark that will have to be reactivated after CPU upgrade. Gee, I hope their activation server is working that day, otherwise I guess I'll have to explain to the designers that they'll just have to go home because the tool that we purchased for them won't work until the guy that owns the tool company comes over and makes sure we're using the tool in the fashion he deems acceptable. Their deadlines and work flow will just have to wait because what should have been a 2 hour machine upgrade/swap is now going to be a "wait and see until Quark can bless us with their approval" on the software we "bought" from them.

      On the other hand, I guess the've successfully screwed the "warez" kids, unless someone has figured out how to spoof their activation server, but at the same time they've seriously pissed off their legitmate users.

    3. Re:Mac is activation free by ChicagoBiker · · Score: 1
      I have to update my above post 'cause I forgot than it's even more restrictive that I mentioned (I knew there was a reason I was so pissed about this a few weeks ago).

      As it turns out, you only get to "activate" your copy over the internet once! That's right, your initial installation is all you get with the quick and easy install. If you change machines or MOVE the software, it has to be activated again, but that WON'T happen over the internet. For that, you HAVE to call a LONG DISTANCE number and speak to someone and explain to them WHY you are moving the software. And then prove your purchase to them with you validation code from the card that came with the original packaging.

      So that means, in 6 months, when I do those 37 machine upgrades for my users running QuarkXpress 6.0, I will have to make 37 long distance phone calls to area code 303 in order to use the copies of QuarkXpress 6.0 my company bought and paid for!

    4. Re:Mac is activation free by b17bmbr · · Score: 1

      crazy question here, but is there any alternative to quark? or, is ver. 5 good enough? this really does make a great point that there is really a far greater cost to using some software than just the license fees. perhaps this activation crap will be their cannae. sure, they'll win the battle, but they'll end up losing the war. so many businesses have become dependent, no, addicted, to proprietary software.

      i think what's happening is that most products are reaching feature saturation, if they haven't already. the only real features left to offer are better security. the software business model can't deal with this too well. even the mighy microsoft is switching to a services based model. i wonder how long until you "lease" software, that it jut stops working after a certain date.

      --
      My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
    5. Re:Mac is activation free by blibbleblobble · · Score: 1

      "is os x drm resillient? now, that'd be sweet."

      More like, the users of OsX are DRM-resiliant. They're not stupid. In the same way that the best, most expensive shops won't search your bags on the way out, whereas certain cheap and nasty shops have no such qualms. Apple, I assume, values the trust of its customers.

    6. Re:Mac is activation free by ChicagoBiker · · Score: 1
      Yes, there's an alternative to Quark. Adobe InDesign.

      And I've been trying like hell to get my users to switch. I've hated having to give Quark money for years. They are the most notorius customer un-friendly company on the Mac.

      The problem is, a lot of my designers are not the youngest most flexable people, and they also don't have to deal with Quark directly, I do. They're old school design students who spent a lot of money and time "training" to use QuarkXpress. The idea of just jumping to a new layout tool scares them because the learning time might diminish their skills and/or they might never get to the same level they're at with Quark. This is causing great resistance to my efforts of switching to InDesign which I've been pushing for over a year and a half.

      But now it seems, even InDesign might go this DRM route too, thank god it currently doesn't, nor does Photoshop or Illustrator; yet.

      The big problem that some of us who are in the demographic that read /. overlook is our users are most times not "in love" with their computers and the act of using the computer. It's nothing more than a tool with which they do something else. In most cases something they used to do in an "analog" fashion. So jumping to the latest and greatest little software widget is not something they're really interested in doing. They know how to use the one tool that came along to help them do their job on the box instead of on a table and that's all the thought that ever really went into the whole "computer" thing. They don't know (or care) what OS they're using, what capabilities it has, etc. So scouring the net and freshmeat, etc, isn't part of their daily activity. And most likely never will be. They're trained and know how to do their job. And in this case, their job is laying out pages for print, and the tool they learned is QuarkXpress. It's not tinkering with the beige box on their desk and seeing which new software gadget they can install today to help them work better.

      And my doing so for them and suggesting alternatives is usually only met with fear, not jubilation that a new, better, tool exists.

      In stark contrast to this model are my Web Developement users who are the opposite. I ususally have to take tools away from them or discourage their use because "I" don't even know what they are or how to "support" them if something goes awry. But this keeps "me" on my toes and makes my job enjoyable. "I" like tinkering with the begie box, and my job is making sure the ones in my deptarment stay up and running smoothly. It's a far cry from the folks who see the computer as a new fangled "hammer" for doing their job of "pounding nails" and their only interest is in the pounding of nails, not hammer design.

  63. Re:Sorry that they've impeded your efforts to stea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry that they've impeded your efforts to steal

    That's the point you ignorant troll. This doesn't stop 1 iota of copying. 3dsMAX has had product acivation for YEARS. You think that stopped the pirating of it?? It didn't stop it at all. The only thing adding product activation does is piss off your PAYING customers. It appears Adobe is taking a page from the RIAA/SCO school of business. If you cannot make a profit with the SHIT product you sell, GO AFTER YOUR CUSTOMERS.
    Your kind of attitude is why fucked up laws like the DMCA can even exist. "Oh you aren't breaking the law, so why would you need privacy." Sorry if these seems like a rant, I'm sick and tired of these companies treating PAYING customers like criminals and it always seems to be the companies who charge highway robbery prices for their products. We were ripping you off! Now you find out about it and you refuse to pay for our product and WE are upset. What the fuck happened to consumer rights?? Or did they, like everything else in this country fall to lobbyist dollars??

  64. just like....Piracy-take two. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "There is only 1 way to stop piracy....."

    Actually there's two.

    The other is to simply not produce the product in question. Can't "pirate" what doesn't exist.

  65. Why don't you stop talking shit on Adobe? by mlazarov · · Score: 1

    Shit people, yea that's an excellent strategy. Now that you can't get their product, question its value and quality. It was the ultimate value before, wasn't it?

    1. Re:Why don't you stop talking shit on Adobe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, no. Unless you count Acrobat's inability to do simple things like "move page 5 and insert it between page 1 and page 2" as a valuable feature. Adobe is the Microsoft of the publishing world, and their overpriced software sucks.

    2. Re:Why don't you stop talking shit on Adobe? by gblues · · Score: 1

      I don't know what's wrong with your copy of Acrobat, but mine does that rather easily.

      Nathan

  66. Ghostscript by crisco · · Score: 2, Informative
    --

    Bleh!

    1. Re:Ghostscript by ingenuus · · Score: 1

      Ghostscript is cool. I don't know of a better way to view .ps files. While Ghostscript does load faster, it is much slower in rendering (at least comparing your typical bitmap font .ps and your typical vector font .pdf) and navigation can be annoying: ever try to search a .ps document?... it has to extract all the text first... I'm not sure how Acrobat does it so quickly. Hence, I like using Acrobat better when I can.

      Also, unfortunately, converting from .ps to .pdf is usually troublesome since Acrobat doesn't render bitmapped fonts very well (which it seems a lot of .ps files use), so I get a very ugly and slowly rendered pages with those converted .pdf files. I wish I knew of an easy way to switch it to use vector fonts.

  67. This will hurt Adobe down the road by dtfinch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Product activation in my experience too often gets in the way of non-infringing use. When I buy a new computer, or a just new hard disk, I want to reformat my old hard disk and reinstall all of my software on the new one.

    Most pirates won't dare use pirated software for commercial purposes. They can lose it all if caught. And most non-commercial users aren't planning to buy photoshop in the first place. In this rare case, software piracy BENEFITS THE SOFTWARE COMPANY. The result is more people know how to use photoshop when entering a commercial environment, which is when they are most likely to make a purchase. Otherwise, there are many alternative products that amatuer users can get their hands on without a high initial investment, like Paint Shop Pro eval and the Gimp, and they will prefer those alternative products in the workplace.

    Existing versions are pretty good. I see no need to upgrade unless they add some great new feature that turns the entire industry upside down.

    1. Re:This will hurt Adobe down the road by elpapacito · · Score: 1

      I agree completely and let me tell you that from my personal, real experience I have seen that the best technical decision makers (when it comes to decide what soft/hardware a company should use)are not only seasoned technician , but seasoned users as well.

      In other words, they have compared a lot of software by using it (and not by doing magazines management, technicians really MUST work) that they usually can't afford to buy -just- for the purpose of testing. Also, usually companies don't want to spend for R&D (whoa hardly news, alright) so the technicians have little choice: either get a pirate copy somehow or get crippled time limited demos if they're avaiable. Also technician are indirectly financing their job position by helping companies reduce R&D costs(and they don't get paid for that, not a dime)

      The net result is that many companies in my opinion owe something to piracy when piracy is NOT used in real business environment to save costs. Business should pay in full for their software because it's used in a real-money profit making process.

      So while the spotlight is always on the "evil pirates that harm profit" I'd rather point the spotlight continuosly on the Enron-creative-accounting companies that do REAL sizable harm to many many workers and families , or on the companies that are using money coming from socially inacceptable crimes like fraud,exploitement prostitution,exploitement of child labor, money laundering, drugs et al.

    2. Re:This will hurt Adobe down the road by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most pirates won't dare use pirated software for commercial purposes.

      Baloney. Maybe that's true of MS Visual Studio, but not Adobe software. Tons of graphic design is done by one and two man shops, and those guys can and do pirate the stuff.

    3. Re:This will hurt Adobe down the road by g0at · · Score: 1

      there are many alternative products that amatuer users can get their hands on without a high initial investment, like Paint Shop Pro eval and the Gimp, and they will prefer those alternative products in the workplace

      Right, so that's why everybody is using Gimp and Dumbassname and KKopyKat in the workplace, where Linux installations are blowing away Adobe products at an unbelievable pace in the real world?

      -ben

  68. Re:How about the GIMP ? - custom GUI by silentbozo · · Score: 1

    Given that the GIMP source is open, how long before someone forks a build that replicates Photoshop as closely as possible? (icons, menus, shortcuts, plugin support, etc.)

  69. Re:Who cares . Use opensource. by perotbot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Pretty much my thoughts...

    We had several users that needed Acrobat just to make "read only" forms. When more people ask, we're going with OpenOffice (just push the PDF button and poof, PDF!). Our graghics people are gettting The Gimp for Windows instead of Photoshop. Activation has nothing to do with this, it has to do with costs. Adobe is pricing themselves out of the market, and OSS strikes again.

    --
    ~corporate tool, but employed~
  70. Re:Who cares . Use opensource. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i'd love to use opensource. find me a good vector illustration program. sodipodi simply does not cut the mustard. F-Keys for keyboard shortcuts? please. gimp is getting better as far as pixel pushing programs go, but it still is a pain to use. being a professional designer in linux is near impossible... i'm trying!

  71. Not Just CS-Tilting at monetary windmills. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You do realize that you don't have to upgrade. Complaining about money you don't have to spend is silly.

  72. Time to crack open skulls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is now time to crack open each others skulls and feast on the goo inside./end simpsons rip off

  73. Hardware locks are NOT effective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember... theres a crack out for everything. Anything can be cracked... remember that.

    Microsoft has software activation in Windows XP...
    cracked.

    3D Studio Max, AutoCAD which both cost thousands of dollars and use hardware locks...
    cracked.

    Audio CDs that are designed not able to be copied...
    craked.

    I can go on forever, but the fact is that sofware is much to costly... you think as a poor college student I can afford hundreds of dollars in software? I rather click the free download link if you ask me. Now don't get me wrong, I don't mind paying for software, but when companies like Adobe, Microsoft, and others gouge you, that pisses me off.

    Alias is heading in the right direction with the free educational version of Maya, I am willing to bet their users are going to increase tenfold now.

    Well thats just my two cents...

  74. Symantec does product activation too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Take a look at their 2004 consumer products. It seems every companies are doing it these days. Most people have no problems with Symantec's activation since it is not bad Intuit's (based on MBR).

  75. everyone has a pirated copy of Photoshop... by pr0ntab · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    wait, let me check.

    Yup. He's right! It's like a belly button.

    And I have the GIMP too... for when I'm on the good side of my dual boot. I have become proficient at both... just in case one becomes permenantly inaccessible.

    --
    Fuck Beta. Fuck Dice
  76. Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by Bryce · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Others have mentioned Gimp as a potential alternative to Photoshop. Sodipodi is considered to be a potential alternative to Illustrator. Sodipodi also strives to be the best SVG editor around, free or commercial.

    However, anyone who has used either knows that they need more work to get them up to the level of quality artists need. These projects need your help. Instead of forking out more C notes to Adobe or wasting time warezing, do something constructive.

    You can make a significant contribution for as little as a few afternoon's of your time. Write a tutorial or a chapter for the GIMP Users Manual (GUM) or the Sodipodi User's Manual (SUM). Publish an article about the apps for a suitable online or print magazine. Or just teach it to some friends. If you can code, pick a bug or feature request and contribute a patch to address it. If you don't code but want to, take it as an opportunity to learn how and to be a part of the Open Source community's successes.

    1. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by KhanAFur · · Score: 2, Informative

      That link for Sodipodi doesn't seem to work. Here is another: http://sodipodi.sourceforge.net/

      -Mary

    2. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I applaud your and others' efforts to get GIMP to a higher level.I must point out, however, that a large majority of computer users cannot code. I love the idea of open source software, but at the end of the day, most folks just use sotware, not write it.

    3. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by FullCircle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree, but how about donating a name that makes sense and doesn't sound funny?

      Look at Cinepaint, Gimps big brother that was originally called Film Gimp. It has commercial donations from the film studios. They changed the name because it was stupid and hard to justify to the higher-ups.

      If you asked a corporate buyer which graphics program to use, would they pick Photoshop or Gimp?

      If you installed Gimp instead of Photoshop, then ANYTHING went slightly wrong, you are out of a job.

      If something goes wrong with a program called Photoshop or anything normal, more than likely they will simply write it off as a software error.

      What the heck to Gimp and Sodipodi mean to the user anyway? PHOTOshop and Illustrator both make sense.

      On another note, don't call a program something that has a negative meaning! Gimp = Cripple
      Lets figure out some program to call Nigger next!

      Names do make a huge difference to the public.

      --
      If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
    4. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by blincoln · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On another note, don't call a program something that has a negative meaning! Gimp = Cripple

      Whenever I hear someone talking about using Gimp, I get a mental picture of the leather-fetish guy from Pulp Fiction hopping out of a box.

      You are very right to suggest that open source software tends to need better names if it's going to be widely accepted. Made-up or hybridized names like "Linux" are good if they're short and snappy-sounding. Common (but previously unused) ones like "Apache" are too, especially if they have connotations that people will generally appreciate. Conglomerates of simple words that convey a point (e.g. "OpenOffice") are good too.

      "Sodipodi" is kind of cute, but it sounds like a dot-com that sells carrying pods full of soda or something and is about to go out of business. Still, it's better than taking the name of the commercial equivalent and tacking "free" onto the beginning.

      I'm far from a master of marketing, but having apps called something like "OpenPaint" and "OpenDraw" would seem to me to be a lot more likely to pull in potential users.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    5. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by einTier · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The first time I saw GIMP, I figured the original author(s) had been watching Pulp Fiction and heard the line "bring out the gimp" and thought that was hillariously funny, and would be hillariously funny to say when they needed to do Photoshop style work. The greater implications were never considered.

      It's an absolute horrible name for a product. I also thought that the first time I saw it. I just figured that by now it would have changed, kind of how products are called one thing in development and testing and something much more commerical when they are actually released.

      --
      -------------------------------------------------- $665.95 -- retail price of the beast.
    6. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by FooBarWidget · · Score: 1

      That's why he said something about contributing documentation!

    7. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by WWWWolf · · Score: 1
      What the heck to Gimp and Sodipodi mean to the user anyway?

      Or Excel? (what's this, Good Stuff???) or Access? (um, it lets you use stuff? It's a thing that, like, connects to the other thing, Right?) or Powerpoint? (Wait, I know! it's explained in Psionics Handbook!)

      But you already explained Gimp - Sodipodi is easy, it's Monk Latin for "feet of soda", except that it's incorrect because you can't pluralize uncountable nouns (a famous example: plural of "virus" isn't "viri" or anything, since the word means "poison").

      Let's face it, the whole industry sucks at naming. The difference is that in most OSS projects, the developers get to name the stuff, and in commercial projects (free or not), it's done by marketroids. Both suck at naming, but at least they suck differently.

    8. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by DrEldarion · · Score: 1

      The problem is that people need all the capabilities of Photoshop, and they need them now. They can't wait around years for Gimp to be as good as Photoshop is now (while Photoshop is improving more and more, giving Gimp more things to try and catch up with). Yes, this activation is a pain in the ass, but there's really not much of an alternative for high-end graphics work at this point in time. Hopefully this new version doesn't have anything people can't go without, and everyone will just use old versions until Adobe figures out that people don't like activation.

      -- Dr. Eldarion --

    9. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by oolon · · Score: 1

      Audacity is a good alturnative to Auditon (Cool Edit). It doesn't quite have some of the functions of Auditon, but its getting there.

      James

    10. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by bj8rn · · Score: 1

      'Sodipodi' is the Estonian for 'mishmash' or 'hodgepodge' or a very random drawing. Now exactly what part of the name doesn't make sense to you?

      --
      Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
    11. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by blibbleblobble · · Score: 1
      From the documentation:
      What does Sodipodi mean?

      The same thing as 'sigrimigri'. In English it should be 'mishmesh', 'hotchapotcha', 'zigzag' ... you got the idea.

      How do you pronounce it?

      Like it is written in Estonian. If you happen to not to speak Estonian, then Finnish will do.

    12. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by ewg · · Score: 1

      Also consider the Sodipodi website. The product name is rendered in Cyrillic characters and the screenshot features anime.

      Not likely to leave a manager with the feeling, "This will work for us."

      --
      org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
    13. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Sodipodi

    14. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck the managers. I want quality software for ME and couldn't give a rat's ass about corporate adoption!

      Sodipodi is a good little program. It lacks functionality and has some bugs, but I paid very close to 0 for it and am happy with it.

      The corporations can go fuck themselves and buy their software from other corporations which have politically correct web pages and talk the empty talk they do.

      As a private person I don't want to pay extra for stuff I can get for free (and legally).

    15. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by pi_rules · · Score: 1

      You could call it by it's "true" name if you don't like GIMP: The GNU Image Manipulation Program.

    16. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by d3faultus3r · · Score: 1

      They should just cut the gnu part from the acronym. the IMP is much less offensive than the GIMP. Well, maybe it's more offensive to Richard Stallman.

      --
      read my blog
      musings on politics and technol
    17. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the heck to Gimp and Sodipodi mean to the user anyway? PHOTOshop and Illustrator both make sense.

      You have to realize it's kind of hard to do that with "Intellectual Property" Law the way it is. Microsoft can and will sue you for infringing their trademark on the word "word". Or "windows". This despite upwards of 90% of software dealing with both. But Microsoft probably has a trademark on "word" describing a word processor, just as Adobe probably has a trademark on using the word "photo" in the name of software for manipulating photo-realistic images.

      In the past corporations had to worry about trademarks becoming generic. Now the public has to worry about generic words becoming trademarked.

      God bless* America.

      * - fuck.

    18. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by het3 · · Score: 1

      I completely agree. Bad names are also doubly damning when they use trite naming artifacts that only serve to annoy: *The* GIMP (with capitalization a must), instead of Gimp. It takes a bad name and worsens it.

      Call it PixelMip (being the first pixelly sort of name I tried that wasn't already in Google) or something else that sounds vaguely like *what it does*. A descriptive name sounds professional, a cutesy acronym or punning name sounds hackerish in all of the worst ways, for folks not involved in the hacker community.

    19. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      >If you asked a corporate buyer which graphics
      >program to use, would they pick Photoshop or
      >Gimp?

      Which one will do the standard color separations required by my ad execs or my printing contractor?

      For which one can I hire interns from the local art school?

      Which one has my graphics organization been using for the past decade?

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    20. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      THE PART THAT'S IN HUNGARIAN!

    21. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by Rampant+Atrocity · · Score: 1

      Lets figure out some program to call Nigger next!

      NIGGER - gNu ImaGe GEneratoR. Sounds like a worthy "plug in" for the GIMP.

      *runs*

    22. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fucking Estonian part.

    23. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by glitch23 · · Score: 1

      What the heck to Gimp and Sodipodi mean to the user anyway? PHOTOshop and Illustrator both make sense.

      GIMP is an acronym for GNU Image Manipulation Program. It is a freely distributed piece of software suitable for such tasks as photo retouching, image composition and image authoring.

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
    24. Re:Help Sodipodi and Gimp become good alternatives by frostman · · Score: 1

      Extremely well-put on the naming issue.

      Also, after Pulp Fiction, "the Gimp" got to be an even worse insult in the popular mind.

      I was just wondering today, after talking to a friend who's upgrading to Photoshop CS, how far one might get repackaging GIMP, getting rid of all GIMP references except in the copyright, making nice installers for OSX, and selling it for $20 in KMart.

      Hmmm.....

      --

      This Like That - fun with words!

  77. Re:Looks like it's time for OPEN-SOURCE alternativ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    There is no "open source alternative" for Photoshop, After Effects, or most of the other high end Adobe products.

    No, we're not talking about replacing MS Paint, Gimp does not count. These are softare packages that have millions of dollars of engineering in them, and just because you don't know about the high end, complex filters, doesn't mean they don't exist.

    Go to a forum where web designers frequent, and try to find one to switch to open source anything over Photoshop. You won't find any. They'd rather pay the money and get GOOD software.

  78. All I am. I learned from Enron. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I'm sure cracks will we available soon... "

    In other words. Crime does pay.

    I know what my new career is going to be in the post-apocalyptic new "outsourcing, downsizing, automated" service with a smile economy will be. Well either that or super-spammer.

  79. Applogies to Avril Lavigne by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Tell me
    Why'd you have to go and add product activation?
    It's just gonna lead to lots of user frustration.

    It's like this it'll
    Be hacked 'till it's cracked and then it will be put on p 2 p
    Honestly, it's not gonna stop the pirates anyway...
    No, no, no.

    1. Re:Applogies to Avril Lavigne by macgyvr64 · · Score: 1

      Sorry Adobe but you missed out
      Well tough luck that app's mine now

      Cracking's more than just a trend
      This is how activation ends

      Too bad that you couldn't see
      See the fact I don't have a key

      There is more than meets the eye
      I see the code that is inside...

  80. Activation by techsoldaten · · Score: 1

    I'm sure someone else has complained about this ad nauseum, but product activation is going to keep people from learning how to use software. When I was just getting into Web development, I installed copies of Photoshop, Illustrator and Pagemaker on my computer at home in order to learn how to use them, and don't see how I could have done so otherwise. Something tells me I am not the only person for whom this is true.

    Macromedia claims you can install a copy of their software at home and at work, which should help the problem, but come on. Do we really want everyone looking to become a programmer or creative professional to have to sign up for $500 courses just to get basic familiarity with software packages?

    M

  81. A study of self destructiveness by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1


    An associate reviewed Adobe Acrobat version 6. She said she did not like it as well as version 5.

    Sometimes in a software company, the good, creative, technically knowledgeable people leave. The company that remains is not able to continue in a competent fashion, but they don't want the customers to know that.

    I know of two software companies that went out of business by releasing one bad version.

    Treating ALL of your customers as though they are criminals to stop the pirates is all war, all the time. The basic thinking seems familiar. Is Adobe learning something from the U.S. government?

    Of course, if Adobe REALLY wants to be self-destructive, it will invade Iraq.

    1. Re:A study of self destructiveness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, if Adobe REALLY wants to be self-destructive, it will invade Iraq.

      Another good way would be to sue the gimp team for copyright infringement and start demanding $699 from gimp users

  82. Well, duh. Here's a lesson: by pr0ntab · · Score: 1

    If it really was worth $700+, then we'd all be paying for it.
    Think about it.

    If you can't see why you absolutely need Photoshop as opposed to some other tool, then you're not prepared to pay for it. And thus it's not worth $700 to you. The barrier of entry was low before, and now it is raised. It's intrinsic value is reduced, and thus people now talk smack about it (they never did agree with the price, hence the piracy).

    On the flip side, if it really was WORTH $700, nobody would complain about exchanging their money for this wonderful product, because it's WORTH IT.

    It's just not worth that much that you would start complaining. I think Adobe should take a hint as to why their sales forecast will not meet expectations.

    --
    Fuck Beta. Fuck Dice
    1. Re:Well, duh. Here's a lesson: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Adobe sells a baby version of photoshop called elements ($99) that does what most people steal photoshop to do. But most people steal the full version cause they think they need all the features. When they don't need alot of what's in there for the press world. Just look around on forums, people bitch "PHOTOSHOP CHANGES THE COLORS WHEN SAVING!!!" When color management is a good thing in the press world yet its almost always the first think most pirates turn off.

    2. Re:Well, duh. Here's a lesson: by mlazarov · · Score: 1

      Well it's $700 because its worth that much to enough people to make a profit. I've yet to hear a complaint from a designer that's made anything decent with Photoshop. Seems to me like a bunch of people are just mad they can't make their glowing website banners anymore.

  83. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by Osty · · Score: 1, Troll

    With software activation, I can't set up this failsafe without blowing my department's budget.

    Activation or not, if the software's license doesn't allow you to install on two machines, you're putting your department at more risk than just their budget. Aside from that, if the activation is properly implemented you should not have any problems at all (see Windows XP; as much as people complained, it's dead simple to reactivate XP, even if you're installing it on a different machine -- if you can't do it directly over the internet, you can do it through an automated phone system that takes less than 5 minutes without any human intervention but yours required).


    However, if your applications die so often that this is a major concern, you're doing something wrong. Most likely, you have crap hardware because you skimped on it. Consider fixing the problem, rather than complaining because this might impact your band-aid efforts.

  84. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by FattMattP · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is bigger than Adobe. What happens when the smaller vendors start using product activation and aren't so generous? What happens when those small vendors go out of business and you're left with useless software? We need to fight this now before the smaller software companies see the larger software companies doing it and jump on the bandwagon.

    --
    Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
  85. Hardware locks cost maybe $32 by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1

    Hardware locks cost maybe $32 in quantity. A software company's accountants don't want to lose $32,000,000 on a million copies.

    Protected USB ports are no problem. They can be inside the case.

    1. Re:Hardware locks cost maybe $32 by tftp · · Score: 4, Insightful
      There is yet another reason. If the software is popular, it will be cracked. Your expense on dongles won't help you at all.

      Normally, dongles are used with a very low volume, specialty software. Crackers are not interested in such software; imagine, for example, a package to control a sophisticated CNC or some industrial robot. A cracker won't ever get his hands on the set of software and hardware necessary to run the thing. Here the dongle serves as a barrier against owner of a herd of CNCs, so that he should buy a license for every machine he controls, instead of getting one and helping himself with the rest. A machine shop owner is not a cracker, and he won't even know how to contact one.

      So dongles are a social solution to a social problem. They can not be applied mindlessly.

    2. Re:Hardware locks cost maybe $32 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So dongles are a social solution to a social problem. They can not be applied mindlessly.

      I dunno... designing a device to prevent problem behaviour seems like a technical solution to me... but then again, what do I know?

    3. Re:Hardware locks cost maybe $32 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A machine shop owner is not a cracker, and he won't even know how to contact one.

      Dunno. I know a machine shop owner who was formerly an AIX kernel developer. I'm pretty damned sure he could crack whatever the hell he wanted to, were he so inclined.

      I also know a guy who maintains CNC machines whose son is a *very* good systems-level engineer -- and one helluva cracker if he ended up on a project of that sort.

      And heh, both of the above know me, and long ago and far away, just maybe I had something to do with disabling a few copy protection mechanisms myself.

    4. Re:Hardware locks cost maybe $32 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use a program at work which has a hardware dongle. When I upgraded computers I spent hours trying to get the damn software to recognize the dongle. There was a huge support section on their website dedicated to this type of problem. Finally I spent about an hour dissassembling the program and modified it so it does not need the dongle.

      Even on the old computer, I had to screw around all the time becuase I had another peice of hardware that would not work when the dongle was connected.

    5. Re:Hardware locks cost maybe $32 by ratboy666 · · Score: 1

      The dongle is NOT to prevent crackers from duplicating the software.

      I used to write and sell low volume high margin software. Price was 6k to 30k US for the software (typically, through in the computer for free). 800 to 1k per year for support.

      I burned dongles for each client, and keyed option modules to each indivdual dongle/client. If a client wanted it, I would give them a "dongle-free" version. Same price. After a simple explantion, NO ONE TOOK ME UP ON THE OFFER.

      And here is the explanation... You (the client) have just spent 20k or 30k on this software. It is VITAL to your business. If there is no dongle, an employee could simply walk with a copy of the goodies, and set up shop. If you WANT it, we will give you a non-dongle version, and we escrow the source anyway.

      If someone can use the software without paying for it, they will gain a serious advantage. So don't let them.

      Same thing applies if I (for example) modify GCC to support a BRAND X microcontroller. I would charge a reasonable (or not) amount for the port. The client would then be in the position to (1) release the source that they received and lose competitive advantage, or (2) keep it a secret. Most would go with option (2) here. If it (the software) works well, why share the benefit?

      Ratboy.

      --
      Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
  86. Nothing to support it, but noting to stop it by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's true that Panther and Jaguar have no features to help out a product that's trying to add product activation - actually, I don't know that Windows XP even has a framework for that yet.

    But just because the OS does not help the app writer do something, does not mean they cannot do what they like within the app. After all, they have the code - if they really want to they can have the product require the use of the internet and talk to the company to allow you to run it every time. Product activation is a less extreme example of this where if the system changes much it demands to get an OK from "Big Daddy" as it were to let you run the thing. Any app could do that, most choose not to.

    So buying a mac does not necessarily protect you from product activation - though you could say that as a group, Mac users would probably be far less likely to accept activation and so they may decide it is too risky in that market. Since every user of XP by definition supports product activation (well, ok not the guys running pirated copies) it's a lot easier to just throw it into a product as you know the backlash will not be as significant a percentage of customers.

    I don't like product activation from a consumer perspective of course, but to me the bigger crime is the resources it takes to develop by a company, for zero gain. Every time a company tries something like this there are always cracked copies without the protection floating around. So since activation does not really gain you anything in terms of stopping piracy why waste a companies valuable cash reserves and technical expertise on something so pointless? Instead they go to extra expense to hope that they will not drive off more than 10% of the instal base.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Nothing to support it, but noting to stop it by slittle · · Score: 1

      Being that Mac is no longer Adobe's largest market, and Apple have been stealing some of Adobe's thunder lately, I think it's more likely Adobe would shaft them just as much as Windows users.

      --
      Opportunity knocks. Karma hunts you down.
  87. Oh-Well by KhanAFur · · Score: 1

    I guess my biggest problem with activation is not the activations process it self but the fact that I can't install the piece of software I bought on all the computers I own. If I buy a piece of software I should be able to use it on as many computers as I want if they are mine. I currently use Photoshop on three machines (laptop, desktop, and in VMware).

    You don't see this with movies, books or other forms of media. If I buy a DVD I can watch it in as many DVD players I want with out calling th company and explaining to them how I want to watch it in a different DVD player (I hope the MPAA isn't ideas from this).

    Oh-well I liked Adobe and I have in the past payed for Photoshop and it's upgrades. Adobe just put this to an end, I'll be sticking to the version I have right now.

    -Mary

    1. Re:Oh-Well by einTier · · Score: 1


      You don't see this with movies, books or other forms of media. If I buy a DVD I can watch it in as many DVD players I want with out calling th company and explaining to them how I want to watch it in a different DVD player (I hope the MPAA isn't ideas from this).


      They did, it was called Divx. Thank God it failed.

      --
      -------------------------------------------------- $665.95 -- retail price of the beast.
  88. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    (the activiation codes in quark are roughly 40 numbers long. 40 numbers!!!

    What is up with long activation numbers? There are only 6 billion people in the world. That only needs 10 digits, plus maybe a check digit or two. But 40?

    Are they being retarded and making their database keys have "smart" info? Are they making it hard to guess the numbers by making only one out every trillion valid? Are they counting the number of quarks in the universe?

  89. Oh man, I figured there had to be a catch... by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 1

    And here I was, thinking they'd finally got a semblance of a clue. Well, the pricing helps anyway and I'll still end up getting it- but it had better be nothing special in terms of product activation. I've had my share of irritating pain in the ass moments with product activation already...

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

  90. HI, I AM MICHAEL AND I AM A SUBJECT LINE TROLL by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 1

    Subject Line Troll should take lessons from Michael. "Adobe makes products harder to Use, More Expensive," and "RIAA Threatens More Music-Lovers." I'm surprised that he missed "Doubleplusgood Europeans Still Fighting Evil Corporate Software Patents." Once again, editors, if you have something to say, do it in the comments section so that it can stand on its merits rather than using your high-and-mighty status to push flamebait on everyone.

    --

    How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    1. Re:HI, I AM MICHAEL AND I AM A SUBJECT LINE TROLL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up, up, and away!!

    2. Re:HI, I AM MICHAEL AND I AM A SUBJECT LINE TROLL by blincoln · · Score: 1

      Next week:

      Microsoft Visual Studio .NET 2003 Discovered To Be Made From The Blood of Linux Users' Babies

      Digital Robin Hood Liberates Return of the King Two Months Before The Forces of Darkness Can Profit From It

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
  91. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by gblues · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Wah, wah, the sky is falling.

    What if terrorists execute a simultaneous detonation of a dirty bomb in every major US city? What if the Marlins beat the Yankees? What if the sun supernovas tomorrow?

    Your problem with activation may be bigger than Adobe, but this topic isn't. Let's not chase non-existant "what if" scenarios, okay?

    Nathan

  92. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love this reaction. It's not the software's fault it doesn't work properly, you should've paid more for your computer, instead! Someone's always saying this. Sometimes it may be true, often it is not. Doesn't matter if you buy Dell, HP, IBM, or buy quality components and built it yourself. How do you know this software doesn't accidently damage it activation status when it crashes sometimes? Maybe they were stupid, and decided to hold the activation status alongside the general program settings?

  93. Re:Who cares . Use opensource. by eliza_effect · · Score: 1

    Your graphics people are going to revolt. Seriously.

  94. We can hope... by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

    ...that Open Source programs like Gimp level the playing field and can give us an option. I finish college in a couple of years and i am a practising Graphic Designer, if this shit isn't sorted out i might as well go open source, there might be more than just GIMP around to let me get my job done.

  95. WAREZ IS THE REASON ADOBE (& M$, &..) IS P by urbieta · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1.- Broke student downloads Adobe.
    2.- Broke student learns Adobe through college.
    3.- Broke student makes a name as an Adobe artist (whink, whink!).
    4.- Company hires broke student and PAYS adobe because it can afford it. Otherwise company would have kept that other obscure graphics package that never made it out of a joint venture or out of obscurity.

    Did you really think Adobe would be as stupid as you to actually ignore this basic fact?

    Ask Microsoft, I got a visit from a local freelance support guy, I noticed he had 1 CD with Windows 3.11, 95 AND 98 in only 1 CD! do you expect me to believe MS had no way to prevent the creation of such a CD? pleassseeeee!! they owe their whole businesses to warez!

  96. pirating adobe hurts the gimp by poptones · · Score: 1
    And all the others who would seek to compete. Just like pirating RIAA music hurts the indies, cuz it just perpeptuate the mindset that the majors are the only game in town.

    I don't care for Adobe at all, but I rather hope this works. Making it impossible to "upgrade" without paying money isn't going to drive all those students and housewives and schoolteachers to shell out hundreds of dollars, but it might convince a few thousand to try out gimp and PSP.

    By making their software harder to pirate, they are ultimately diluting their power in the graphics market. That's a good thing for everyone.

  97. haha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Been using GNU software for years, no activation worries, lifetime of free updates, no cost, no viruses, not too many bugs, completely customizable and it comes with source code.

    If that's not enough for you, GOOD!

    Hahahahaha!!!

  98. Why is that whenever I post about photoshop... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    invariably someone has to remind me about Elements?

    Let me tell you something: Elements is irrelevant.

    I'm glad it only costs $99, but then, the Gimp does everything it can do, and IrfanView supports 8bf, so who fucking cares?

    I've used it, and it's decent, but sometimes I end up hitting my head on the monitor for not zipping and burning up my existing PS installation and bringing it with me.

  99. No Surprise by spamguy · · Score: 0

    It's a move I've been expecting for years. There's a unique fine line with old Adobe demos between stealing and being legit: do your graphics work, and then take a screenshot. I'll admit to having done that -- not so much anymore, since I actually have a legit copy now -- and I have the feeling I'm not the only one. It's just that Adobe decided to take a poll one day and learned what it should have known four versions of Photoshop ago.

  100. Hooray for executive compensation by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 1

    The philosophy behind DRM: Spend a dollar to save a nickel. But wait... it's not my dollar! Full speed ahead!

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

  101. what about the incremental upgrades? by nsda's_deviant · · Score: 1

    the poster danced on this brieflly but one of the issues at fault here is that it seems like adobe brought out a new version of photoshop just so it could implement product activation. the actual amount of new features in photoshop from 6 to now is so incremental its hard to justify its cost. I had people in the graphics department pissed at 7 because it switched some default keyboard layouts and hated the web implementation tools, right now I think adobe is really pushing the envelope here. The new photoshop really offers negligible upgrades and seems like its just a push for is quarterly earnings.

    photoshop seems like its more and more bloatware with every release, new features that should've never been implemented in the first place and ridiculous applications to people's needs. i will never understand why people try to make webpages in PHOTOshop.

    aside note to this is that the healing tool introduced in v7 is damn cool.

    1. Re:what about the incremental upgrades? by beakerMeep · · Score: 1

      Not only did they switch keyboard shortcuts but they removed functinality... It's now considerably harder to draw a single pixel line. And I can't imagine what they were thinking when one of their core audiences is pixel pushers. I am honestly so fed up with them it's time to go learn Maya or something. -just another pixel pusher

      --
      meep
    2. Re:what about the incremental upgrades? by khuber · · Score: 1

      It's now considerably harder to draw a single pixel line. What do you mean? Pencil tool, size 1 doesn't work? -Kevin

    3. Re:what about the incremental upgrades? by beakerMeep · · Score: 1

      The pencil tool does work but it does not have the same flexibility as the old line tool. And while the line tool is still there, it has lost it's ability to turn off anti-aliasing.

      --
      meep
  102. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by FattMattP · · Score: 4, Insightful
    You're right. What was I thinking? We should be reactive not proactive. Let's wait until something becomes a big problem before we try to prevent it from becoming an issue.

    While we're at it let's just toss those letters of objection about European software patents and wait until we actually have software patents that are causing problems. No need to chase non-existant "what if" scenarios.

    --
    Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
  103. Illustrator? by Tisephone · · Score: 1

    I could have sworn I posted this before, but is there a vector drawing program (preferably OSS) that comes anywhere near Illustrator?

    Sodipodi is usable, but that's about it. Last time I tried figurine and sketch they were less pleasant to draw with then dog turds.

    --
    "Neque enim lex est aequior ulla, quam necis artifices arte perire sua."
  104. in other news... by Indy1 · · Score: 1

    adobe rectally self inserts 12 gauge shotgun loaded with slug rounds, and pull trigger repeatedly. Between Bullshit (er product) activation and the heinous crime they commited against Sklyarov, I see no reason for anyone to legally give Adobe one cent.
    Warez their products or use an alternative.

    --
    Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
    1. Re:in other news... by binary+paladin · · Score: 1

      Eh... I want to make this statement so I'll make it here since it's as good a place as any.

      I have a number of friends that use Windows and pirate it. (Who doesn't?) When I say that they should either pay up or use Linux I get a string of excuses... but the most common reply is this, "Microsoft isn't getting my money so who cares?"

      Every single time a legitmate user or a business says, "We'd like to use an alternative but everyone uses Windows and we need to be compatible." It's the fault of all users, even the ones that pirate.

      Photoshop has become a de facto standard, I believe, in major part due to piracy. Honestly scan your friends and the people you know and tell me what percentage uses Photoshop "legitimately." I'll bet almost none.

      I love Photoshop. I really do, particularly the effects engine but... I can't afford it so I'm just not going to use it. Furthermore I'd like to see someone come in and kick Adobe's ass with a better product... preferably one that runs in Linux.

      Warez solves nothing because paying or not paying, you're still part of the user base and thus still part of the problem (from the perspective of someone protesting).

  105. "probably the cornerstone" by ahfoo · · Score: 1

    Well, talking about probabilities. The US is probably ripe for a new look at the advantages of a welfare state as we've apparently moved well into, or perhaps right past, the post-industrial stage at this point.
    Trust me, we'll all be better off in the long run by reducing income disparity and de-emphasizing a system in which only those with investment capital can live comfortable lives.

  106. Re:Looks like it's time for OPEN-SOURCE alternativ by 00420 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is no "open source alternative" for Photoshop, After Effects, or most of the other high end Adobe products.

    Not yet, but I think many people underestimate the open source movement. As Taco Cowboy pointed out, proprietary software is continually distancing itself from the end users. More and more people are turning to Open Source, and it's not going to stop because it is FREE!

    There will eventually be alternatives for the products you mentioned as well as others. Eventually people are going to be sick of shelling out money for things that they can do for free.

  107. Re:WAREZ IS THE REASON ADOBE (& M$, &..) I by Kenja · · Score: 1

    Do you realy think that only "broke students" are pirating software? Grow up, Adobe, Autodesk, etc lose a crap load of money each year from people pirating their software. Please explain why they SHOULDN'T try to protect there stuff.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  108. A bad time for "product activation" by steveha · · Score: 1

    I'm trying to use nothing but free software.[1] I've discovered that this is very rapidly getting easier. OpenOffice improved a lot in the last year, for example; Scribus shipped a 1.0 release; Evolution is all I want in an email client; GIMP 1.3 is slick and I can't wait for it to ship as GIMP 2.0.

    With free software getting better all the time, it's even worse idiocy than ever to start jacking up commercial software with "product activation" codes!

    When people ask me if I have any trouble with my free software, I tell them that all software has problems, and I prefer the problems I have with the free software. I do have problems, for example, editing some documents from proprietary software; but I never have problems that my software decides it isn't authorized and won't run. And I don't have to type in long codes just to reinstall things.

    On the other hand, I think there has never been a better time for dongles![2]

    In the past, dongles were a pain to deal with. Now, with USB, dongles are about as convenient as a software usage restriction scheme can be. Hot-pluggable, because it's USB. Users who are out of USB ports can buy a USB hub. Someone who wants to make a hot spare system can borrow the dongle, set up the spare system, and then return the dongle to the main system.

    Yes, software pirates will hack the software so it doesn't need the dongle anymore, and ship the hacked version. Just like they will hack the "product activation" version so it doesn't need to be "activated" anymore. Any software restriction scheme will only inconvenience the people who actually buy the software; the people willing to steal it will be delayed exactly long enough for one person to crack the protection, which isn't long, and then they will suffer less than the paying customers.

    I think the chief attraction of "product activation" for companies like Adobe is that it will end any market in used software. They are probably hoping that companies will buy extra copies of their software, e.g. for hot spare computers. Dongles won't have these effects. (I guess you could require a company to trade in the old dongles when they buy upgrades. I'd ship the new dongles out first, however, to keep the customers happy!)

    If companies like Adobe want to lock down their software, they should remember that any scheme they use has to compete with free software that just works. They had better use a scheme that is minimally painful for the users.

    [1] This rule doesn't apply to games; I'll cheerfully buy a proprietary game, just as I cheerfully pay to buy a new book. With somewhat less cheer, I'll also run proprietary software to view media clips, such as movie trailers in QuickTime.

    [2] "Dongle" is a slang term for a bit of hardware that needs to be plugged in to a system to authorize software to run. Story has it that this word is derived from the name of a pioneer in dongles, Don Gall.

    steveha

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    1. Re:A bad time for "product activation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evolution is all I want in an email client

      If you're running it on a 3Ghz box with 2GB RAM. Otherwise it's slower than moose shit in January.

      Yes, software pirates will hack the software so it doesn't need the dongle anymore, and ship the hacked version. Just like they will hack the "product activation" version so it doesn't need to be "activated" anymore. Any software restriction scheme will only inconvenience the people who actually buy the software; the people willing to steal it will be delayed exactly long enough for one person to crack the protection, which isn't long, and then they will suffer less than the paying customers.

      Ah, yes. Those amazing pirates. Nearly omniscient they are. They can use magic, I tell ya... that's how they know the activation numbers. They can break 40-digit passwords on a wristwatch... from memory.

      Until Joe Consumer can find a cracked version of $PRODUCT on a chunky server with tech support (which doesn't exist, and won't) faster than he can find the company's website, it's all a fucking pantload.

    2. Re:A bad time for "product activation" by binary+paladin · · Score: 1

      Funny, evolution runs just fine on my K6-III 400 with 128MB of RAM.

    3. Re:A bad time for "product activation" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typically, one may have 20 PC's in the test lab, 20 up in software 'DEV' / image development and 20 in the wilderness for 'QC'.

      Companies SHOULD barter with their software rep, and simply ask for another 60 free copies.

      Show them your test facilities. If the rep then laughs, or offers the usual 5% discount, change your supplier to another one, on the opposite side of the seaboard.

      Thats a lot of bucks doing not much. The reason is 'Core' applications like Adobe, are prone to break with IE upgrades and service packs, and people have been burnt. Why is an API called 'Webbuy' loaded up, when I open up any old document?

      I would think software theft would be much lower, if say Microfoft offered one '10 Gig Master Image' chock full of the usual add-ons, and you just need a code to unlock them. End of dll and registry hell.

      Thereagain, this would put many 'image development teams' out of work. It may surprise some, but MCSE's have been known to apply corporate patches/cracks on software, so ghost rollouts just work.

      Many corporates are fed up to thier back teeth with this licencing crap, PLUS what is costs in behind the scenes mucking about. Open Software is now being added, to satisfy the I want brigade, on same master images. Soon, peer pressure will turn the tide with people getting used to free alternatives.

  109. This is really kinda pointless by andih8u · · Score: 1

    Not only does this just make your customers irritable, it takes the crackers about 3 hours to circumvent the product activation for the warezed version.

    Plus, how does this affect tech support? Company I worked for would do win-installs of everything and just let the product install the next time the person logged into their novell account...so if you install photoshop with product activation, do you have it install automatically then you have to get a tech to go set up the activation crap for the user? Kinda borks that whole automation thing.

    --


    slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
    1. Re:This is really kinda pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only does this just make your customers irritable, it takes the crackers about 3 hours to circumvent the product activation for the warezed version.

      Yep. I know one guy who can shit a Faberge egg in your choice of colors too. Then he does this great trick where he levitates all the furniture in the room while playing the theme from "Medical Center" on a slide whistle. Then he...

      (the two sound exactly the same)

  110. OpenOffice.org 1.1 makes perfect PDF files! by urbieta · · Score: 1

    I think its time to get rid of M$ Office AND Adobe Abrobat.

    Id just like to thank the big companies for cornering more and more clients who pay me for giving them cost effective options from the open source world! O;)

    Old:
    MS Office $$$$$$$$$$$
    Adobe Acrobat $$$$$$$$$$$
    Me: $

    New:
    OpenOffice.ORG (includes PDF export) $$$$$
    Me: $$$$$$$$$$$$$

    any questions?

    1. Re:OpenOffice.org 1.1 makes perfect PDF files! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know why, but your post made me think of Neal Stephenson writing the Baroque cycle on paper with a fountain pen.

  111. Not likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I leik to toss taht taco SALAD

  112. Lessions in product activation from 1997 by ShavenGoat · · Score: 1
    Back in the day of the BBS meeting the Internet, there was a company named Telegrafix. They made a "graphical" telnet application called "RIPtel", which allowed you to use their propriatary vector rendering graphics called RIP (Remote Imaging Protocol) for contacting RIP-enabled BBSes over a Telnet session.

    I liked the software so much, I paid $70 for it as part of a "RIPkit" package, which included some SDK stuff.

    When I registered, I got a serial number, much like any other software package at the time (around 1997). I punched in the number, and RIPtel responded "contacting server, registering serial number". I thought nothing of this -- I just thought I had to verify the number was legit.

    A few months later, my computer crashed (stupid Win95) , and I had to reload everything. When I put RIPtel back on, I punched the serial number back in, RIPtel contact the server, and said my serial number was already in use! I contacted the vendor, and I didn't get a reply. I was screwed.

    Telegrafix is now long gone, though they still hava a valid DNS record. This doesn't do me any good if I want to use RIPtel again.

    Software activation is horrible, and isn't pro-customer. Vendors need to put trust and power in the hands of the customer. Sell service. Sell upgrades. Don't lock out your own customers with product activation! Learn from the past guys.

  113. FAQ is WRONG!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q: What is Adobe doing to stop the real piracy problem -- professional piracy? Shouldn't they be spending their efforts there instead of burdening their loyal customers?
    A: Adobe does not believe a customer-focused activation process represents a burden to the user.

    The real answer is that adobe DOESN'T CARE about burdening it's customers. assholes.

  114. GIMP by KalvinB · · Score: 1

    will never be used in a professional market because it refuses to cater to even the most "basic" features like CMYK. If you're doing professional print work CMYK is an absolute requirement. It is practically a science to get from the monitor to a printer in the quality that is demanded by professionals. GIMP has failed to beckon to the call. Ever. It came out before Photoshop and has failed to be anything that a professional would want to use.

    Considering how badly Photoshop is pirated it doesn't shock me at all either that they've gone to product activation. Stop bitching to Adobe and start condeming people who pirate software.

    I currently use GIMP and it blows. It's awkward to use for even the most basic things. And whose idea was it to hardcode a maximum brush size? Or maximum anything for that matter? This may come as a shock but 200 pixels is not enough for everyone. You cannot use a slider to define brush attributes. You need more control than that.

    As soon as I get the money I'm moving to Photoshop and I don't care what kind of DRM it has. I formated my PC and had to "deal" with Office telling me I had to call MS and get a confirmation code and it wasn't a big deal.

    I'm not about to yell at Adobe for protecting their assets. They've put up with rampant piracy for years. I think we can handle a little inconvienence. It's hardly their fault this is what it's come to.

    Ben

    1. Re:GIMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      try paint shop pro by JASC software (or at least used to be). It's a pretty solid package and does a lot of things and crashes less often than the GIMP (for me, anyway). Plus, it seems to be more intuitive to use.

    2. Re:GIMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Photoshop came out before the GIMP did. You don't know much, do you?

  115. Send Them FEEDBACK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.adobe.com/activation/feedback.html

  116. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by tcd004 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ok, usually I don't reply to my own post, but I should make a few clarifications:

    1. I'm basing my crash problems on Quark 6 which I have little experience using so far. Previous versions of quark are notoriously buggy so I don't expect this one to be much better.

    2. Also, I'm basing my knowledge of activation on Quark's current scheme. They only allow installation on one harddrive. (2 if you pay an extra fee for a "mobile") If that harddrive, or anything else on that machine fails, you're fucked. You can make 5 hardware changes to a system over the course of a year, but if you make 6, the software shuts down.

    3. I'm also basing this reaction on my experience activating 3 copies of quark 6, not adobe.

    The software has a built-in activation application that is supposed to function over the internet, BUT it doesn't function through a firewall. So, all three of my copies had to be activated by phone. This process took about 2 hours.

    I was not a happy camper.

    I hope Adobe does a better job at managing this process.

  117. FP to your troll war by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All your points are valid. However, I'll take the side of cheap trailor trash dude that doesn't really give a crap about source code either. Which basically is your meat of your argument against last poster (which incidentally I didn't bother to read, just from your quotes, poster is obviously a free software, free source code lunatic)

    I don't have a job that earns $n* money. In fact, I'm a live in parents basement dwellar. But my stereotype stops there. I can't code out of the proverbial brown sack, believe me I tried, look it up via my id. So I could care less about source code, I too want something that works without configuring all kinds of crap. Unfortunately, I've got several wasted years learning how and nothing to show for it but a decent working linux comp that I personally built; hardware and redhat software. I tried to learn gimp. Too many things for me to figure out. However, my sister is a professional and uses PS, she was able to quickly use the gimp with no problem. Sure it wasn't as feature rich as PS, but she taught me some things that maybe someday I might use when I feel that I think I feel like being a pro today bug. Other than that there has been NO bugs.

    Finally, I bought an Apple ibook. I love it, iphoto and itunes works for me. However, I do absolutely hate appleworks. This problem is probably my primary reason for not completely going all the way OSX. I'm not going to shell out for the M$ tax to buy office when I especially do not have the need to pay that kind of money for all those features that will take me years to learn how to use only to find out that I didn't buy the upgrade so my version will be compatible with yours. Screw that. I do really like Open Office. Yes, it's free and you can have source code, but again I don't care. I get something thats almost compatible with your crap when I just write something or make a simple damn spreadsheet and I didn't pay anything for it.

    See the difference is you make alot of money, so the money you make you can spend on extra taxes, thats your choice. When I will make my alot of money, I'll find away to not give it away for crap thats of no use to me.

  118. what you say would make sense if... by pyrrho · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    there were national health care and re-education funding when people lose not just their job but industry.

    --

    -pyrrho

  119. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by tcd004 · · Score: 1

    I should have been more clear. I only run top-notch hardware and software. I maintain and assemble it myself.

    Still hardware fails. Anyone who is serious about keeping systems running builds in redundancies, if the redundancy is a cloned system, ready to boot at a moment's notice.

    If a computer fails, I should be able to install the application that I ran on the dead machine onto the new one without delay. With Quark 6, I'm unable to do that without running through a drawn-out reactivation process (Ideally, in this case, they want a freaking hard copy of a form faxed to them verifying the fact you're switching installations!!!)

    Based on my experience with the initial installation, quark has much to learn from microsoft in the realm of product activiation. Quark's system is a nightmare.

    Again, I haven't used Adobe's system yet. I'm basing all of these comments on my experience with the quark scheme.

    tcd004

  120. Re:Who cares . Use opensource. by noewun · · Score: 1
    I hope to God your people don't need CMYK support, or multi-channel operations with separate masking layers, or cross-channel math, or professional level color support, or any of the things Photoshop offers which makes it the amazingly powerful program it is.

    This sounds like more IT arrogance to me.

    --
    I am a believer of momentum and curves.
  121. Activation? It worked well for WinXP (not!) by Jafar00 · · Score: 1

    Activation will not stop piracy. It's a waste of money for them to develop and administrate it and it makes the product all the more attractive for the pirates to crack it. How many cracked copies of (activation required) Windows XP are running out there? Still, it doesnt bother me. Running Linux and the Gimp works well for me. I never miss a deadline :)

    --
    RebateFX.com - Spread rebates for Forex traders
  122. Cool Edit by Andy+Smith · · Score: 1

    I'm not best of friends with Adobe at the moment...

    The other day I wanted to convert some audio files so I went to download Cool Edit, software which I last used several years ago. Turns out that Adobe bought out Syntrillium Software and have now discontinued Cool Edit and rebranded Cool Edit Pro as Adobe Audition. Fair enough. But now this $30 piece of software costs, wait for it, $300.

    I'd guess that Adobe has improved the interface and now ships the product in nice packaging with a good manual. They also include 4,500 royalty-free loops. But a 1000% price hike?!

    Too many of these pro-end companies have forgotten about the concept of price correlating to value. Cool Edit Pro was worth $30. Has Adobe really made it 10 times better?

    I've frequently defended Adobe over the price of Photoshop. Now I'm not so sure.

    1. Re:Cool Edit by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1
      Too many of these pro-end companies have forgotten about the concept of price correlating to value. Cool Edit Pro was worth $30. Has Adobe really made it 10 times better?

      I've frequently defended Adobe over the price of Photoshop. Now I'm not so sure.

      Well, with each dollar you spend for Photoshop, Adobe gets more opportunity to buy out little companies. It's all tied together. And when Microsoft, Adobe, Symantec, et. al. are the only ones left standing with their market niches worked out, then you'll really see the prices go through the roof. It's called oligopoly and it's as big of a problem as monopoly. I don't do print, so I don't need color correction, CMYK sep, or other stuff. So I don't use Photoshop. I also try not to use PDF files. Open as they are, each PDF file out there increases Adobe's power.

      All of you folks out there who are just producing web graphics, but are still using Photoshop, had better wake up and smell the karma.

      --
      That is all.
  123. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The number has to be big enough so that people can't just guess a valid one.

  124. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are they making it hard to guess the numbers by making only one out every trillion valid?

    That is exactly what they are doing.

  125. Mod parent up. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1

    Exactly right.

  126. Re:WAREZ IS THE REASON ADOBE (& M$, &..) I by littlerubberfeet · · Score: 1

    Because if i want to learn lightwave (about 2000) or Maya (about 10,000 with renderfarm support) or Digital Performer (about 700) or perhaps learn them all, I can get a crappy, crippled educationl version sometimes. My alternative as a poor student, for learning these applications is pirating them. Otherwise I would never be able to learn, and later buy them. The software vendors do check to make sure companies producing things with their products have licenses. There is no way for me to learn this software without pirating it or taking a bullshit, slow-paced class at college, which also happens to cost money that I don't have.

    --
    Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
  127. Hardware locks defective (sent one back smashed) by just+someone · · Score: 1

    Worked on a project where one piece of vital software had a hardware key. Software would only work in vga mode, with the laptop. So when we needed to do processing. Reboot computer into vga mode. Found a bug.
    Company said they would send a new version out with a new key. We needed to send back the old key. Sent back old key smashed saying, this key does not work with our computer now. please send new software. got unkeyed software.

    Work with many flexlm products.
    I do not mind that the software check out licenses, if I have the option to have a license server.
    But we really need an escrow service, so that when a company goes out of business, other people who relialed on them can stay in business.

  128. hate to play devil's advocate but... by z84976 · · Score: 1

    It's called a free market economy, folks, and it's the best thing we (humans) ever invented. They can charge whatever they want for their software, and with profit being the ultimate goal of the company, whatever increases profit is ultimately justifiable. The question they have to ask themselves is, how far is too far? If they push it too far, then isn't that the best thing for their competitors? Isn't it in the interest of not only the open source alternatives, but also the other proprietary ones, for them to "go too far" in their user abuse?

    Just had to point that out... this probably isn't a bad thing for anybody except those users who have already decided to only use their products no matter the cost.

    1. Re:hate to play devil's advocate but... by ncr53c8xx · · Score: 1
      It's called a free market economy, folks, and it's the best thing we (humans) ever invented.

      It is the best only if it maximizes something we define as useful. Free market works very well when there is competiton, i.e., low barriers to entry. If that is not the case then you (customer) are screwed.

    2. Re:hate to play devil's advocate but... by benzapp · · Score: 1

      It's called a free market economy, folks, and it's the best thing we (humans) ever invented.

      Someone has been reading a little too much Ayn Rand lately... Do you really believe this? The best thing? I don't know, I would take Venice from 1500-1600. That was no free market, but human existence was raised to a level quite unique and beautiful. In fact, purely materialistic social orders like capitalistism and communism have both resulted in very sterile and inhuman communities. I think you are shockingly ignorant of history if you honestly believe free market economics is the best human invention ever.

      --
      I don't read or respond to AC posts
    3. Re:hate to play devil's advocate but... by kellererik · · Score: 1

      You're probably right, but the thing is that given DMCA and Software-Patents, Adobe will be able sue all competition into oblivion faster than you can say 'free enterprise'.

      Just my 2 cents

  129. Re:WAREZ IS THE REASON ADOBE (& M$, &..) I by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How does Adobe, et. al LOSE money from people downloading software?

    Is there some sort of automatic bank withdrawl tied to someone's downloading of software over P2P?

  130. Complain to Macromedia about product activation by ValourX · · Score: 1

    You might not be able to change Adobe, but Macromedia has a web-based product activation feedback form here:

    http://infopoll.net/live/surveys/s22559.htm

    And the new Studio MX 2004 is also more pricey, buggy, and restrictive than Studio MX was.

    -Jem
  131. Diminishing Returns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if the the "creative" (page layout, graphic manipulation, font) software is reaching a point of diminishing returns?

    Photoshop has not really changed much since version 4, albit vr. 7 is less buggy and has more "frills".

    Development in a similar field, web browsers, has ground to a hault (partly because of the explorer monopoly, but also because there just arn't that many more features you can pack into a brower without turning it into something else entirely) What will companies like Adobe & Macromedia do once their products reach maturity? How do they make any money at that point?

    Will consumers "upgrade" software eternally? When is a product "done"?

  132. Re: programmers aren't graphic artists by einTier · · Score: 1

    I think this is a problem with much open source software. It all tends to be written for programmers by programmers.

    I'm a programmer. I use Photoshop. But that by no means implies that I fully understand how to use Photoshop. I can get around in it and do some amazing stuff with it because it's so powerful, but one of my graphics friends will use it and suddenly I feel like a 16 year old kid driving Michael Schumaker's F1 Ferrari.

    Now, understand that I have no real idea which features I'm not using, much less how to begin using them at all. I know there are dozens of tools in Photoshop I've never touched, dozens that I've played with and never figured out how to use, and dozens more that I've only used in the most basic terms. How in the world would I know how to begin coding these tools into the GIMP? Even if I could figure them out, I probably wouldn't be using them in the 'right' way, and I'd probably get the interface down wrong, or worse, incorrectly duplicate (or improve upon) the tool.

    The biggest problem in open source is that rather than listening to the people who would actually be using the tool (graphic artists), we sit back and say really constructive things like "but, the GIMP works just as good as Photoshop, you need to figure out how to use it" or "but you don't really need that particular tool" or "but look at all these other 31137 things you can do" or "I do more things better and quicker with GIMP than Photoshop. It's extremely powerful (to me) and extremely useful (to me)." These all sound great, but when the end user says they tried the tool and these claims don't appear to be true, we ought to be listening to them rather than dismissing the claims outright.

    --
    -------------------------------------------------- $665.95 -- retail price of the beast.
  133. What is the point of upgrading? by ndavidg · · Score: 0

    What is the point of upgrading? A pdf is a pdf, right? Is adobe going to keep upgrading 100 years from now? There must be a benefit curve for the ratio of upgrading vs. the benefits of upgrading, and as time goes on, it gets steep. I think it's all b.s. Just because there is another release, it does not mean you should upgrade. The newest, as we see here, is not always the best. All I care about is that I can print to PDF, which I can in Adobe Acrobat 6.0 for Windows. In linux, I just use ps2pdf.

  134. Look at it this way... by Trogre · · Score: 1

    Since so many people use photoshop, but a minuscule proportion of those actally pay for it:

    After this, there'll be a whole lot more people using (and hopefully developing for /submitting bug reports on) the GIMP.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  135. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by resprung · · Score: 1

    Two Quark stories:

    1)
    I work at a magazine. We go to print on fridays at 6 o'clock. One friday, the dongled machines running Quark 6 began shutting down unprovoked every 15 minutes or so, losing everything not saved. Quark was reinstalled, the OS and Quark was re-reinstalled. Same deal.

    The deadline at the printers' was pushed well into the night, and eventually the editors struggled through.

    The later verdict was, what made Quark think it was unlicenced was a conflict with the windows patch against the SoBig worm. We had to work this one out ourselves, no help from Quark.

    2)
    My uncle runs a small publishing shop. His Quark started shutting down on him at any and all times, losing whatever was on the screen.

    No mystery this time -- the rotten workmanship of the Quark dongle. It was loose in the serial port, and would lose contact with the app, shutting Quark down.

    Having paid good money for the pleasure of Quark ownership, he refused to download an illegal 'dongle killer' app... which would probably have been the sensible thing.
    ---

    I'm amazed at how universally hated this application is, it's right up there with clippy and jar jar...

    Take note, Adobe...

    --
    Now is the winter of our disco tent
  136. because America defends by pyrrho · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    the seaways they use to ship the goods back here to sell. They will drain all the consumer capital from the beast and worry about it later. Of course tech jobs should be developed around the world, but as usual, the way the corporate system is going about it sucks.

    --

    -pyrrho

  137. yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they are scumeth.

  138. Re:Who cares . Use opensource. by raju1kabir · · Score: 1
    Our graghics people are gettting The Gimp for Windows instead of Photoshop.

    I sure hope they don't do anything more professional than the internal company newsletter.

    I'm all in favor of open source and use it for almost every task. But the fact is that the gimp is simply not up to the job. For twiddling a few web buttons or snapshots, sure. But for correcting and preparing images for quality print work? No sir. Open source has yet to come up with a decent 2-D vector or raster graphics app and I don't see anything on the horizon. Either it's too hard or the open source developers just completely fail to grasp the requirements. Gimp, for instance, doesn't seem to fail for lack of trying. It fails for lack of "getting it."

    --
    "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
  139. oh, they're gay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no doubt about that

  140. "clearly you reformat too often!" by pyrrho · · Score: 1

    When it happens, it's a pain. If you don't have the internet (SHOCK!) to that machine. It's the lamest copy protection since the dongle, especially since these sorts of things are only a bother to paying customers! Pirates crack and solve the issue. It's pathetic.

    It does pull more machines on the net though, so there is a Machiavellian appeal to it. And don't get me wrong, companies are perfectly within their rights to use this kind of buttheaded scheme.

    --

    -pyrrho

  141. damn clever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have never seen such a deftly produced exploitationg of the slashjoke. You made it seem as though you disliked these old running jokes (as you must), while ectually using several classice forms. Overall however, I think you fell apart midway, I give you a "7.5"

    -Competition Judge Troll

  142. notebook installations by deepsky · · Score: 1

    Adobe licenses, so far, allowed the user to install the software not just on a machine, but also on a notebook (provided the twos are not used at the same time). This has always been a very good thing (and one of the reasons why I hate Macromedia licenses, not allowing this): most of us have a main workstation, plus a notebook to carry the work around.
    I am now very worried about this product activation concept being embraced by Adobe. Product activation usually binds the license to a single machine. Does this mean that, basically, for notebook owners the price of Adobe software has effectively doubled? (two activations = two licenses)?

  143. Software is becomming a commodity by DeltaQH · · Score: 1

    The problem is that software is becoming an utility like gas or electricity, but the business model of the software companies business model is based in selling you the whole thing over again every 1 or 2 years ( a little more bloated each time; ok, sometimes there might be a nice new functionality... just enough to justify the price tag... Functionality delivery management I call it ;-). What about a subscription system model for software? You pay as you go, you may but slots of time, you may pay depending on the functionalities you use, you may even buy computing power from their BIG rendering or ray tracing computer farm. (mmmhhh.. buying processing power from other appliations users while their computers seats idle doing nothing more useful that what a heating system does more cheaply?) If you are a person that just uses the basic functions you get the cheap price. If you need to use the more complex functionalities you pay more. If you are a student or someone that just want/needs to learn you pay less. If you do not use anything you pay nothing. Even if the software is discontinued, it should be still profitable to maintain the subscripton service running. If the company if bought/devoured by another, why kill a profit stream from those users who do not want to change to or own newer/brighter/bloater software product. But the prices should go down quite a bit. If the prices is right people will not take the bother to look for a crack. Especially if you provide additional services and a reasonable stream of improvements and updates. If the prices are right anybod will be able to learn to use the program without problem of conscience. Problem is that managers today are trying like crazy to squeeze as much money from their product base to try to please the markets. "Hey, if we make pay all the people who use pirated copies of our software we will have more $$$ for our next quarter results!" They either do not get it that their software is sold because of all the people who were able to learn thanks to a cracked copy, or they think that their product has become such an standard that they can now crack down pirated copies and make everybody pay..., a lot of $$$. I do not think that is going to work, the legal users is in the end the one who get pissed off, the others will find a crack somehow. You risk lousing more of your paying customers in the end, and the good faith of all of them. mmmhhh... Just an idea, what about a market driven open software development system? Weve got this ABSOLUTELY FANTASTIC software but we do really need more developing power. Set up an affordable subscription based system, reward the people who helps to advance the software according to their contribution, proportionally. Software will be open source. If you wan to improve it by yourself alone, be my guest! If you are able to set up a better subscription shop, you are very much welcome! With all the hungry software developpers on the wide world nowadays, maybe you could get enough of them to make a open software application as refined as a comercial one in a reasonable period of time. Any takers? Yo do not need to go to India! But watch out for the hindues(indians? ;-), they are good anyway!

  144. the marlins did beat the yankees by anthony_philipp · · Score: 1

    "What if the Marlins beat the Yankees?" They did. This time

  145. Re:Looks like it's time for OPEN-SOURCE alternativ by Loconut1389 · · Score: 1

    Look at RedHat, there's nothing that says OpenSource isn't profitable. You make your dough on support/extras/contracts/etc. I think the day will come too.

  146. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by zenbamboo · · Score: 1

    Yo, lostbrain~ All of Adobe technical and customer service for North America is in Oregon. Also, Photoshop is probably the most pirated application out there. And yes, Product Activation is a pain for everyone except perhaps some Adobe shareholders.

  147. Adobe, Macromedia et al, piracy and activation by theolein · · Score: 1

    The fact that Adobe is also becoming one of a long list of commercial software vendors, such as Microsoft, Macromedia, the makers of MathCad, AutoCAD, etc opting for product activation is an interesting one.

    Why do they do it?

    Obviously it's done to combat piracy. Although marketing departments can be extremely stupid and more than capable of ruining a good software company in ties of financial crisis, I don't think that this is an idea that comes from marketing, but one that comes from corporate financial departments as an attempt to improve the company bottom line by forcing the pirates of popular products to buy their products. They DO have a point. I've worked in a number of companies where there've been 2 bought copies of Photoshop being used by 20 or more users.

    Does it work?

    Yes, obviously. Most companies that were using more than their bought number of licences will pony up the money if they need the software (my last company went through the AutoCAD activation hoops, and although it left a bad taste, they went for it). All those private users who previously used pirated versions will continue to do so, and would not have paid for the software in any case.

    Does it drive some users away.

    On the other hand, there are definitely some companies and private users that will try to seek alternatives, as the general increase in pricing in products (AutoCAD, Express 6, Adobe CS all cost enormous sums) and users in poorer countries i.e. most of the world will in no way pay for those products (such as paying $800 for Adobe CS in Russia where the average monthly wage is somewhere around $300). Onerous licencing and problems with software quality where more attention is paid to activation than bugs in the software is partly responsible for the move to Linux in some corporations. Almost all software packages will in any case be cracked and private users will continue to use those cracks.

    The irony is that the majority of previously legitimate users won't care so much, and will go along with activation IF it doesn't disrupt their workflow. It will NOT really make that much difference to the software companies' bottom line as those that paid before will continue to do so, and those that used cracks will continue to do so. Only those who used more copies than they paid for might add a couple of percentage points to software sales.

    In the long run, there will probably be no difference, as the market can only sell so many copies of Adobe CS at $800 a pop. I don't think many graphics pros will consider changing now, but given two or three years there might be enough quality in the GIMP, SodiPodi (printing!!! colour synchronisation!!!) etc to start a move to them, but not now.

    That said Photshop 5.5 and Illustrator 8 were IMO the pinacle of features/performance. The later versions suffer from too much feature overflow.

    1. Re:Adobe, Macromedia et al, piracy and activation by archilocus · · Score: 1

      They do it because lawyers are too expensive. The old attitude was pretty much along the lines that the easy way to enforce the licence was through legal means. Used to be that individual users might pirate the software, but they don't have a lot of cash so no point in chasing them. Just wait for a cash rich company to exceed their licence agreement and then politely ask them to cough up or sue their arse off. The small fish were just the cost of doing business (and as someone pointed out - good for spreading the word about the product). Nowdays the cost of going after software pirates is so expensive that you need a short cut that doesn't involve lawyers. With a live activation you can note discrepancies in a licensee's registrations very easily, have an account manager ring them up and bingo, one hundred new licenses sold on the spot! I think we're going to see a divergence in the software market. Individuals will use increasingly better free software and companies will use increasingle more complicated, propritary software distributed by a smaller number of vendors. Vive la difference!

      --

      Don't look back the lemmings are gaining on you

  148. back in the day by pyrrho · · Score: 1

    I worked at a game company and we were using 3D studio which used a dongle. Problem was that none of the PCs had a parallel port, well, we had them, but the IRQ was tied up in the network because you printed over the network anyway. As a game company we had a couple hackers who were able to break the protection in a couple days.

    --

    -pyrrho

    1. Re:back in the day by rhizome · · Score: 1

      You had parallel ports, "but the IRQ was tied up in the network".

      Yes, you really must have "had a couple hackers".

      --
      When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
    2. Re:back in the day by pyrrho · · Score: 1

      what are you talking about? are you doubting me or making fun of the way our novel network was hacked together? Fuck, the network card was configured to use the parallel ports IRQ, what can I tell you?

      --

      -pyrrho

    3. Re:back in the day by rhizome · · Score: 1

      You can change the IRQ of the parallel port fairly easily. Beyond that, I was mostly making fun of how poorly you constructed your sentence. A grammar flame.

      --
      When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
    4. Re:back in the day by pyrrho · · Score: 1

      well, at least that explains it, I guess, though I thought it would be clear enough if someone understood IRQs.

      Are you sure you can always change the IRQ on a parallel port? This was 1993. We were not able to do it. I forget if the bios wouldn't do it, or if there was some other, subsequent conflict, but I remember trying to do that for some time, since it was the obvious solution.

      Bottom line, even if it was somehow our fault, it was easier to crack the software ourself than make that change.

      --

      -pyrrho

  149. "dongle" by Crazy+Eight · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one a bit uncomfortable with that term?

  150. I love activation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just love my Adobe product activiation. I love getting it to work. This is yet another feature that GIMP does not provide. I will never try GIMP. I am an Adobe man.

  151. Bug in Slashdot ! by Thomas+Miconi · · Score: 2, Funny

    Can't find the "-1 Too Intelligent, Please Go Away" button !

    Thomas Miconi-

    1. Re:Bug in Slashdot ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It only appears then the parent post deserves it...

  152. yea, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The source code is available so if there's anything they don't like they can program it in. They can even start their own company and sell GIMP, like RedHat. I think all artists should use GIMP until it's better, or else pay $800 for Photoshop. If they go the second route, they will not be able to make a million dollars selling Photoshop. Actually, Adobe will make a million dollars off the artist who tries to rebrand Photoshop with his picture on it. Then he will wonder why he didn't use GIMP in the first place, and just look at that. GIMP may not have every feature, but the one's it does have are available to anyone with a computer.

    dd

    1. Re:yea, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha ha, the typical bullshit OpenIdiot(TM) argument. Yes a graphic artist should spend years learning to program, and years more developing the basic tools they need to do their job. Hey, they'll save $800 and I'm sure their career will wait that long! Who needs an income - right?

      Really, if just anyone could make major improvements to a program Gimp wouldn't still suck like it does. And sure you can sell it if you like, and being GPL anyone can just take the source and make a free version. Sorry to say no one's made a million selling open source app - not even Redhat. It's only the support they sell, and that covers hundreds of complex applications.

      If your super-duper version of Gimp is *that* hard to use, well I hate to tell you - but it will *still* suck.

  153. Adobe just bought a big shotgun by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
    And is aiming that shotgun at its foot.

    The main reason reason that Photoshop ranks #1 is because it is the best out there, end of story. The second reason it is #1 is because of how Adobe has hooked people in the past. They have grown up using Photoshop in schools, and most likely having a pirated copy of it for their personal use. The $600 pricetag is not something the ordinary user will hand over money for.

    However, when you enter the business world, the user will gladly plop down that $600 if they are a freelancer, and if its a company, its a drop in the bucket for them to purchase the licenses they need. Adobe shouldn't be worrying about getting money from the regular Joe Enduser because they most likely won't pay for it. Even if they have to use the #2 Photoshop-clone out there, they'll do it if they can get it for free, or a lot cheaper.

    Adobe's getting greedy, and they'll learn the hard way that this won't do anything but cost them dollars and annoy the piss out of the legit customers, because there will ALWAYS be a cracked version out there.

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  154. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by lanswitch · · Score: 1
    No mystery this time -- the rotten workmanship of the Quark dongle. It was loose in the serial port, and would lose contact with the app, shutting Quark down.

    So Quark makes rotten software because it refuses to work when the dongle is not correctly inserted?
    Should they come around and check whether you are capable of plugging a dongle?
    What's the problem here?

  155. Open source alternatives. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its time to promote open source, and for people to improve it.

    Photoshop = Gimp, the lastest version is much improved, with a DECENT GUI, masking layers, the beginings of CMYK support and much much more. There is no need to complain about the gimp, and if you need a feature that is not there, Then you can help. Also check out the gegl project, which will add much wanted stuff such has weird colourspaces and 48-bit support

    Illistrator = Karbon. Sodipodi is nice, but its designed as an SVG editor only, Karbon has a more illistrator like interface and supports more file formats. As usual, give feedback, its how open source improves.

    InDesign = Scribus. A powerful DTP application, its a lot to explain on this page, so go and read the page and don't forget to help.

    GoLive = Quanta. Quanta is the best OpenSource Website creator. Support for wysiwyg is in the CVS, so help them out ;).

    I use these tools everyday and FOR PRODUCTION work, remember don't complain on slashdot about $APP dosen't have $FEATRURE. Either help fix it if you can program, or submit a feature request in bugzilla. I have several times and gotten the features I wanted. So, if you are tired of Adobe lock in, then help open source.

  156. spearhead fetish? by RumbaFlex · · Score: 1

    jeez, if anyone out there are using photoshop 5.5 or illustrator 8 and are happy with it, let them - if the tools suffice it's throwing money and computing power out the window overshooting your needs..

    Adobe is sinking rapidly with their upgrade features, nowadays the improvements are internalizations of what the best plugins already do. As for the licensing scheme, i think trends like these have a strong gravity that makes you do something just because it is what is done, without examining the consequences, and these are the early heydays of DRM. As for bug free - you can stuff it, try working with hilariously huge files and you'll see what i mean..

    --
    -By attempting the impossible we can achieve the absurd..
  157. hum... by autopr0n · · Score: 1

    If you need CMYK so bad, why don't you just hack it in yourself? If the developers won't take your patch, you can fork it and call your program KimmyK draw or something.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:hum... by blibbleblobble · · Score: 1

      "If you need CMYK so bad, why don't you just hack it in yourself?"

      Or even better, just buy CMYK support.

      Adobe photoshop costs $650. There are several people on this forum who've indicated that they buy at least 10-30 copies, per upgrade cycle, in a commercial environment.

      I don't know the Gimp developers personally, but has anyone asked them whether they'd consider adding CMYK support, and all the other features you want, if you paid that $10,000 to Gimp developers instead of to Adobe?

      After all, you know if you give the money to Adobe, they won't use it to implement any cool features: they've proved that much in the last few versions. But if you want more control over the features being developed, and if you want a system ideally tailored to your needs, you could do worse than getting involved with the development of programs that you can use indefinitely without restriction, on all of your machines.

    2. Re:hum... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > If you need CMYK so bad, why don't you just hack it in yourself?

      1) It's non-trival to do - PhD-level stuff.
      2) It's a heavily patented field of research.
      3) Realistically, you need to licence Panatone to make useful.

  158. Postscript Anyone!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What "we" need is to stop using PDF and start using Postscript (.ps) instead!!!!

    It would help having a proper Windows based Postscript reader. The Ghost... look's and feel's terrible.

    Do you want to start a new cool opensource windows project?!! Do me a Acrobat Reader like app for Postscript on Windows!!!!

    1. Re:Postscript Anyone!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm have you checked the size of uncompressed postscript files versus their pdf versions?
      There's good reason to use pdf.

      You're looking for a useful project? make open source free pdf distiller utilities and viewers on some cross-platform toolkit.

    2. Re:Postscript Anyone!? by chthonicdaemon · · Score: 1

      Of course, uncompressed PDFs are even bigger. PDF is a subset of PS leaving out the programming language elements and adding support for some nifty features, including compressed text streams.

      If your looking for a PDF distiller, you can just use this collection of apps. Not dead easy to install, but perfectly usable.

      --
      Languages aren't inherently fast -- implementations are efficient
  159. While we're bitching about activation... by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 1
    Let me put in my rant here. I purchased a copy of Waterloo Maple 6, student edition. I installed it on my Linux box. The damn thing requires you to e-mail your serial number to their tech support, who then sends you an authorization "file."

    The authorization interfaces with this stupid licensing server called "flexlm." I swear to God, I don't ever want to buy another product that uses this activation scheme. I'll do without. If all software vendors do this to us, I'll quit using computers. You have to have this stupid program running in the background on your machine all the time to use the software. I did a little research, and found out that this little bastard program from hell is published by Globetrotter. I little research and found that this is a division of Macrovision, the evil demon-spawn company that forced that copy protection on our TV sets. They bill themselves as "secure and flexible distribution for your product." FLEXIBLE MY ASS!!! As far as I'm concerned, they can go &@*% themselves.

    I just checked Maple's web page; it looks like they don't require this anymore for a single user version of the program.

    --
    Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
    1. Re:While we're bitching about activation... by ncr53c8xx · · Score: 1
      Let me put in my rant here. I purchased a copy of Waterloo Maple 6, student edition.

      May I suggest Maxima, which is the code on which Maple was originally based. It is GPL and cross-platform.

      The authorization interfaces with this stupid licensing server called "flexlm."

      If you have been using UNIX for any length of time you would have run into this. Most of the commercial software on UNIX uses it. The Intel compiler which they released as freeware also requires this software.

    2. Re:While we're bitching about activation... by gvc · · Score: 1

      Maple is not based on Maxima. Maple is a from-scratch package originally developed at the University of Waterloo but long-since commercialized.

    3. Re:While we're bitching about activation... by ncr53c8xx · · Score: 1
      Maple is not based on Maxima. Maple is a from-scratch package originally developed at the University of Waterloo but long-since commercialized.

      I don't think there is any code sharing. However, it is mentioned in the Maxima webpage.

  160. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by flappinbooger · · Score: 3, Informative

    Man, if it was me, and I was in a business situation with a very very close and important deadline, and this junk pops up? I'd have that key piece of software cracked so fast it wouldn't know what hit it. The software is meant to serve ME, not the other way around. If I've got a license sitting RIGHT THERE, and I CAN'T USE IT? Crack it, not worth the time to play their silly games.

    --
    Flappinbooger isn't my real name
  161. Maybe he's not a coder. by rdunnell · · Score: 1

    This may come as a shock to people who do write code, I know. Not everyone who uses a computer is able to actually write or change a program. This even applies to people who might use some sort of OS or applications that would require them to compile the code before they can run it.

  162. Re:Free Mumia Abu-Jamal!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    when will niggers learn not to be so uppity to prevent this kind of thing?

  163. They're not hurting the warez community at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "On the other hand, I guess the've successfully screwed the "warez" kids, unless someone has figured out how to spoof their activation server, but at the same time they've seriously pissed off their legitmate users."

    As has been stated before, therein lies the irony:

    No, they haven't pissed off the "warez kids" whatsoever. There are software cracks for any kind of security. The warez community will rise to the "challenge" and happily break the protection scheme, and millions will use cracked software with far less hassle than paying customers use their legit versions.

    1. Re:They're not hurting the warez community at all. by ChicagoBiker · · Score: 1
      Yup, you're so right. I just went and played again with installing Quark 6.0 onto another machine.

      When you don't have an internet connection or you're already past your "one" alotted internet activation you have to click the "use phone" button which brings you to an "enter activation code" window. There it gives you the phone number to call and I would guess they'll read you a new 40 character code to type in.

      I'm sure someone already has their security scheme cracked and codes are out on the net so all you have to do is force that "enter code" window to appear and enter the cracked code and away ya go until the next time it breaks.

      This is the first time "I've" encountered DRM where, as some others have said, it's actually easier to use the "crack" than it is to use the software legitimately.

  164. For Mac, Futurepaint by StazSoftware by MickLinux · · Score: 1

    Futurepaint is also free. However, that said, I actually prefer its predecessor, Deskpaint, by ZedCor. But it's no longer published.

    --
    Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
  165. Re:Free Mumia Abu-Jamal!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get this through your THICK SKULL -

    HE'S GUILTY! He should die a very PAINFUL death just like his victim.

    NOW SHUT THE FUCK UP!

  166. Your HIRED! by DAldredge · · Score: 1

    When can you state? We need a new head of MSFT security!

  167. What open source needs is GUI engineers by Quizo69 · · Score: 1

    I currently use my old copy of Paint Shop Pro 5, since it does everything I need in a graphics editor.

    I tried GIMP for Windows since I am trying to move everything on my machine to free/open source software.

    It lasted about 5 minutes before I uninstalled it. Why? Because the GUI sucked, quite frankly.

    The problem with lots of these types of projects is that they are full of good intentions, and coders, but along the way they seem to forget about the GUI, the single "feature" that will make or break their product to the average user.

    Now don't get me wrong - there are some excellent free/open source GUI products out there. I use OpenOffice.org exclusively and it's great (it could stand to use system fonts by default on installation on a Windows machine though). Mozilla Firebird is another great GUI.

    What coders need to recognise is that to have a product that "just works" you need a lot of forethought put into the GUI before you start coding. GUI elements need to replicate default system behaviour expectations. If you code for a Windows version, use right mouse context menus. Use system fonts. Use the window model (unlike GIMP's multi-splat method!!). If you code for Linux, use hooks to allow the program to behave as the rest of the desktop does, KDE or Gnome or whichever other flavour you prefer.

    Don't nest tabs. Don't saturate users with a thousand options they need to change. Don't use the registry. Allow the user to provide a custom data directory which can be stored on another drive to facilitate easy backup. Allow user settings to be exported and imported easily. Follow the KISS principle when it comes to designing your program's GUI.

    Projects need to take on people who CAN'T code! You need people who are essentially clueless to coding but savvy in GUI design. Pick up a designer or two, but DON'T allow them to design gaudy non-standard buttons (see ANY recent Taiwan based interface like BIOS update programs etc!).

    Keep to established standards. Keep it simple. Keep it intuitive. Then you will have programs you can show off. Until that happens you will forever remain a bit player when you could have so much more.

  168. Re:Looks like it's time for OPEN-SOURCE alternativ by gunga · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm tired of these arguments, people keep saying them but it won't make them true.

    Unix systems also had millions of dollars of engineering (strange measuring unit for engineering), X Window also...

    Adobe doesn't (to the best of my knowledge) use secret algorithms, they have high quality standard and know how to leverage a few technological advantages to get a strong grip on the market.

    Also, speaking as if Open Source or Free software was only written by hobbyists or students is a little ignorant, don't you think? Have you checked the eclipse project, for instance?

  169. Why warez are bad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A conspiracy to entrench high cost commercial apps in the market place! ...boo.

  170. GIMP Runs on windows by linuxislandsucks · · Score: 1

    Gimp runs on windows withotu cygwin, friend if you bothered to look with those clear eyes and mind tha tyou claim you have,,

    Of course I did not pay $900 to use it either..:)

    so who is the wiser one?

    --
    Don't Tread on OpenSource
  171. Re:WAREZ IS THE REASON ADOBE (& M$, &..) I by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you realy think that only "broke students" are pirating software?

    Do you really think that software companies are unaware of this phenomenon? I'm aware of at least one major software vendor that is the source of their own warez releases along with the "crack". The release usually has some annoying oddity (such as crashing) which can be blamed on the crack and not the legit software. They're well aware of the hunger it creates for their product.

    Please explain why they SHOULDN'T try to protect there stuff.

    They SHOULD try to protect their stuff. If not for the fear of fine or prosecution, too many managers would opt for a cracked version of the software over a legit version for the purposes of production work.

  172. Won't be spendin' any more on THAT SHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey Everybody! Go to LIMEWIRE and learn how to get all that Shit fo' FREE!

  173. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    Thats a good point. Software companies may not last forever. Even if they do when will they trash the old activation servers and force an upgrade. There are many legitimate reasons to use older software. and possibly use it over a long period of time on different platforms putting activation on adobe products is a bad idea all together. Unlike TurboTax which needs to be upgraded each year, or windows that is designed to run on one computer at a time. Adobe products could last generations and pc upgrades, if their tool has all that they need then there is no reason to upgrade. And forcing people to upgrade could hurt them in the long run. Because it may make them switch to an other companies product and never go back, because at that time they were forced to upgrade they coulnt afford the new product, or the new product doesn't do what they need. Or their new version is Crap, and if they could wait for the next release they would.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  174. Don't worry about the price by queen+of+everything · · Score: 1

    I have received many emails telling me that I can buy adobe's photoshop 7.0 for just $49.95. Its a real bargain! In fact, one of my coworkers got this email, forwarded it to my boss (both are idiots btw) and got the corporate credit card number to go ahead and purchase the 'email only' photoshop for $49.95. These deals will always be around. They're totally legit, right?

    --
    "Wisdom is not a product of schooling but of the life-long attempt to acquire it." -Albert Einstein
  175. Name a bug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you even read the adobe support groups? :)

    By the way, what year is this? Adobe still officially does not support saving to network drives.

  176. Quark is hiring American programmers by LordNimon · · Score: 1

    Not that I want to defend Quark, but they are hiring programmers at their Denver facility. Also, notice that the linked article was written in April 2002, so this isn't some recent event. Quark opened their India office back in 1998, well before the bubble even started.

    --
    And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
    To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
  177. Continuous improvement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good Call :)

    Microsoft is on Windows XP which is basically major rev 6. All major bugs are fixed. All minor bugs are fixed. :) According to him yup that's the case.

    Naturally there isn't 150 megs of windows updates. (Which a dialup modem user is expected to keep on top of I might add)

  178. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by nyseal · · Score: 1

    Wow.....how nice of them to let me use something I purchased the way I want to.....I guess in the EULA it states that they're REALLY nice people too.

    --
    [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
  179. Troubling Stats on rescueamericanjobs.org...Facts? by shadowxtc · · Score: 1

    This really has to be the most disturbing bit of information I've heard in a long time, if it happens to be true. http://www.rescueamericanjobs.org/info/amazing.htm l Who else thinks its time the intelligent people take control of our country? I've got no problem with LEGAL immigrants, or even them working here. I do have a problem when they're only coming to replace native workers, even more so when we're bleeding from the jugular our higher level workforce. Why not replace cashiers first?

  180. We are at war. FREE IS THE ANSWER. by twitter · · Score: 1
    I've been out of a "real" job for more than a year. It's been hard and I'm not alone. With enough time, I have decided why I am where I am and what to do about it.

    With companies offshoring all their engineering work AND screwing their customers at the same time, we are at war. The non free word, composed of MBA bean counters, "intelectual property" lawyers and other users are out to screw us all. The only answer for everyone is free software and direct service. This is a battle for survival, no mistake about it. The makers and creators of the things our former companies are selling must unite to recapture the value of their labor.

    Adobe, Quark, Ituit are only small pieces of the puzzle. The larger picture includes software service to everyone. Lawyers, doctors, restaurants, manufacturers, God bless the survivors, and anyone who uses any kind of computer program. Each is a nitch waiting to be effectively served. Windoze costs $100, while a free operating system can be installed in an hour that can be billed to a home user at $50. The Gimp has been used by Hollywood to make movies such as Scooby-Doo, surely it's good enough for 90% of graphic designers. You can bill these people for set up and administration time and they too will be winners. The other 10% you can sell GPL'd modifications. Medical managment software available is the pits, expensive, insecure and clumsy. For doctors, there is GNUmed. Lawyers only need text editing. KOffice should be good enough for them, but there is also Star Office, Open Office and Correl's Word Perfect to tide them over if they need it. Of all the people in the world, they should know best about free formats. For every concievable group of computer user, there is superior and less expensive free software!

    Get out there and take your money back! Fuck the people who have thrown you out onto the street. Simply sell your time and free software to people directly. When your customer needs something, make it happen. It's not as hard as it looks and it beats the hell out of some kind of second rate, no benefit shit work.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  181. Scribus anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Might be worth mentioning Scribus here, the best thing in the DTP world for Linux (and can run on Mac/Windows too). Undergoing a lot of active development. Check it out, free of activation at http://www.scribus.org.uk

  182. What are you worried about? by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 1

    The Word processor went about as far as it was going to go a few versions back. Every new version is just adding features that MOST users don't even use.

    Of course if you're M$ and have a monopoly you can just say we're not supporting this anymore and you have to buy the new OS.When things fuck up as bad as M$ this is an issue because of all the time you need tech support. I have found PS to be pretty stable.

    As far as the graphic editor going about as far as most users need, Photoshop is pretty much already there. Feathering graphic selections over multiple layers (now I'm just making shit up) is something that 99% of your users will never use.

    The people this affects REALLY are the dedicated Adobe people who live and breathe this stuff and maybe they make enough money to justify Adobe's price.

    The rest if us will just have to use Paint Shop Pro, GIMP or wait for a crack.

  183. Excel == Spreadsheet cell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The name Excel is based on the word cell, as in a spreadsheet cell.

    I agree a little bit about Powerpoint. Apple's Keynote software has a much better name. But Powerpoint does make sense. At the time it was released, doing a slideshow was a big deal, and normally the slideshows at business meetings were filled with bulleted points the speaker intended to address. In the 80's, anything executives did was Power this, Power that. You had Power Lunches, Power Naps, and by golly, if you gave a presentation, you were giving Power Points.

  184. SAVE GIFS IN GIMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can save GIFs with no problems. Oh, it must be because I actually read what the download page said and grabbed the GIF plugin too.

  185. after expenses ( I read your post) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    after all expenses paid we only saw a $45,000 profit


    And two of those expenses was your own six figure salary, and an equal salary for your spouse, for "consulting?"


    Oh, you forgot to pay yourself. Moron.

  186. -1 by lowmagnet · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Err, no.

    -1, "Bzzzzt wrong" post.

    --
    Heute die Welt, morgen das Sonnensystem!
    1. Re:-1 by Speare · · Score: 0
      Nice juxtaposition of sig and message.
      • Err, no.
      • -1, "Bzzzzt wrong" post.

        --
        Moderation is a waste of time.

      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
    2. Re:-1 by lowmagnet · · Score: 1

      You, sir, have just been bookmarked for future reading thanks to your comment ;) (especially for the game theory page)

      --
      Heute die Welt, morgen das Sonnensystem!
  187. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by cloudmaster · · Score: 1

    I've personally installed Quark 6 on several (5 or 6, I guess) Macs at my place of employment. Following the initial startup of the installed program, a little window comes up asking if I want to activate over the internet or some other way. I pick "internet", and click OK. Then, a few seconds later, the product is activated and running.

    Those machines are all behind a firewall (Linux iptables nat, in this case). Your firewall sucks. :)

    Adobe's online registration has been pretty good for me so far (on the same macs), except for the period where their web server was down. I expect similar performance from their registration system (if we ever upgrade, which isn't likely to happen soon).

  188. Will this hurt the printing industry? by CybSirius · · Score: 1

    The people in the printing industry I've met tend to believe that copying Photoshop for personal use is okay, but it should be purchased the moment it becomes one's livelihood. The reasoning is that Photoshop is a complicated software package and it takes time to master, and the only way to do that is to spend hundreds of hours in front of your computer learning it. But once it is used to make money, the software will pay for itself very quickly so at that point it is considered an investment.

    Having said that, it would be interesting to know how many professionals who now own ligitimate copies of Photoshop for their business once cut their teeth on "pirated" versions. If Adobe stomps out this attitude among the printing industry, then what will happen to the number and quality of new professionals?

  189. You were right. by wirefarm · · Score: 1
    The gimp.org website used to say that Pulp Fiction's gimp was the inspiration for the name, at least partially. I think it was an amusing retrofit of the name, or at least an interesting co-incidence.
    The gimp.org website no longer has this reference, though it does have an unexplained link to Pulp Fiction. Sadly, they're not in the Internet Archive, either.

    Ah, just found a link on Google:

    http://www.xach.com/gg/1997/1/profile/1/
    It took us a little while to come up with the name. We knew we wanted an image manipulation program like Photoshop, but the name IMP sounded wrong. We also tossed around XIMP (X Image Manipulation Program) following the rule of when in doubt prefix an X for X11 based programs. At the time, Pulp Fiction was the hot movie and a single word popped into my mind while we were tossing out name ideas. It only took a few more minutes to determine what the 'G' stood for.

    And to make the matter clear, the GIMP originally stood for General Image Manipulation Program, but has since been dubbed GNU software by Richard Stallman (with our agreement). Spencer and I decided that GNU Image Manipulation Program is a better usage of the 'G'.
    --
    -- My Weblog.
  190. Don't buy amoral products by Snaller · · Score: 1

    ...and product activation is amoral. Some people will undoubtedly feel justified downloading a cracked version instead- because if they think activation prevents that, they are very stupid.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  191. This is the nonsense argument by Snaller · · Score: 1

    It probably works quite well. Its the amoralty of tying you, like a slave, to this monolith for ever. It really drives how you haven't bought any property for yourself, you have rented your soul to the greed bastards.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    1. Re:This is the nonsense argument by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      The answer for you, and those who believe like you, is to simply not use Adobe products any longer. Better yet, I would suggest you not use any products that use product activation. Refuse to touch computers using Windows and insist that only pirated versions or free software be used in your presence.

      Product activation is here because people have consistently decided they would rather not pay for software and wanted to use it anyway. This is the reward for that position.

      Can it be cracked? Sure, today. If the piracy continues, you can bet there will be something stronger in place in a few years. How about something keyed to your fingerprint? How about "web services" where you don't get the application, just access to it? Don't like that, huh?

      Let me assure you that is the road the pirates, warez d00ds and others have put us on. They want something for nothing and today they have it. Investors, stockholders, and like folks don't like that. In their minds this means that people are using the products without paying. No matter how much the "technical" people whine about impact on customers and how it is all usesless anyway, product activation is here to stay. Subscriptions are coming. Web services are coming.

      Don't like it? You have a choice. Refuse to work with "activated" software (seriously career limiting), find a niche where you can use only free software, or get your friends to stop using "free" copies of what should be paid for.

      In the 80's after several rounds of copy protection (a completely different sort of thing) nearly all companies backed off. Partly because the world moved on, away from the Apple II where it was generally assumed you could sell two or three copies of anything - it was posted nationwide that fast.

      Well, here we are again with 0-day cracks and software purchased with stolen credit cards online. Financial consultants are telling software companies they have to DO SOMETHING about this RIGHT NOW or they are going down the tubes. Product activation is something they can do RIGHT NOW.

    2. Re:This is the nonsense argument by Snaller · · Score: 1

      The answer for you, and those who believe like you, is to simply not use Adobe products any longer.

      No. That's like saying "Don't like slavery? Don't keep slaves!" - It needs to be fought since its basically amoral.

      Product activation is here because people have consistently decided they would rather not pay for software and wanted to use it anyway. This is the reward for that position.

      This is a postulate that has never been proven. I have paid for good software, even though the curreny copyright laws allow them to earn more than is fair.

      Can it be cracked? Sure, today. If the piracy continues, you can bet there will be something stronger in place in a few years. How about something keyed to your fingerprint? How about "web services" where you don't get the application, just access to it? Don't like that, huh?


      I'm sure the amorals will come up with even more amoral crap. We can only hope people will wise up and vote in politicans who can curtail this crap.

      Let me assure you that is the road the pirates, warez d00ds and others have put us on.

      Well, since i don't believe you, you can't assure me of that.

      No matter how much the "technical" people whine about impact on customers and how it is all usesless anyway, product activation is here to stay. Subscriptions are coming.

      Don't bet on it - contrary to popular belief, sometimes the good guy scan win even in real life.

      Don't like it? You have a choice. Refuse to work with "activated" software (seriously career limiting), find a niche where you can use only free software, or get your friends to stop using "free" copies of what should be paid for.

      You overlook the other options: Actively boycot amoral firms. Support politicians who can make new law to make this kind of behaviour illegal.

      Well, here we are again with 0-day cracks and software purchased with stolen credit cards online. Financial consultants are telling software companies they have to DO SOMETHING about this RIGHT NOW or they are going down the tubes.

      Yeah yeah the amoral whiners, eventually they'll hire somebody with a clue.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  192. Perhaps you don't read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Go down to the library and look at the magazine section. Look at all the books. Look at the advertising pamphlets that fall out of the newspapers.

    In the world of print, hundreds of thousands of images are edited every day, all over the world. These images are much, much higher resolution than things you normally see on a computer screen.

    Real life is very different from the internet, with it's 128x96 banners that can be hacked up in anything.

  193. Truly Unfortunate... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I am a graphics designer and had been looking into Photoshop CS. A few magazines highlighted some of the features and they seemed rather interesting. Last week I secured approval to have it purchased.
    I am so completely sick of product activation in appliations that as of about 5 minutes ago, I withdrew my purchase request. Photoshop 7 is more than adequate. There is no quantity of features that would make me willing to be treated "guilty until proven innocent" by product activation (auditing).
    At home I have a rule: if a product requires activation, I avoid it and find alternatives. If I must buy it, I crack my legitimate copy and run it cracked. I know it's technically in violation of the EULA, but I figure once I've paid for it, a software company has no right to peer deeper into my life. Too bad the laws aren't written that way, huh?

  194. Your solution is by Snaller · · Score: 1

    ...get cracked programs...

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  195. Soooo??? Free distillers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For me, this is a stupid idea for Adobe. A free distiller (the program that makes PDFs outside of say word processors) has existed for sometime, and Open Office has a distiller built in. I even think Linux has a stand-alone distiller as well.

    Let 'em shoot themselves in the foot. Wish we could contact the people who bought Acrobat, and tell them of the free versions everywhere.

    Glad I don't pay for windows software. Keep 'em coming, Open source community :) They work just as good as the overpriced stuff.

  196. Help a programming geek... by c0dedude · · Score: 1

    I have a copy of Photoshop at school, but I don't know how to use it because I mainly do PHP/MySQL work. If someone could post a link to a site teaching how to do cool stuff with Photoshop, I would greatly appreciate it.

    --
    Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
  197. "Activation" and Piracy by asv108 · · Score: 1

    I understand that these companies want to prevent casual piracy but any of these activation schemes never deter piracy. The only people who end up dealing with activation problems are legitimate licensed users. What happens is legitimate users end up having to download cracked versions for convience. Look at windows XP, most people I know that use windows XP actually own legitimate copies but choose to download OEM XP ISO's so they don't have to deal with WPA.

  198. Except... by Snaller · · Score: 1

    the gimp sucks so bad... and the name, luck so much on linux, sounds totally stupid. Its kids developing for kids (at least "film gimp" changed name to "CinePaint" and suddenly got commercial donations because it didn't sound like something kids play with)

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  199. Quite right by Snaller · · Score: 1

    Though now you are likely to face a ton of people deriding your opinion.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  200. The price doesn't matter one bit by faust2097 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you're good with Photoshop it's difficult to not make more money than you spent on it in a year. Even a beginning designer could make enough to buy the whole suite in under a week. Plus it's deductible.

    Now there's a lot of people recommending thg Gimp in this thread and if you use it and enjoy it that's fine. But feature and usability-wise there is absolutely no comparison. Yes, OSS is wonderful but the fact remains that for someone who is trying to make money using a bitmap-editing program Photoshop offers a better value propisition than the Gimp does, even though you have to pay for it. Adobe doesn't take the money they make from Photoshop and use it to pay for a factory that converts orphans and kittens and orphaed kittens into fuel oil, they improve their products continuously. There's a reason that a real alternative to Photoshop doesn't exist and it's not because Adobe is anticompetitve or anything, it's because it's really hard and really expensive to make software as good Photoshop unless you're just ripping off thier feature list as quickly as you can. One of the reasons that I don't like The Gimp is that except for Script-fu and a mess of a user interface the developers brought nothing original to the bitmap editing table and are instead content to just poorly ape the work of others. Now that's innovation, eh?

    As far as activation goes, it's not that big of a deal either. Adobe is only using it on Photoshop for Windows. It's pretty obvious that it'll get cracked. They're probably just doing it to please their dumb shareholders who think that all those copies of Photoshop being used to ham-fistedly combine Domo-kun, Admiral Akbar and the Eiffel Tower at Fark will somehow magically become sales.

    1. Re:The price doesn't matter one bit by micheas · · Score: 1

      One of the reasons that GIMP does not compare to PhotoShop is patents. The PhotoShop works, GIMP doesn't work is limited to print. If the final output is print, you need panatone, etc. This is not available without going to closed source.

      In the video world. Cinapaint is more used by pro's than Photoshop. If your job is one the line research your tools. But the issues isn't that adobe makes better software. They have features that are patented, and if you need them. you have to use their products.

      Don't make this out to be a failure of the GIMP. Realize that when the patents expire, the features will be there.

  201. +5 Funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well done :)

  202. Re:Looks like it's time for OPEN-SOURCE alternativ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're sick of those points because they're true. Yes, Unix has had millions of dollars of engineering put into it. But we're talking about photo manipulation and publishing packages, not the OS they run on.

    And he doesn't say that its written by hobbyists or students. Please read what he wrote.

    His statements are entirely correct.

  203. Adobe's rationale? by base_chakra · · Score: 1

    Adobe's Creative Suite is clearly a response to Macromedia's MX Studio suite. This is further evidenced by Adobe's new pricing structure, in which indivudal products cost more than previous releases, but one gets a slightly better deal by buying the suite.

    The step up in copy protection is unwelcome, although no doubt overdue from Adobe's vantage point. This is not appear to be a time for creating new (unlicensed) users, but for leveraging all-or-nothing site licenses for most of their most popular products.

    For years, Adobe's copy protection scheme has been failry minimal, even in high ticket products like the UNIX version of FrameMaker+SGML. This made it easier to believe that they turned a blind eye to piracy of their (comparitively lower-priced) flagship products, especially given the prevailing theory that Adobe creates brand loyalty by tolerating college-age pirates. If one plays the devil's advocate and assumes that this theory is sound, perhaps we can interpret the new activation scheme as a sign that Adobe feels sufficiently entrenched in enough markets (or feels enough pressure from Macromedia), that it's time for a more aggressive strategy, however unpopular the change may be among users and budget planners.

    Suffice it to say that Adobe's protection methods were weak compared to certain other product lines with similar price points and consumer markets.

    However, what I find inexcusable is the steep upward trend of its pricing structure, especially in regards to educational licenses. My former university's art department was underfunded enough that they were almost always using development software that was one or two generations behind. This move will surely stifle upgrade possibilities even further.

    I don't doubt that Adobe is in a position to make certain demands. But, speculation aside, they've long struck me as a company that doesn't seem to fully grasp the impact their products can have on the desktop. I wish they'd use their powers more wisely.

    Two years ago, my company cohosted an Adobe convention of sorts. At this time, Adobe was strongly pushing Acrobat; unless I missed the point, Acrobat is supposed to universalize platform-independent shared documents. And who can create these "platform-independent" documents? Users of Windows and Mac OS!

    After the last presentation, I approached an Adobe marketing rep and frankly asked why they had dropped Linux support (they'd recently dropped plans to port one or more key products to Linux). The marketing person looked very annoyed, and refused to make eye contact. Her dismissive reply was, "You have to go where the market is." To me, this answer is nothing more than short-sighted bollocks, and I'm still flabbergasted by it. My response to Adobe now is this: 'You're Adobe. You fucking MAKE the market.' They have the power, but not the foresight. Just think how much more money shops would have to spend on Adobe products if they could run them on Linux.

  204. It's too expensive to begin with... by Kyouryuu · · Score: 1
    Adobe wouldn't have to insist on product activation and worry about piracy if they sold their product at a reasonable price point in the first place. People tend to pirate things that are out of their price range. Certainly, I know dozens who have Photoshop, but I doubt any one of them actually spent $579 for it.

    I see other posts in this thread talking about how the educational discount of $299 is a "steal." Perhaps this is true, relative to other Adobe products. But don't forget that vector drawing still necessitates Illustrator, which also costs a small fortune.

    If you want a "steal," you want Paint Shop Pro. We're talking about $100 for the complete package, but a paltry $40 for upgrading users (and I found my copy of PSP7 with upgrade discount for measly $15 at Best Buy). Though the "professionals" will argue what they will (and believe me, they argue on why you should cough up hundreds more), Paint Shop has always worked for me and I can produce Photoshop-level work in it. I'd be willing to gamble that Jasc suffers less from piracy as well.

    But rather than being a fanboy of Jasc products, my point is this. Adobe has to be ten times larger than Jasc is. Adobe's products are industry standards. In art circles, Adobe is a household name. So why is it, then, that Adobe charges five times as much for nearly the same program when the much smaller Jasc can get away selling it for a fraction? An economist would say supply and demand. I would say greed.

    Often you hear people whine about all of the "starving artists" in the world. Ever walk into an art supply store and be dumbfounded at how much things cost? It's no wonder artists are starving. I see Photoshop in that same light. Yes it's a great program. Yes you can make awesome stuff with it. But thriftiness is also a virtue, and in that respect Photoshop is not worth the price when there are far comparable, cheaper alternatives.

    What's "professional" does not immediately equate what's "best." It is merely what the majority is used to using.

  205. Aye! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Couldn't have said it better myself.

  206. Parent make a damn good point. by UncleRage · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Parent makes a good point. Don't believe it? Well...

    I once came dangerously close to losing a job over suggesting the use of GIMP.

    I worked for an NPO that provides essential living services (as well as group home services) for persons suffering from Cerebral Palsy. Like many NPO's, budgetary cutbacks were always sources of stress. So, during a roundtable where we were discussing switching as many departments as possible to open source alternatives, GIMP came up. This never went beyond the meeting table, but I was summarily written up for insentivity.

    And I am one of the very last "Thalidomide Children" (early 70's). For those that don't know, thalidomide caused birth defects (usually related to extremeties). Missing a hand, since birth, over here and I was severely reprimanded and nearly canned over suggesting a software title.

    It may seem silly, but people put alot into a name.

    ----

    --
    #SickNotWeak
  207. For Desktop Publishing, try Pagestream! by DG · · Score: 1

    If you're a desktop-publishing kind of guy, you might want to try Pagestream.

    http://www.grasshopperllc.com

    This started life as an Amiga and Atari ST desktop publishing program, but it has since expanded to Windows, Mac, and Linux.

    It is managed by a VERY small software house that has always been on the verge of bankruptcy (that's what happens when your customer base is on Amigas, and Chicken Lips goes under) but they are survivors, and over the years the core engine has gotten very good.

    I just bought the Linux version. The UI stuff is still pretty buggy, but the developers are very responsive to bug reports, and they "release early, release often" so it should get very much better on a reasonably short timeframe.

    The same thing happened back in the Amiga days. They released a major new version (3.0) and it was as buggy as hell, but with a lot of internet-based customer feedback, development was brisk.

    BTW, if there EVER was a program to get bought out by an angel like Red Hat, and then open-sourced while keeping the main programmers on staff (OpenOffice, Mozilla) this is one of them. It really is very good. I did quite a lot of production work with it back in the day.

    Give it a try!

    DG

    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
  208. On minor version!?! in Debian WOODY?!? by MickLinux · · Score: 1
    Never crashed on me. Maybe you used a development version? (odd minor version number ==> develoment version)



    I have Debian Woody, and can confirm that Gimp is slightly unstable, plus way too slow, for me. I don't like it at all.



    Plus, there is a ton of stuff which it can't do, AFAIK. Anyone have a Mac, try out the free(beer) Futurepaint. That's a ton more powerful than GIMP, in my book, and a ton faster, too. At that, it's slower and less powerful than its $20 predecessor, DeskPaint. But you can't get Deskpaint any more.



    But anyhow, my version, as it turns out, is 1.2.3. If I understand correctly, that means that Debian used a development version of GIMP in their Woody (stable) distribution.



    That's asking for trouble, IMO. I'm surprised that they did that. Just my 2 cents' worth.

    --
    Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
    1. Re:On minor version!?! in Debian WOODY?!? by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      No. It's not an unstable version. The major version number is the first one, the minor version number is the second one, and then you have incremental releases. The stability classification of the release depends on the minor version number, and being as 2 is even, you are indeed using a stable release of the Gimp.

    2. Re:On minor version!?! in Debian WOODY?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, thanks.

  209. Question by haxor.dk · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Now that most of us here agree that Adobe is slowly screwing their customers - I'd like to know, what alternatives to their products are there ?

    Photoshop - GIMP ? (come on...)
    Illustratore - Macromedia Freehand ?
    InDesign - Quark (oh dear!)
    Acrobat - ???

    Looks to me like we're screwed throughly until someone decides to expland GIMP or come up with a brand new program package that does vector illustration, portable documents, and advance image manipulation...

  210. Screw Adobe - They Should Follow Alias's Example.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    These stupid priced software products will never sell to a home user - never. $600 for a package that makes PDF's? Please - home users typically don't pay more than $100 for any piece of software - that's why XP Home is $100.

    This will only just screw them up. Activation is a pain in the ass for one user, but downright impossible for an IT department with 1200 users. This is labor intensive, slows down roll outs and inconviences users.

    Also, screwing with your home user's ability to use the software diminishes the software's acceptability in the enterprise. Users want to use the software they are comfortable with.

    Again, big software misses the big picture: Most users of their producitivity/design/graphics/editing packages have jobs and home computers. They are both corporate users and home users. THEY'RE THE SAME PEOPLE!

    I personally believe that if your company paid for a package at work for your PC, you should use it royalty free at home - and if your company didn't pay for it at work, you should still use it at home either for free or less than $100, as a marketing tool.

    Well - screw them. Adobe isn't the only game in town. Every product they make - Ulead makes one.

  211. Who would deal with these bozos. Remember Sklyarov by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, it was Adobe who set that whole charade in motion. Protecting their poor products with the force of law.

    No, I don't use anything from them. And won't ever.

    Derek

  212. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by 110010001000 · · Score: 0

    "It was loose in the serial port, and would lose contact with the app,"

    Wow, a post where both "lose" and "loose" were used properly - even in the same sentence!

    This guy isn't a "looser" at least! :-)

  213. Re:Who cares . Use opensource. by zymano · · Score: 1

    yeah gimp can't handle raster graphics !

    lol.

    Do you know what your saying ?

  214. Immoral versus amoral by Adam+J.+Richter · · Score: 1
    Its still amoral.

    Product activation is amoral, any company doing that deserves a boycot.

    Why does a company deserve a boycot for doing something amoral, "being neither moral nor immoral"?

    1. Re:Immoral versus amoral by Snaller · · Score: 1

      Thanks :)

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    2. Re:Immoral versus amoral by yerricde · · Score: 1

      A company that acts amorally, as all public corporations are required to do in their shareholders' interests, eventually will perform both actions that the general public regards as moral and actions that the general public regards as immoral. For example, the Walt Disney Company is only trying to increase its bottom line, but look at what happened.

      --
      Will I retire or break 10K?
  215. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by RevAaron · · Score: 1

    Or their new version is Crap, and if they could wait for the next release they would.

    And this does indeed happen- even with Adobe products. A long time ago, our department bought Acrobat 3, and it was good enough. Last year, we bought Acrobat 5- and it was decidedly not good. Some things were fine or about the same level, but other things, namely OCR, is complete and utter shit. So, I installed Acrobat 3 on another account on the machine and was able to go back to making OCR'd PDFs with relative ease.

    There's a good chance, Adobe does not support Acrobat 3 anymore, and therefore a chance that if that product required activation, we'd be SOL if we wanted to go back on a machine.

    --

    Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  216. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by tcd004 · · Score: 1

    You're lucky. Even in this day and age, many DTP machines aren't on the internet, or they're on an internet-enabled network wihout any ports open. Newspapers, magazines, etc. Many still function this way.

    I just hope quark beefs up the phone support.

    So when adobe's webserver was down, what did you do? Could you use the software?

    tcd004

  217. Examples of Copiers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Do they know how many art students and new graphic artists take a copy home to learn how to properly use this application that will now be limited to what they can learn in the shop? How do they think they got ahead of Quark and their like in the first place? They are not going to buy a new version, they cannot afford it. Hence the term struggling artists. I hope they enjoy a year or two without people upgrading and super low new features use. What scumbags. Casual copying was their greatest selling point. Why do they think they get recommended so often by employees? It's because they have a pirated copy at home and they liked it. Let see if GIMP gets a kick in the pants now, we need a good option.

  218. Re: alternatives to Photoshop by jonom · · Score: 1

    There are alternatives, actually. Photopaint for one.

  219. Re:Who cares . Use opensource. by raju1kabir · · Score: 1
    yeah gimp can't handle raster graphics ! Do you know what your saying ?

    I know exactly what I'm saying. Of course it can handle raster graphics, that's what it's for. However it is not "a decent 2-D vector or raster graphics app," to the standard set by the commercial alternatives. It is a toy and a proof-of-concept and the basis for a lot of embarrassing arguments by zealots who do not do serious professional graphics work.

    --
    "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
  220. Doesn't apply to Mac by 90XDoubleSide · · Score: 1

    Adobe is only adding activation to the Windows version of Photoshop CS.

    --
    "Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
  221. Re:Who cares . Use opensource. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No we don't.

    And if Adobe keeps pumping their prices up, the only ones buying their overpriced crap will be the 3 people who do.

  222. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by daviddennis · · Score: 1

    A careful reading of some of the other messages reveals that when Quark shuts itself down, it doesn't give you the opportunity to save your work. So if you have a bad hardware dongle, you'll lose your work done from your last save on.

    This appears to be unusual. I have Final Cut Pro installed on my spanking new G5 and my PowerBook G4. When I put them both on the same network, it will not allow me to use one of them. But it lets me save my work first - I'm just not allowed to use the two applications concurrently. That's fair.

    I'd call Quark's approach a serious problem.

    D

  223. Gimp in other languages means nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And it gets ignored too.

    As time passes, the more I think warez is free promo, no matter how much they whine about loosing sales.

    1. Re:Gimp in other languages means nothing by big.ears · · Score: 1

      As time passes, the more I think warez is free promo, no matter how much they whine about loosing sales.

      I've been reading /. too long. That word ("loosing") is misspelled so much here that it is beginning to look correct.

  224. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by lanswitch · · Score: 1

    So adobe has to come round to check if your dongle is correctly inserted. They should also come around to save your work for you.
    Advice: save your document every 5 minutes. When you do this you will never loose more than 5 minutes of work, even when adobe did not check if the dongle is inserted correctly...

  225. Photoshop is harder to use than ever. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Photoshop has been a farking mess since the release of version six. They changed a lot of basic things that has made it impossible for me to use Photoshop in a timely manner. I even can't do half of the things I used to do with Photoshop! Sure, I could read the ten ton manual from cover to cover again like I did eons ago. Why should I have to relearn the entire program though? Do they really think experienced users upgrade for the privelige of being total newbs again?

    I feel sorry for those who depend on this bloated application's useability to make a living. Adobe did a great job of modernizing Photoshop right up to version 5.5. Then something happened. Somebody on the Adobe team said "Hey, why don't we switch around 95% of the features and put them in a place where our users can't easily find them?" The only thing saving them from disaster is Jasc's own awful GUI methodology and a lack of two or three features.

    As for me, I've given up using Photoshop for much of anything but resizing and saving photos for the web. What a great tool for $500+ dollars, eh?

    1. Re:Photoshop is harder to use than ever. by bikerguy99 · · Score: 1

      you are right on the money anon coward it is simplu insane that every graphics product has to follow the route of Canvas (remember the simplicity of Canvas 3 and the horror of what followed?) and Freehand that sucked soccer balls from the very beginning here's a simple test: how many of Photoshop and Illustator users enjoyed drawing/adding arrows? Such a simple thing but guess what - nothing is simple anymore...

  226. Modern Machine Shop magazine by morcheeba · · Score: 1

    A machine shop owner could just find spamming the forums of their favorite magazine :-)

    Excellent arguement and well put, but there is the exception that the dongle-protection-creator is exceptionally dumb and implements the same software interface in all products. Then, someone could write a rouitine that searches the executables for a function called Check_Dongle_Attached and patch it so that it always returns 1.

    EDA tools us flexlm extensively - they've virtually got a lock on the market because phb's won't allow more than one kind of licensing scheme to keep up with (and run servers for). Flexlm is also priced attactively enough for software producers so that it's just under the cost for any one company to roll-their-own (~$30k). It offers good features, but security-wise, it still sucks and is regularily broken for all products that use a particular version number of flexlm.

  227. FlexLM by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 1

    As things like that go, FlexLM is not all that bad. It's not so much an activation system as it is just a place to put serial numbers. You can make it support phone activation, but I haven't really ever seen it phone home or anything like that. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it does not appear to be as much of a goon as you might think.

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

  228. Explain by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 1

    How is it amoral? Not too smart, sure... but amoral?

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

    1. Re:Explain by Stu+Charlton · · Score: 1

      what's even worse is that he switches words... first it's amoral, then it's immoral.

      He's probably right, amoral means "without morals". It's a business decision (and probably a poor, short-sighted one).

      As for being "immoral", that's an RMS-like complaint about freedom that is subject to debate.

      --
      -Stu
  229. but... by n0wak · · Score: 1

    I'm not funny, you insensitive clod!

  230. they still dont get it by Datasage · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Software avtivation schemes have been out for years in many diffrent forms. All they manage to do is inconvience the legal users of the product.

    The people who pirate will still pirate it anyway. These are not studios who have alot to loose if they get caught, but just students and independent users who want to learn the software.

    No copy protection sheme is unbreakable, its just a matter of time. It will be cracked.

    --
    In America we are imprisoned by our fear of them.
  231. Graphic designers need to.... by StarTux · · Score: 1

    Form a group that helps develop an alternative to Photoshop, just like what happened with Film Gimp, now known as Cinepaint.

  232. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by Doomdark · · Score: 1
    1. I'm basing my crash problems on Quark 6 which I have little experience using so far. Previous versions of quark are notoriously buggy so I don't expect this one to be much better.

    Whatever else you think about the company, or its products (XPress is not the only one... but only one with much significance), there are huge differences in bugginess between versions. 5.0 was reasonably bug-free, esp. compared to 4.x series (albeit years late), 6.0 is (from what I've heard) also fairly bug-free, due to its internals being rewritten so dev. team now had full understanding of the code. 4.0 was horrible, in comparison, and took months to get patch releases that made it usable.

    As to installation and activation; yeah, that sucks. It's stupid form Q's part to make it that complicated... they are just being paranoid and greedy there. :-/

    --
    I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
  233. Quark did not ship their ENTIRE engineering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    (pardon my anonymity, but in case of Quark and its despotic sue-happy owner, I'm rather safe than sorry).

    Quark has not moved ALL of its engineering to India. Pretty much all QA and dev. support has been moved, at this point, and much of engineering. However, core team that actually knows XPress, architechs and designs it, and implements anything remotely compliated, is still in Denver. That's a fairly small but very talented team (two dozen developers or so); and only thing that really keeps QuarkXPress going.

    As to the "Indian office"... that's a sad sad story. Hundreds of developers, doing specs-in, garbage out. Not because of developers being bad, just completely inexperienced, communication being a hurdle, and Quark not paying well even in India (by local standards that is). And when devs there get experience, they find a new job (in India or USA), to earn more.

    In fact, the reason core engineering remains in USA is exactly because THEY JUST CAN'T MOVE IT ALL at this point. And that they try so hard to do it is due to owner's agenda. He's a business man who thinks development is just another factory, where one warm body is just like the next one, and what matters is how many hours one works, at what rate. That's idiotic (anyone who knows software development knows there's at least 10x difference between best developers and those barely worth keeping) ideological dream... but that's how it is.

    Upside of this all is that now, finally, after couple of years of hiring freeze, Quark is actually hiring s/w engineers in US too. It's almost like admitting the blunder of trying to off-shore the whole thing ("settlement without admitting wrong-doing").

  234. In RED China... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    In RED China, they empty the REDnaut's piss bottle from SPACE, right on top of D.C. The black water they save until they're over Taiwan.

  235. It's the same bug that hit Microsoft and SCO... by petermdodge · · Score: 1

    ... Adobe's failing to innovate. It can't come up with anything fresh and new - and it's loosing customers over it. 7.0 is my last upgrade unless something life-changing happens to the Adobe Photoshop programming team. I've pretty much switched over to the GIMP as much as I can.

    --


    Peter M. Dodge,
    Chief Executive Officer,
    LiquidFire Studios

    Platinum Linux - www.
  236. When will Adobe learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought Adobe had made a decision to only make money from corporations. I figured they sat down and said "obviously no one in their right mind would pay $500 for software unless they were using company money. So, we'll just charge that and expect everyone else to pirate our software, and only use it legally when in a workplace."

    I'm certainly willing to accept this buisness decision, but it seems that somewhere they must have forgotten that whole thing. Now they're just being offensive with their prices!

  237. Re:Who cares . Use opensource. by zymano · · Score: 1
  238. There is no "open source alternative" for Photosh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GIMP has become quite sophisticated. More so than I thought. I think people (like you) might take it more seriously if it had a better name.

  239. Re:Looks like it's time for OPEN-SOURCE alternativ by jrockway · · Score: 1

    > Will the open-source alternative fill the void ?

    I don't think so. I do think that the open-source alternatives are almost always better for experienced computer users.

    Let me give an example. Yesterday, I saw an ad for some Macromedia product that allows people to update the content on a webpage without messing with the design. Good idea. I applied the same idea to update one of my pages years ago with a simple perl script. Run ./update_notes and type the news and it would be on the page. Easy.

    But the problem is it isn't easy for other people. They need a shiny UI that matches their point-and-drool web design tools. So I think there will always be a market for software with a solid, shiny UI and good technical support. The open-source movement doesn't seem to fufil the needs of idiots by providing this. They seem to cater to smart people that want to read to learn how to use something. Word is easier to learn than Emacs+LaTeX, but the flexibility and end-results of LaTeX are far better than the alternatives. But you have to type commands instead of clicking pretty widgets.

    So my point is that people are too stupid to use open source software. And that's not a bad thing :)

    --
    My other car is first.
  240. Adobe and profiteering by glassesmonkey · · Score: 1

    Something must be up. They are contracting with auditing firms to check up on licenses which seems rather expensive in my opinion.

    They have recently decided to audit my University (the formerly largest single campus in the country) and the IT folks have required everyone to report every version of Adobe products (even the fonts!) that happen to be installed in any machine on the network..(even personal boxen) (and yes, that includes the campus-wide wireless network and laptops from home) Which I don't really get cause I believe there are university-wide agreements, edu only uses, and many students and mostly just the 'free' reader is installed.

  241. Will piracy cause Adobe's prices to go UP or DOWN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    I (like many others) get all of my Adobe products for free from P2P. And the P2P distros often have product-activation stripped out of them.

    So does this mean that the price of Adobe's products will go DOWN in the long-term to compete with the $0 P2P price (much like Universal's recent CD price drop)?

    Or does it mean that the price of Adobe's products will go UP in the long-term to make up for revenues lost to P2P distribution?

    Also: Would P2P piracy have more overall impact on the price (in the long term) than the addition of the product-activation feature would? In other words, is the inclusion of product-activation like trying to bail out the Titanic by using a bucket?

  242. Re:WAREZ IS THE REASON ADOBE (& M$, &..) I by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The protection is useless. It will be cracked with or without activation. But their stupid argument is as always: we do not want that people can simply copy their CD. And that it is all. It will only stop people who only buy one copy for many users. That's all. ADOBE wants money.

  243. Re:Who would deal with these bozos. Remember Sklya by vegetablespork · · Score: 1

    Thanks to Adobe's jackbooted treatment of Sklyarov, I've spoken at conferences to people who would have bought Distiller and taught them how to create PDFs with Ghostscript and Ghostview.

    --

    Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.

  244. Sounds like a blow to commercial software then by Baki · · Score: 1

    This story (and others in this thread) makes me think. It makes buying software ever more risky than I thought.

    It might be very beneficial for free software.

  245. Re:Adobe PDF by typo83 · · Score: 1

    While reading an adobe PDF document, a very long one, and paging through it,page after page, after page, I suddenly noticed just how much it was like reading MICROFICH! Can you say 'OBSOLETE'? Of course you can. Adobe might be great for creating a document, but it really sucks when you have to read it. I refer you to the online 1000+ pages for MySQL in pdf. Ah, printing it all out on paper wouldn't help much would it?

  246. FUD by perlchild · · Score: 1
    hint?

    Economic theory says you agree with their policy if you buy their products in sizable numbers(under capitalism: if they make money, they're right).

    Hopefully, they'll realize they're wrong before they fade away fast enough to take away from the public domain whatever innovations they promised by filing their patents.

    Of course, the "intent" of the law was to provide monetary incentive for people to innovate and give back to the commons. Yet intent is never protected by the laws...

    However I'm sure a case would be made that the limited monopoly granted by the patent expires at some date defined by law, and "the people" owns everything at that point... Pity "the people" can't be recognized as a debtor of companies that file patents and bankrupt less than (I believe in Canada it's 17 years, except for pharmaceuticals) 17 years after filing the patent. Of course, "the people" would take money away from "the employees of the late firm" and be bad guys.

    --

    Sometimes it doesn't pay to get out of your bed of ignorance in the morning.

  247. reasons not to (like or) use acrobat by goon · · Score: 1

    [adobe acrobat 6.0]
    *slow load time
    *poor searching capability
    -CTRL-F
    -enter value to search
    -press *search*
    -get results
    -to find again press *new search*
    -last search results disappear??
    *very slow scrolling
    -1 page per screen
    -up/down scrolling is painful
    -forcing you to use bookmarks which are not fine grained enough.
    *poor use of screen real estate
    -sidebar
    -statusbar
    -searchbar
    -but difficult to turn off
    *overwhelming options
    -View has 16 sub options for instance
    *pdf metaphor broken
    -PDF: Unfit for Human Consumption
    "... Users get lost inside PDF files, which are typically big, linear text blobs that are optimized for print and unpleasant to read ...J.Neilsen"

    --
    peterrenshaw ~ Another Scrappy Startup
  248. such socialist bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    So, the government makes taxes and regulations so unpleasant for corporations that they start outsourcing overseas, and when they do so, they're the villians, instead of the government! Brilliant.

    We believe that the Constitution grants its citizens economic rights, and we endeavor to protect & support these rights


    I guess that the citizens who own and operate those corporations don't have the same rights that the rest of us do.

    Socialist fucktards. "Rescue American Jobs?" I got an idea. Make business more attractive and the businesses will hire here instead of over there. In the meantime, all your well meaning idiocy is just that -- idiocy.

  249. Adobe also killed Cool Edit by FreekyGeek · · Score: 1

    Adobe also recently bought Cool Edit, the best inexpensive audio editor out there. It's now called "Adobe Audition". They've discontinued the basic verison (Cool Edit 2000) and are now charging $300 for what use to be Cool Edit Pro.

    Sucks to see a big company kill a great product like that. I guess they don't want the buinss of those of us who want a good basic editor but don't want to, or can't spent the money for their overpriceds version.

    Bye-bye, Cool Edit. You had a good run. :(

  250. Harder to use? More expensive? nothing new.. by srcosmo · · Score: 1
    At least relative to their competition, Adobe has been producing harder-to-use and more expensive software for years.
    Remember Corel's PhotoPaint and CorelDraw? Those two bundled together sell for half of the price of Photoshop alone.

    Unfortunately, they've never really caught on. Why? Because, as this product activiation scheme shows, Adobe now has virtual control over the graphics software market, and MS did with Office, are free to pull these inconviencing tricks on their users. Perhaps it's time the users (== us) considered the price of Adobe's continued dominance, and tried out some alternatives.

    And maybe we can finally stop using "photoshop" as a verb... :)

    --
    free speach
    Did you mean: free speech
    1. Re:Harder to use? More expensive? nothing new.. by acceleriter · · Score: 1

      Precisely. In fact, a successful implementation of a product activation scheme is prima facie evidence of a monopoly and warrants investigation by antitrust authorities. (For example, Intuit, which does have meaningful competition in the tax preparation software market, was forced to back down on its scheme.)

      --

      CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.

  251. Re:Looks like it's time for OPEN-SOURCE alternativ by BiggyP · · Score: 1

    i'm sorry, but the main reason i know of that prevents web designers switch to The GIMP is both a reliance on win32 and the way P$ does things.

    of course, the other is that attitude that you only get GOOD software if you pay money for it, i'm sorry, this simply isn't the case.

    unfortunately these people get stuck in their ways...

  252. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by cloudmaster · · Score: 1

    Why would they need to be "on the internet" with ports open? No one can connect to our machines, our machines connect to the registration server which then replies, over the same connection, with an activation - just like getting a web page.

    That could fail, potentially, if the registration system was written with bad assuptions. It could also fail if some over-zealous network admin blocked internal access to external ports other than 80 and maybe 443, but there's almost no reason to do that, and nearly no *good* reasons to do so.

    I do agree that not every machine is even capable of getting to the internet, which may have been the point, :) and yeah, phone support should really be an option. I was mostly speaking to the idea that a firewall woudl prevent registration, and that, while I think the people at Quark are idiots, I don't think they would make their registration system any more difficult than "connect to web site and download activation code after uploading serial number"...

    As far as Adobe's downtime, I waited until the next day. The programs work for several days without registration. The same's true of Macromedia's stuff - they're fully-functioning demos for 30 days (identical to the download version, AFAICT), at which point the activation needs to happen. 30-day downtime is pretty unlikely in any event that won't render the ability to create flash movies moot. ;)

  253. Acrobat alternatives? by Mark+Bainter · · Score: 1
    Does anyone know of any good alternatives for acrobat? Like others on this thread I've noticed that acrobat is only getting bigger and more bloated. Many of my clients have to be able to generate pdf documents now, and acrobat is practically unusable for them.

    Can anyone recommend alternative software that runs under windows, can create pdf's from scanner input, and can create pdf documents through a 'pdf printer' style interface? Easy enough on linux, but there's quite a few alternatives on the Windows side, with no real clues as to which if any are any good.

    If anyone's used one of these and is happy with it, this is probably a good place to post such information.

    --
    "No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."
    --James Madison
  254. Photoshop Elements by yerricde · · Score: 1

    Adobe should do something like Alias|Wavefront does with Maya - release a free, 90% functionality version

    I don't know about free, but Adobe does sell a 90% functionality version of Photoshop for $100 for one seat. Photoshop Elements includes just about everything in Photoshop except for high-end prepress features, without watermarks. It's more than enough for photoshopping your face onto somebody elses body or photoshopping "All your base are belong to us" onto a Chick-fil-A ad. In overall capability, it's a bit above GIMP but below the full version of Photoshop.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  255. Bezier selection in GIMP by yerricde · · Score: 1

    Gimp was still missing features as basic as a k-line selection tool

    What's a "k-line selection tool"? That sounds like something that would fit in a graphical program for configuring an IRC server. A quick Google query pulls up nothing relevant to the discussion of image editors.

    Did you mean "polygon selection tool"? GIMP has that; it looks like a calligraphic pen with a short curve coming out of it, and the curve has a small box that vector drawing program users may recognize as a "control point." Its tooltip is "Select regions using Bezier curves", and its default hotkey is 'b'. Draw your polygon by clicking (or draw your Bezier shape by dragging from each on-curve control point to an off-curve control point), and then click inside the polygon to select its contents.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
    1. Re:Bezier selection in GIMP by S.Lemmon · · Score: 1

      The selection tool I'm talking about is exactly like the freehand selection tool except you can draw the selection with connected line segments.

      It's not the path tool you describe (which Photoshop also has) but works on a pixel level to directly make or extend a selection. That's important as a path and a selection are two different things. A path is a vector overlaid on top of the image. Sure, you can convert it to a selection, but that's an extra step (and thats not the only problem).

      In Photoshop and most similar programs, you can usually get a k-line while making a freehand selection by holding down an aditional key. Especially when zoomed in tightly, the line segment will follow the "staircase" of the pixels so you can see *exactly* what will be selected. Without this, the freehand selection to is usually too inexact to be of much use.

  256. But we're talking about Photoshop... by Stevyn · · Score: 1

    Have you ever used it? People use Photoshop because it is such an amazing program. It can do everything conceivable to a photo, and then 100 things you didn't even think of. I think you're trying to compare Photoshop to windows. Windows is being threatened by Linux, but there is nothing in the open source bin that will even come close to Photoshop. I'm an avid Photoshop user because I use it for my work and everything else I've used pales in comparison. This is not windows, this is not preinstalled on every computer where people have little choice. This is a professional graphics program that is used by people who will pay for it because they feel that it is a fair price because it is their livelihood. They will not put their neck on the line supporting an open source clone of Photoshop while it's in development.

    All Adobe is trying to do is prevent the rampant piracy of their software. Photoshop is very common among warez groups because it is easy to distribute. This is not evil Microsoft DRM; this is a company that makes one of the best graphics programs protecting their investment. And users will only upgrade if this program has many new features. I've used Photoshop 5 through 7 and I haven't found too many new features, but that's because they did such a good job in earlier versions. Another reason that this is not like windows is because people aren't forced to upgrade to get rid of all the bugs, they do it solely for the new features and better designed interface. I have said this in the past and I believe it more now, if Adobe would make Photoshop for Linux, you'd see hordes of people switching overnight.

    And for god sakes!! This is not FUD! People can use Photoshop on Macs too, as it was originally developed for I believe. These people are not scared that embracing an open source alternative will send a lightning bolt from the heavens. They simply look at their job, how they make their living, what is currently available, and make the decision based on that. They could care less if hobbyists want to tinker around with something like GIMP; they care about what is the best product that is currently available.

    If GIMP or some other clone of Photoshop exceeds the capabilities of Photoshop, then they'd probably switch. But don't expect them to switch to GIMP now and risk their livelihood based on political correctness.

    1. Re:But we're talking about Photoshop... by BiggyP · · Score: 1

      i'm not suggesting for a moment that people switch in the name of political correctness, i'm simply pointing out that the alternative is a serious one, and not just for hobbyists, surely you've seen some seriously ugly and obviously Photo$hop driven work littering the web produced by so called "professionals", maybe it's because they're simply lazy, or maybe they really don't know how to apply a bevel to text either way, there are plenty of people out here who are using photo$hop, costing their company a license, and not even needing a tenth of the functionality, so, if you say that GIMP isn't a suitable replacement for the profesional, where do you place people who get paid too much to tinker with P$?

    2. Re:But we're talking about Photoshop... by Stevyn · · Score: 1

      um...Photoshop elements or any of the many other graphics programs out there that is designed for people to do simple tasks without paying for a $700 program.

  257. Hell yeah! by Stevyn · · Score: 1

    This guy is 100% correct.

  258. offtopic by pyrrho · · Score: 1

    I think not.

    --

    -pyrrho

  259. Move along folks, there's nothing to see by Zog+The+Undeniable · · Score: 1

    I bet the crack will be out in less than a month.

    --
    When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
  260. Re:WAREZ IS THE REASON ADOBE (& M$, &..) I by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "Did you really think Adobe would be as stupid as you to actually ignore this basic fact?"
    Hell yeah. I used to work for a software company which had a quite popular piece of software. And the more people used it, the more people would get to know about it and consequently buy it.

    But then the sales people decided that we weren't making enough money.

    So they started adding all sorts of crap to annoy people into buying it, and they added stuff to make it harder to crack.

    Never mind the fact that people pirating the software actually spread the word about it to their friends, and that's how the software's user base grew in the first place. The sales people didn't care about market share or anything like that. Their attitude was that it doesn't matter if hardly anyone uses the software, as long as everyone who does use it is a paying customer. Meaning: Fewer and fewer as they managed to run the program into bug hell and pester both warez puppies and legitimate users with more and more crap.

    Don't underestimate the stupidity of sales and marketing people! And since they are the ones figuring out how to bring in money, they have power.

  261. OpenOffice.org 1.1 PDF != Forms by KagatoLNX · · Score: 1

    Perhaps you missed this, but I need PDF forms.

    PDF has an extension that appeared in 4.0 to allow you to draw forms on the PDF and automate them with JavaScript.

    OpenOffice doesn't yet give me that. My other alternatives are OmniForm (had trouble there) or Ms Word.

    Lesser of three evils, no?

    --
    I think Mauve has the most RAM. --PHB (Dilbert Comic)
  262. Can't Explain No Linux Frame by 4of12 · · Score: 1

    Another of the unusual business decisions that Adobe made was to

    • acquire Framemaker
    • not release it for Linux, despite Linux desktops edging out all the other Unix desktop platforms that Frame runs on.
    They had a beta program which they discontinued.

    With their other products and with MS Word out there for Windows and Mac, giving up the Linux market when they had a reasonable product for it seems particularly screwy to me. I think the mantra of "focus, consolidate" has acquired a life of its own in Adobe's management ranks.

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
  263. Re:The problem with activation for legimitate user by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Why not just put a user name and password into it then?