Slashdot Mirror


Adobe Acquiring Macromedia on December 3, 2005

dennison_uy writes "Adobe Systems Incorporated and Macromedia, Inc. today announced they have either received or been notified they will receive all regulatory clearances necessary to complete Adobe's pending acquisition of Macromedia. The companies expect to close the transaction on December 3, 2005. Does this mean the end for Fireworks and Freehand?"

13 of 262 comments (clear)

  1. Macradobe by Short+Circuit · · Score: 5, Funny
    We mustn't forget the Macradobe song!

    To the tune of Yankee Doodle Went to London

    Big Adobe went to town
    Riding with great worry
    "Microsoft might buy our foes
    Goodness let us hurry"

    Big Adobe, buy them out
    Big Adobe dandy
    Mind the lawsuits and the FUD
    And with your cash be handy

    Macromedia went to the web
    With great Flash and vigour
    Then Adobe said to them:
    "We ownz you, start to quiver"

    Big Adobe, buy them out
    Get yourself a trophy
    Buy a business out of fear
    And call it Macradobe

    All you geeks and all you nerds
    Reading this here story
    Remember what the Parent said
    And call it Macradobe
  2. The voice for all Australians.... by Paska · · Score: 4, Funny
    Adobe Acquiring Macromedia on December 3, 2005


    That's today you insenstive clod!

    I for one live in the future, which puts December 3rd as, well, right now.
    1. Re:The voice for all Australians.... by GoatMonkey2112 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Please stop sending us those Terminators. They're causing a lot of problems and they can't stop fate anyway.

  3. Software line-up changes? by Cyphertube · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have my own personal bets about what will be going, but of course, that's from my own perspective. From what the majority of analysts say, yes, Freehand will likely go, as will GoLive.

    Much speculation exists regarding Fireworks vs. Photoshop. Photoshop will, of course, stay. What I wonder about is whether or not ImageReady will go. If they could merge some of the features of Fireworks into Photoshop, it would be a fabulous product. I've never liked ImageReady to export photos for the web, and I've not liked using Photoshop for creating simple graphic elements for online either. With enough support, Fireworks may stick around by itself, even.

    While I've consistently used products from both companies, and many an employer will likely reap an initial cost-savings from the merger, I am sad to see that competition in this industry has faded. I don't think even a company with as much cash to burn as Microsoft can break in any time soon. However, the tools themselves are pretty well set, so I think the next cool thing will be modifying the user interfaces to be even MORE user-friendly and intutitive. Go GIMP and bring on some competition!

    --
    Linux - because it doesn't leave that Steve Ballmer aftertaste.
  4. Background info by JonN · · Score: 5, Informative
    Here are a few links for background information for anyone who needs:

    How the Adobe-Macromedia Merger Could Impact PDF
    Interview of both CEOs
    Staff's comments
    Article with a bit more bulk on the subject (The article linked about is quite small)

    --
    do.what.promptcmds
  5. Macromedia used to be cool by pubjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've used Macromedia products since their early days. They used to be cool - a big focus on the developer and keeping everything open. They don't feel so cool these days, they just seem to want to squeeze as much money out of me as possible, and I've started to resent it.

    For instance, making a "professional" version of the Flash tool - I'm sure pretty much everyone who buys Flash is a professional, the "professional" version is just an excuse to charge extra for things that should be in the main product.

    And they are trying to push developers in the direction they want them to go, rather than providing what developers want. For instance, they have a heavy focus now on using Flash for on-line forms and applications, but when was the last time you actually used a Flash application online? And yet many developers use PHP and are now interested in Ruby and AJAX but Macromedia have very poor support for those technologies.

    I would like to think something positive will come out of this merger, but I'm afraid the new Adobe will just use their new powers to try to force developers in the direction they want them to go and find new ways to squeeze more money out of them.

  6. Fireworks by Phil+John · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is really not a steaming pile at all. It's the only decent app out there that handles vector graphics as well as bitmapped equally well. It's a godsend for an awful lot of people. Plus, it's much easier to "dive in" than with photoshop for someone who doesn't do much graphics work, but is forced to every now and then.

    PNG support is also much better, it produces smaller, better quality files than Photoshop manages to.

    I do agree with your comment on freehand however, it is indeed doodooo.

    --
    I am NaN
  7. The future by NoSuchGuy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    will bring us more:
    - more PDFs on web pages
    - more Flash on webpages
    - more Flash in PDFs
    - more PDFs in Flash

    --
    Grundgesetz * 23. Mai 1949 - 30. November 2007 - http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/
  8. Re:Speed by giorgiofr · · Score: 4, Informative

    No, it's because of the three thousand plugins that are loading while you watch that splash screen. Move them from the plugins dir to a backup one, restart Acrobat and see it fail, read what plugin is missing, restore it, repeat 3-4 times and notice how it now takes less than 1 sec to show up.
    I tried it and the loading time went from like 10 to 1 second.
    Then of course when you're doing something that requires a plugin, restore it and leave it there (for example, the search function *is* a plugin... WTF?) but anyway 90% of them won't be needed.
    HTH

    --
    Global warming is a cube.
  9. Re:PNG better quality? by illtud · · Score: 5, Informative

    That's odd... short of saving at 16bits/channel (which maybe Photoshop can't do - I don't touch that thing), I don't think there are any quality settings with PNG per se; it is a lossless format, after all.

    There's a lot you can to optimize PNGs, for example with pngcrush. See Wikipedia's detail on PNG filesizes. For more info on PS's bad handling of PNG, see Photoshop & PNG about halfway down that page.

  10. Re:Farewell Freehand, You'll be missed :( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    FreeHand has been dead for a year now. The entire development team in Richardson. TX was disbanded in March 2003. Everyone was laid off (including me), Development was moved to Bangalore, but that effort was axed after 10 months or so without any results. No wonder, our codebase was exceedingly convoluted.

    A shame really. The FH development process was a fine example of how things were supposed to be done. Proper bug tracking, competent managers (no, I was just a grunt developer), plenty of testers, proper specs. One can argue with the actual features and the archaic nature of the multitude of settings but the process was good. The latest release has unfortunately not held up well on OS X though.

  11. Re:Flash Plugins by tverbeek · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I can't believe I'm seeing this kind of discussion here on Slashdot. I thought more or less everyone here agreed that Flash is the single largest scourge on the web (possibly, but only possibly, after MSIE).

    Sorry to disappoint your faith in groupthink. Flash has legitimate, appropriate uses, such as creating sites that go beyond simple click-to-the-next-page interfaces. Just because it's frequently misused, or because you don't see any value in rich media and want it banned from the web, doesn't mean that everyone agrees with you.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  12. Re:Flash Plugins by theoneknuckles · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I am sick and tired on websites that use 30% of my CPU just to show a useless, animated logo, or using Flash menus that can't be searched in or for, and unable of being indexed by search engines, and that break back and forward navigation, or waiting 10 seconds or more when a new page loads just to be shown the intro animation for that page.

    This is because you're only being exposed to "Skip-Intro" sites built by incompetent Flash users that don't know how to code in Actionscript and so are left making movieClips and timelines. Problem is that movieClips, especially invisible ones, CONTINUE to play little blinking animations etc in the background and will hog your CPU. It's important to note that this is NOT a problem with Flash or the plugin, you can put that problem squarely on the head of idiot users.

    Macromedia's website is built on 80% Flash content, does your CPU run at 30% + to view it? No. Why? Because they have users that *know* how to build proper Flash animations.

    Try viewing a page with 7+ animated gifs and see what happens to your cpu.