Slashdot Mirror


Against Apple, Ballmer Floats Microsoft Merger With Adobe

Ebbesen writes "Ballmer had a meeting with the CEO of Adobe, and among other things: 'The meeting, which lasted over an hour, covered a number of topics, but one of the main thrusts of the discussion was Apple and its control of the mobile phone market and how the two companies could partner in the battle against Apple. A possible acquisition of Adobe by Microsoft were among the options.' Apparently MS has courted Adobe previously, but feared anti-trust regulations. With Google and Apple gaining, Microdobe might be possible."

520 comments

  1. Bleeeechhhh by paimin · · Score: 5, Informative

    I just vomited in my coffee.

    --
    Facebook is the new AOL
    1. Re:Bleeeechhhh by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Funny

      I just vomited in my coffee.

      Doubtless Microsoft-Adobe's first product line, to be followed by Shit-In-A-Dish 2.0 (they'll start the version there to underline just how unique this new collaborative technology is).

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Bleeeechhhh by zooblethorpe · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, you see, your problem there is you're drinking bleeeechhhh. That would make anyone vomit.

      Cheers,

      --
      "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
      "A four-foot prune."
    3. Re:Bleeeechhhh by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 5, Funny

      Microdobe might be possible

      I think they meant Microbe (pronounced my-CROW-bee). If you had some of that in your coffee that'll make you puke like a pro.

    4. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Threni · · Score: 5, Funny

      Imagine the power of Microsoft's experience in insecure bloat, and Adobes undisputed skill in...owning Flash, we can look forward to bloated, insecure flash.

      Wait, what?

    5. Re:Bleeeechhhh by perpenso · · Score: 4, Funny

      I just vomited in my coffee.
      --
      Facebook is the new AOL

      You signature just made me snort iced tea up my nose as I laughed.

    6. Re:Bleeeechhhh by v1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Among the "top 10" for insecure software products, I can see the pack leaders are Windows, Acrobat PDF plugins, and Flash. Such a merger sounds like a match made in heaven.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    7. Re:Bleeeechhhh by paimin · · Score: 1

      All that's missing is "YOU'VE GOT MAIL!"

      --
      Facebook is the new AOL
    8. Re:Bleeeechhhh by straponego · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, and they can get rid of that stupid cross-platform support too!

    9. Re:Bleeeechhhh by paimin · · Score: 2, Funny

      All that's missing is "YOU'VE GOT MAIL!"

      Wait a minute...I think I just came up with a good idea for a Facebook application.

      --
      Facebook is the new AOL
    10. Re:Bleeeechhhh by sconeu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      $SO_AND_SO has invited you to join $GAME!

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    11. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give adobe their due. They too are experts at bloat...I mean I'm pretty sure photoshop is going to launch sometime tonight with it's 8 million plugins.

    12. Re:Bleeeechhhh by microbee · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sorry, what?

    13. Re:Bleeeechhhh by edxwelch · · Score: 1

      > we can look forward to bloated, insecure flash

      how will we be able to tell the difference?

    14. Re:Bleeeechhhh by duguk · · Score: 1

      I just vomited in my coffee.

      What do you expect when you put 'Bleeeeachhhh' in there?

    15. Re:Bleeeechhhh by sincewhen · · Score: 4, Funny

      Microbee? Didn't you die in the '80s?

      --
      -- Braden's law of data: All data spends some of its lifetime in an excel spreadsheet.
    16. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Maybe Time Warner can purchase Facebook next for a horribly inflated price.

    17. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Isn't adobe the only thing that ever f***'s up computers in those security tests? Not to mention responsible for nearly every browser crash. And the number one reason most don't switch to linux "omg I found the browser but it doesn't have flash yet installed wtf *delete*". And right when I thought adobe was on the right track and not screwing up anymore. . . tsk tsk

    18. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Zorque · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure why this is modded "informative", unless someone here really likes knowing when people puke.

    19. Re:Bleeeechhhh by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Why would Adobe merge with Microsoft? They already write mediocre software and MS is paying them to keep producing crappy versions of Flash for non-MS OS's, what more could they want?

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    20. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

      ...we can look forward to bloated [...] flash.

      Linux had that NN years ago! You see? Microsoft^H^H^H Microbe always copies off of Linux!

      --
      $ make available
    21. Re:Bleeeechhhh by rivaldufus · · Score: 1

      I've been calling it AOL 2.0 for a while, too. That's what it is. They had games, chat, and web access... just like Facebook. I suppose web access isn't all the way there, but they're working on it. Now they need to start mailing out cdroms with links to facebook.com

    22. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Bloem · · Score: 3, Funny

      As 3\/1l as this may seem, this might even be a good thing from a security point of view. The MS-guys have made huge steps the last decade in improving their security processes. We all get a monthly mea culpa and a bunch of fixes. This can only but improve the track record of Adobe.

      --
      the use of knowledge is highly overrated
    23. Re:Bleeeechhhh by arivanov · · Score: 1

      Same here. Need new coffee...

      Silverlight and Flash tighing the knot to create the ultimate in-browser resource abuse?

      We may see Java coming back to the in-browser space as a result...

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    24. Re:Bleeeechhhh by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      Sorry, what?

      I read the head line as "Against Apple, Ballmer Floats" and stopped right there. That was the headline I had been waiting to read for years!

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    25. Re:Bleeeechhhh by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Two geeks and a cup?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    26. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Vectormatic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      from that angle some secret sponsorship from intel is probably likely, just think of the cpu load of a version of flash developed by MS

      --
      People, what a bunch of bastards
    27. Re:Bleeeechhhh by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

      Funny, Adobe is one of the few companies worse at insecure bloat that Adobe. I'm not sure, but I think I'm frightened by this merger.

      Will it make MS products worse, or Adobe products better?

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    28. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Pharmboy · · Score: 0, Troll

      The irony is that the new AdobeSoft would likely start supporting Linux and OSX to a lesser degree (or drop Linux "since no one uses it") which would make Flash even more irrelevant. There are already valid PDF readers and creators, so Acrobat is superfluous already.

      That leaves Photoshop and a handful of video and image tools. An important segment, but history has shown us that any "must have" application can be replaced with the proper application of time and money. Since 95% of people use Photoshop for RGB only, IBM could throw some money at GIMP, leaving only the CMYK crowd stuck with Photoshop. Besides, 90% of the 95% are pirating it anyway, and with Microsoft's control, that will be reduced enough to open the market. Just a thought.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    29. Re:Bleeeechhhh by crypticedge · · Score: 1

      Well, he was informing us how this merger made him react.

      I found it quite informative.

    30. Re:Bleeeechhhh by @madeus · · Score: 1

      Genius. Now I seriously want Microsoft to do this.

    31. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Asic+Eng · · Score: 1
      Adobes undisputed skill in...owning Flash

      Hey that's not all they do. They also make a PDF reader which slows down even a relatively modern PC, they sell Framemaker with the consistently same set of features and bugs which it had 20 years ago, and so on.

      Mergers are usually not the best way to grow - cultures of the merged companies clash, capable employees leave etc. However in this case, I'd say Adobe and Microsoft are an excellent match.

    32. Re:Bleeeechhhh by ginbot462 · · Score: 1

      Damnit .. now I am stuck on tvtropes.org. Do you routinely leave needles full of heroin laying around?

      --
      Atlas Shrugged : Thematic Story :: Battlefield Earth : Organized Religion
    33. Re:Bleeeechhhh by akayani · · Score: 1

      Microsoft Live and the new Adobe app 'Say What'.

    34. Re:Bleeeechhhh by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      You have to admit, it'll be a pairing of historical kinship: they both produce multiple closed variants of something commonly available for free which is known for wanton security flaws, bloat, and poor design.

      Adobe's products will fit nicely into Microsoft's portfolio.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    35. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Skull_Leader · · Score: 1

      Hold your cup out, I'm queasy too. Why don't we just let the N. Koreans run our social policies to? Nothing in the world makes sense any more...

      --



      "This technology stuff is just plum crazy!"
    36. Re:Bleeeechhhh by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      Considering that the biggest exploits right now are flash and adobe reader based*, I would think this would increase security as users would get updates to flash and reader via MS updates and not the broken adobe updater.

      Secondly, IE7,8 and 9 all run in protected mode in Vista/7. Running flash and reader in protected mode would be trivial for MS to do, but is taking Adobe a couple years to do. MS has a huge incentive to keep plugins secure as infections via flash or reader are blamed on Windows and not on Adobe. Adobe has no such incentive.

      Yes, this is a slashdot and MS bashing is the name of the game, but Adobe is so much worse than MS that this merger can only be a net gain for end users.

      *Java webstart in close second

    37. Re:Bleeeechhhh by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      Silverlight isn't Windows only. There's an OSX port and Moonlight on Linux. Flash would remain cross platform. More likely they would just merge the two into one product and be done with it.

    38. Re:Bleeeechhhh by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and they can get rid of that stupid cross-platform support too!

      Yes! I've been waiting for Adobe to quit wasting resources on buggy crash-fest Windows versions of Premiere, AE, and Flash for years!

    39. Re:Bleeeechhhh by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      In Adobe's defense, they do make what I consider to be the two best pieces of creative software ever seen on a personal computer: Photoshop and Illustrator. I'd argue for After Effects too, but I'm not experienced enough to judge it against other industry tools.

    40. Re:Bleeeechhhh by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      So does that mean Microsoft admits Silverlight is crap and can't compete against Flash.....

    41. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Reapman · · Score: 1

      Cross platform in a "features will never match the version that Windows has". I'm also curious where on Microsofts track record we have ANY indication that support for non Microsoft OS's will improve?

    42. Re:Bleeeechhhh by v1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, this is a slashdot and MS bashing is the name of the game, but Adobe is so much worse than MS that this merger can only be a net gain for end users.

      Not bashing, just watching the blind leading the blind...

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    43. Re:Bleeeechhhh by TheQuantumShift · · Score: 1

      Looking at the latest versions of reader, I would think Adobe has the upper hand regarding "insecure bloat". 200MB+ of disk space used. To open a PDF.

      --

      Shift happens. Fire it up.
    44. Re:Bleeeechhhh by TheQuantumShift · · Score: 1

      Cross platform support will remain. The same quality flash/reader performance you enjoy today will be available for Window 7 and Windows 7 64 bit.

      --

      Shift happens. Fire it up.
    45. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Pharmboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Now I seriously want Microsoft to do this.

      Pretty much what I was thinking as well. Not sure how that is a troll, as I thought it was fairly well thought out with some attention to detail. It wouldn't be hard to get the majority of people (RGB) who now pirate Photoshop to use Gimp if you could get it up to Photoshop 6 quality. Hell, I do commercial work all day now using Photoshop 6, as I haven't needed a reason to upgrade. As you likely know, piracy leads to sales. Microsoft used to know this, but of course, you don't need to build marketing momentum when you already have a monopoly.

      And yes, if I was an executive at IBM, and MS bought Adobe, you damned right I would be looking at throwing some money at Gimp. Any good businessman *must* look at ways to knock the wind out of the sails of your competition. Microsoft did exactly this with giving IE away free, to cut the sales of Netscape. This is no different in many aspects, and obviously would be marketed under their "We love Free software" platform, which is a legitimate claim considering how much they have contributed.

      As a final note: It is already insane how HUGE the Acrobat Reader installer currently is. I can install an entire operating system with a GUI using less space! This kind of bloat will be right at home under MS ownership. In two years, you will be able to order the Acrobat Reader two DVD install set.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    46. Re:Bleeeechhhh by catmistake · · Score: 1

      I just vomited in my coffee.

      I've been saying since CS3 that Adobe was the new Microsoft, as they now tend to sell the same old crap with a new package every few years. Somehow, this merger would be like marrying a sibling. I believe you had the correct and natural reaction.

    47. Re:Bleeeechhhh by catmistake · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, and they can get rid of that stupid cross-platform support too!

      Are you kidding? On the contrary, Microsoft wants Windows everywhere, so Ballmer must realize the only way to do this now is to run Windows inside Flash!

    48. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Asic+Eng · · Score: 1

      Forgot about those, yes you are right they definitely deserve credit for that.

    49. Re:Bleeeechhhh by Threni · · Score: 1

      > Funny, Adobe is one of the few companies worse at insecure bloat that Adobe. I'm not sure, but I think I'm frightened by this merger.

      I'm not so sure - I think Adobe is far worse.

  2. First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is horrifiyng news. What would happen to Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign?

    1. Re:First post! by CdBee · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well I would guess they would be Windows only. The opposite happened when Apple bought Logic Pro and offered migration to the Mac version, as there would be no future windows builds. Apple sowed the wind on this particular trick..

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    2. Re:First post! by exley · · Score: 1

      People would continue pirating them pretty much at will?

    3. Re:First post! by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 4, Funny

      This is horrifiyng news. What would happen to Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign?

      They would all get 'ribbons' and Clippy.

    4. Re:First post! by Zocalo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Given that Microsoft has never been able to compete effectively against any of those three packages, or even really attempted to for that matter, I would guess that the Adobe coding teams would be assimilated into Microsoft whole and continue as if nothing much had happened. You'd probably be getting your CS updates via the Windows Update site from the next major release though, which would be a major plus point in my opinion. Jokes about having plenty of practice aside, one thing that Microsoft does do very well is patch management and deployment. Personally, I wish they'd put in some suitable security mechanisms, open up the API and let third parties plug into the Microsoft Update mechanism; it'd be really nice to have something like YUM or APT for Windows boxes...

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    5. Re:First post! by paimin · · Score: 5, Informative

      Riiiight. Because Microsoft has never done anything like that.

      --
      Facebook is the new AOL
    6. Re:First post! by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2, Informative

      How many Windows users of Logic Pro were there? My recollection was there were not many so cutting the Windows version wasn't a big loss, and Apple didn't want to support a Windows version. If Adobe cuts off OS X versions of their professional tools like Photoshop, they will be losing about 50% of their customers.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    7. Re:First post! by Jazz-Masta · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There wouldn't be any name change for Microsoft - the brand is far too valuable. Adobe would cease to exist; or rather they would become a subsidiary and only funnel money to Microsoft.

      They have very few competing products, which is great for the customers of both. There would be far more integration, very little product loss.

      It would be great to see Flash take on some of Silverlight's power and ease of development. Combining the best of the two would create a very worthy foe. Coldfusion has long had a few features that ASP should have had. FrameMaker could lend a hand to Word, and Visio could become an addin to FrameMaker...as all three are used very much when writing technical books.

      After the scare Adobe received earlier this year at the hands of Apple, Adobe must realize at any time Apple holds the power in their relationship. Although Adobe is responsible for Apple's early dominance in the graphic and motion industry, Apple no longer needs them. In terms of sales, Adobe has always made most of their money supporting Microsoft's operating system.

      Lately both companies have seen innovation only in the form of acquisitions of smaller, more nimble companies. Whatever they choose, they need to do it before the slide starts.

    8. Re:First post! by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Except for people running OSX, those products might be cancelled and any non-OSX non-windows flash would instantly be killed.

    9. Re:First post! by badboy_tw2002 · · Score: 1

      Why? Photoshop is a drop in the bucket compared to Office, and there's still a Mac version for that. There's no long term strategy in shutting off a good portion of your user base...what, do you think they don't like money? Believe what you will, but Microsoft is not "evil" in the classic sense of the word. What we declare "evil" is really banal decision making to maximize profits for shareholders.

    10. Re:First post! by Mikkeles · · Score: 1

      If I could get FrameMaker at a good price, I'm for it!

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    11. Re:First post! by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If Adobe cuts off OS X versions of their professional tools like Photoshop, they will be losing about 50% of their customers.

      OR Apple may lose them. Adobe still holds a lot of clout in that area.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    12. Re:First post! by hedwards · · Score: 1

      And MS cut the Mac version of IE and Windows as well. They'd have a much harder time cutting the Apple version of Photoshop than they would cutting the Windows version.

    13. Re:First post! by h4rr4r · · Score: 1, Informative

      Try the Mac version and get back to us. It is crippled, try using excel services for one.

    14. Re:First post! by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Exactly, and that's the true win. Would definitely hurt Apple =P

      If only there was some way to kill all old versions to ;D

      Apple always does it the way you describe though. Since everyone developed for Mac and PC why would anyone get a mac? So by doing what you describe they solved that, but then they lose all other third-party software titles because Apple claim more or less the whole market in the area.

      And that's just one of the areas where macs suck. Like iTunes? Fine. Don't like it? Oups.
      (Yeah, I know Songbord exist in this example, and yes, it suck.)
      Like Mail? so on so on.

    15. Re:First post! by mr_exit · · Score: 1

      Apple bought a professional compositing package called Shake. It was roughly $10K a licence. They left the windows and Linux versions at $10K and made the Mac version $5K. It was pitched as, you could get a Mac workstation and a license of Shake for the cost of a license for the other platforms.

      They since killed it and rolled it's useful retiming and keying bits into Final Cut.

      --

      -------
      Drink Coffee - Do Stupid Things Faster And With More Energy!
    16. Re:First post! by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      OR Apple may lose them. Adobe still holds a lot of clout in that area.

      I don't that many people who would buy new hardware and learn a new OS rather than new software.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    17. Re:First post! by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      More importantly, what would happen to adobe reader and flash player on Linux?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    18. Re:First post! by Zocalo · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I doubt it. I can't think of any Microsoft product on the Mac that was making a decent amount of money and axed, and I think it's safe to say quite a large percentage of the purchased copies of Creative Suite apps are running under OSX on Apple hardware. Flash/Silverlight would probably end up merging though, although I don't see that as much of a loss for any platform - I've yet to find a single site that isn't viewable without Silverlight, and anything that hastens the death of Flash is fine by me.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    19. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Not quite.

      Logic was HUGE on Windows - especially in Europe.

      The problem was that the ratio was 20% bought vs. 80% pirated. On the Mac, it was 80% bought vs. 20% pirated.

      Emagic was close to going broke.

      Apple did the only thing that made sense other than closing shop.

    20. Re:First post! by RocketRabbit · · Score: 1

      Maybe they would get some real fucking competition.

    21. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Why would they stop selling it? Microsoft still develops office for OS X. You'd think they wouldn't turn down the free business with the adobe prodyucts. It's the largest segment of softeware Apple doesn't have any product for ( Aperture doesn't cut it )

    22. Re:First post! by gutnor · · Score: 1
      Photoshop is just one element of a tool chain that start at some artist in a studio to some publishing plant somewhere - with many steps and middle-men between. That is a lot of stuff to migrate - not just replacing the workstation of some random web developer in a corner of the basement. Micro-Dobe will lose their customer while they migrate/adapt to something else.

      In the long term, this is most certainly a loss for Mac. However, that does not automatically mean a big victory for MS. Some customers will learn to live without Adobe. I have, for example, seen a little printing shop that were using Photoshop only just for changing color profiles - I'm sure they would find some way to deal with the loss. Other businesses will have the opportunity to look for non-Adobe workflow - not the kind of activity you want your client to engage into.

    23. Re:First post! by nebosuke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When it comes to software like Flash, AfterEffects, Illustrator, etc., becoming an expert user of the application software is orders of magnitude harder than learning a new OS.

      Also, if you use any of the aforementioned software packages professionally, the value of time and money spent learning the software and developing a productive workflow is far in excess of hardware and OS costs. This becomes especially true as you integrate custom application-specific scripts into your workflow and build up a library of project templates and other application-specific assets.

    24. Re:First post! by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 1

      They will just die off faster.

      Alternate readers exist, and WebM will replace flash.

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    25. Re:First post! by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      Both Adobe and Microsoft (and Intel for that matter) desperately want to get into the mobile space, but they're failing miserably. Adobe's coding teams seem to be a bunch of indians that try to use flash for all their interface elements. Creative Suite Vista **shudder**

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    26. Re:First post! by youngone · · Score: 1

      Apple would lose them. Those customers, (graphics pros) use Photoshop. They use it on a Mac because "Apples work better than PC's". If they can't run Photoshop on a Mac, they won't have a choice will they?

    27. Re:First post! by ooshna · · Score: 1

      So its wrong for them to offer halo only for xbox and windows? Damn Nintendo has been doing the same thing with Mario for years. And Jobs is a dick b/c I can't use Garageband on my windows 7 computer either.

    28. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flash for Android would be the first to go.

    29. Re:First post! by worx101 · · Score: 1

      No the point is this, "its bad for us and any alternative OS users, even if it is great for them." Nothing intrinsically wrong with what they are doing.

    30. Re:First post! by Entropy2016 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Halo originally wasn't ever intended to be an XBox game. Back in those days, Bungie was a Mac-only game company.

      Then Bungie publicly showed a demo of an early alpha version in action. M$ saw it and decided they wanted to have it as an exclusive for the new console they were developing.

      To Mac users it was like Halo was stolen before it even left the womb.

    31. Re:First post! by ooshna · · Score: 1

      Yeah but its not like the Halo that was released for the Xbox was anything like what was going to be released for the Mac.

    32. Re:First post! by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wouldn't bet on that dude, you'd be surprised how many graphic artists know those tools like the back of their hand. Considering the only "learning curve" for using Windows 7 with Photoshop would be "Start PC, click on desktop link" I don't think one can even compare the amount of retraining one would need to replace Photoshop. Hell one of my customers is an old school graphics artist, and he pays me to keep his circa 2003 PC going alongside the new dual AMD I built him simply so he can run a single program and switch between the desktops with a single KVM switch. he does all that just so he can keep Macromedia Xres, which he knows like the back of his hand. While he has photoshop along with corel and a dozen other tools on his main duallie, he says for certain tasks that would take a half an hour and a dozen menu layers in Photoshop he can get them done in under 3 minutes and a couple of clicks with Xres.

      The sad part is while this would probably kill most OSX sales, I honestly doubt Jobs would care. They are making so much money on consumer level gear like iPad, iPhone, and iPod that I doubt sales of Mac is even a blip on the radar anymore. But if Photoshop goes Windows only I can see a lot of graphics guys either spending all their time booted into Windows via Bootcamp, or forgoing getting a new Mac at all and just going with a high end Windows laptop. The level of complexity of learning a new heavy duty graphics program would make the trivial learning how to get around in Windows 7 (which has an excellent help system and tons of how to videos) pale in comparison.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    33. Re:First post! by Larryish · · Score: 1

      I axed somebody, an' dey done said you was right on, mah man!

    34. Re:First post! by Entropy2016 · · Score: 0

      What makes you think that? The original public demo? That was an super early alpha, so of course it looked different. That goes for any game.

    35. Re:First post! by jackbird · · Score: 1

      Bungie was a, or perhaps the, well-known Mac-friendly game developer before Microsoft bought them - they made the Marathon and Myth games, and Halo was planned for a cross-platform release before the MS deal.

    36. Re:First post! by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Their old hardware will run Windows just fine, and almost every person in the world has used Windows (or continues to do so) in some capacity during their lives. At home I'm a die-hard Ubuntu user. Doesn't mean I don't use Windows everyday at work.

      That's ignoring the fact that most people using professional level apps like that aren't necessarily techies, but they're certainly not computer-illiterate. That class of user can pickup a new OS very, VERY easily. To the point where most could just sit down and have it figured out in a few seconds.

      Prime example: my brother was visiting me last weekend. My laptop was sitting on the coffee table next to the couch. He asked if he could use it for a second to check his fantasy football league. He picked it up, opened Chrome from Docky at the bottom of the screen, did what he needed to do, then put the laptop back. The laptop was running Ubuntu - literally the first time he's ever seen or touched Linux. It was such a non-issue that he didn't even bother to ask me about it. Just clicked on the familiar icon and off he went.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    37. Re:First post! by ooshna · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well other than the fact the when bought by Microsoft it had a shit load of money thrown at it I was going off the first sentence of the article on Wikipedia. I've played a few Halos and I don't remember any being RTS.

    38. Re:First post! by ooshna · · Score: 1

      Halo would have never became as popular or been giving such a big budget if it wasn't for Microsoft.

    39. Re:First post! by oztiks · · Score: 1

      Yeah, see Apple got all bent out of shape about flash. Now Adobe decided to skimp on the graphics acceleration for Flash on OSX. OSX's reputation was stained by lacking in API flexibility some even say the API is less substantial than Windows because its an incomplete API - not being an Apple programmer I dont know, but whats publicized in the news I do.

      As for this meeting who knows if this is just Adobe threatening Apple's marketshare here via press and FUD or if its an honest business to business arrangement being made. Adobe has made it fairly clear support for Graphical Applications for Apple isn't something they are going to do as well from here on. Maybe this is just the next step, or maybe not.

      My opinion is that this MS / Adobe alliance is just a show and pony parade. Just like the acquisition of Yahoo with MS or Apple. Then the FUD suggested that Apple was going to form an alliance with MS so on and so fourth.

      To me it just looks like MS is still the market leader and everyone 'pretends' to be in bed with them just to scare their opponent. Rarely does it happen as it did in the past. Besides what are you going to cover in an hr meeting? I tell ya, you'll get a cup of coffee, a danish and shoot the breeze about your weekend, a 1HR meeting is hardly enough time to decide the futures of two leading vendors in the IT market.

    40. Re:First post! by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Probably not much would change. If you look at the features that Adobe has been rolling out the last couple of years and then look into their sources you'll find the original research is usually Microsoft R&D + University of Washington + Adobe R&D.

      Adobe is already in Seattle. Microsoft is in Seattle. University of Washington is smack dab in between the two companies and I'm pretty sure Microsoft has a satellite campus pretty close to Adobe.

      On the plus side you could finally see PDF support in Word really take off. And killing the OSX version of Premiere wouldn't really spite Apple. Apple already has made it pretty clear they don't give a shit about their professional users (Killed Shake. Slowed FCP to a halt. Constantly disrupt Photoshop development. Release pathetic "Pro" hardware offerings. And on and on...)

    41. Re:First post! by GigaplexNZ · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bungie was a, or perhaps the , well-known Mac-friendly game developer...

      When I think Mac-friendly game developer, the first name that springs to mind is Blizzard.

    42. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're a little mixed up. Apple bought Logic Pro *after* Adobe indicated they were no longer developing software for the Mac platform, and Apple wanted to be sure they still had reasons for bringing audio/videophiles to their platform. In 1996 Adobe announced they were no longer supporting the Mac platform. Final Cut wasn't announced until 1998, and Adobe had long screwed themselves in Apple's eyes by that point. Apple announced the migration program in 2003; again long, long after Adobe had essentially told Apple to go fuck themselves.

      In short, they had it coming. Now they're mad Apple doesn't want to let them play in their sandbox? Geee. I wonder why.

    43. Re:First post! by Tharsman · · Score: 1

      I think it's about time we had viable alternatives for those products. Even the best photoshop alternatives I seen are still very limited. As for Illustrator... darn do I miss Freehand...

      Other than that, nothing would kill Flash faster than an Adobe/Microsoft merger, so I guess not everything would be bad news.

    44. Re:First post! by jackbird · · Score: 0

      At the time we're talking about, though, Blizzard was "Those guys that made Lost Vikings and Warcraft 1."

    45. Re:First post! by GigaplexNZ · · Score: 2, Informative

      At the time we're talking about, though, Blizzard was "Those guys that made Lost Vikings and Warcraft 1."

      Microsoft bought Bungie around 2000 from memory. Blizzard was far more than just Warcraft 1 by that stage.

    46. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > adobe reader and flash player on Linux

      Nobody uses Adobe reader on Linux. GNOME users would install Evince, and KDE users would install Okular.

      Gnash has always been the traditional open source Flash player for Linux, and it still works OK, but now the new Lightspark player, with GPU hardware acceleartion via OpenGL GLSL, is likely to overtake it sometime soon.

    47. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All the Adobe coding teams are in India. They outsourced their entire R&D in 2005.

    48. Re:First post! by MidnightBrewer · · Score: 1

      If they tried to go that route with Adobe, they'd get sued for antitrust on the spot. Their second option, of course, is what they do with Office: continue offer the product, but let it lag behind, and make several features (such as collaboration) available as Windows-only options. Basically, a lobotomy.

      Apple may have made people unhappy with what they did with Logic Pro and Shake (which got cannibalized for Final Cut Studio and then discontinued), but they weren't buying the only game in town; Windows is, after all, famous for software choice, right? Adobe, on the other hand, is a monopoly in the creative market, and its discontinuation on the Mac platform would be an unparalleled disaster. The legacy of Photoshop overshadows even that of Office; there simply is no realistic competition at this point, more's the pity, and even if Apple stepped in and tried to fill the gap, it'd take several years for a realistic replacement to emerge - that's simply not possible. We'd be back in 1996 again, slowly bleeding users over to the Windows platform.

      Having said all this, it's important to note that the current competition from Apple and Microsoft's point of view is the mobile space. Adobe would be insane to let Microsoft buy them out, as Flash still comes in second to the importance of Creative Suite to their bottom line. Microsoft is not even a player in the mobile space at this point; they're going on name recognition alone. As good as their new platform appears to be, they also run the risk of the same kind of market fragmentation that Android now faces. Adobe can hitch their wagon to the software platform, but unless Microsoft takes a more draconian approach to hardware control with the vendors (which would make them serious contenders against both Apple and Android, and they of all companies should have the clout to do it), they're not going to any more benefit from the partnership than allying themselves with Google.

      --
      "Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
    49. Re:First post! by Kyusaku+Natsume · · Score: 1

      The end of Xres is one of my main reasons to hate Adobe. That, and the incredibly crappy software that they develop for OS X. It is like Adobe really don't want it to work. Even Corel with all their troubles manages to build their apps properly for OS X.

      --
      Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
    50. Re:First post! by jackbird · · Score: 1

      I was speaking more of the era in which the intense Mac user loyalty to Bungie was forged by the Marathon games.

    51. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Myth and Myth II were both released for PC.

    52. Re:First post! by shugah · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Mac users wouldn't recognize a womb it it sat in their face.

      --
      If you aren't part of the solution, then there is good money to be made prolonging the problem
    53. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're looking at this backwards. You merge the bad features together because the only reason they haven't been pitched out revisions ago is the last guy that said they were terrible got fired.

    54. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No they werent Mac only. They started out that way but they had been releasing games on PC/Mac for a while.

      Oni anyone?

    55. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why isn't your customer running his old machine in a VM? That might save you a lot of headache.

    56. Re:First post! by mjwx · · Score: 1

      OR Apple may lose them. Adobe still holds a lot of clout in that area.

      A lot of Mac fan's forget this, you can make designers switch platforms if you sign their paycheck.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    57. Re:First post! by mjwx · · Score: 1

      There wouldn't be any name change for Microsoft - the brand is far too valuable. Adobe would cease to exist; or rather they would become a subsidiary and only funnel money to Microsoft.

      The Adobe brand would not cease to exist either for the same reason, it's too valuable. What would happen is what happens with acquisitions all the time, the brand stays on as a subsidiary publishing it's own marketing under it's own name but still funnelling the profits to the parent company.

      Microsoft would still be Microsoft, Adobe would still be Adobe, Microsoft would publish Adobe Flash and Adobe Photoshop.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    58. Re:First post! by lonecrow · · Score: 1

      Sounds a lot like cutting off your nose to spite your face. I understand that Photoshop people would probably follow the software rather then the hardware. However it would create so much bad will that Photoshop would be vulnerable to up and comers.

      I would be very surprised if they did this.

    59. Re:First post! by pipedwho · · Score: 1

      Funnily, if you look at the demographic of Apple users, I'd suggest they'd be the most likely to be in a position like that.

    60. Re:First post! by cbhacking · · Score: 1

      Third parties are already allowed to use Microsoft Update, and some of them (mostly drivers) do. However, the updates much pass extremely rigorous testing. Since this is basically required for WHQL anyhow, getting drivers on board is pretty easy. However, even if that level of testing is done anyhow (don't count on it), proving that to Microsoft's satisfaction is... trickier.

      Mind you, there's been talk of a Windows app store for a while now. Not quite like Linux package management, but possibly a major improvement anyhow if it ever materializes.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    61. Re:First post! by znerk · · Score: 1

      Photoshop is a drop in the bucket compared to Office, and there's still a Mac version for that.

      But switching to GIMP from Photoshop is absolutely nothing like switching to OpenOffice from MS Office. Quite a different learning curve.

      --
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
    62. Re:First post! by znerk · · Score: 1

      ...I can't think of any Microsoft product on the Mac that was making a decent amount of money and axed...

      I axed somebody, an' dey done said you was right on, mah man!

      Where's my "-1, incredibly stupid" moderation option? Oh, right, it's in the never-to-be-released patch... you know, the same one where we get the "-1, facts are wrong" moderation option?

      --
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
    63. Re:First post! by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Because those old Macromedia apps get seriously wiggy when run in a VM? Believe me, he gave me the discs and I tried every trick in the book...VMWare, MSFT Virtual PC, compatibility mode IN a VM, you name it I probably tried it. I seriously think something about the timing doesn't like SATA drives. From my tests this thing don't like SATA, it don't really like CPUs faster than around 2.4GHz, it don't like dual core CPUs, and it don't like more than 1.5Gb of RAM. In the end it was simply easier to build him a new old stock PC with circa 2003 parts and rig up a 2 port KVM switch along with shared folders. That way all he has to do is double click the scroll lock key and drag his files between the two shared folders.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    64. Re:First post! by hackerjoe · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you have to read all the way through to the 3rd paragraph to find out about Halo Wars. Pretty obscure.

      (Point taken, but come on, you have to be Indie Rock Pete to think Halo would have been better for being a bit player RTS rather than the phenomenon it is!)

    65. Re:First post! by DurendalMac · · Score: 1

      Um, no. Bungie started out as Mac only. They were NOT Mac only when Halo was announced. Marathon 2 got ported and Myth I & II were both cross platform. Oni was in the works and was cross platform as well.

      It does really suck that Halo got snapped up for XBox, and then on Mac/PC we got a shitty port two years later with utter dogshit for network code. I love seeing horrid lag on a LAN!

    66. Re:First post! by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      So ... what software will replace Photoshop on Mac?

      --
      No sig today...
    67. Re:First post! by hcdejong · · Score: 1

      There would be far more integration, very little product loss.

      So we'll end up with the Adobe apps sporting the steaming pile of excrement that is the Ribbon UI? No thanks!

      FrameMaker could lend a hand to Word,

      That would be the one good thing to come out of this: Word getting replaced with FrameMaker. It'd never happen, though.

    68. Re:First post! by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and try using AppleScript to do in Excel 2008 what used to be done using VBA in 2004. Trying to decipher the scripting dictionary is like parsing scripture, and then quite a few things that, according to the dictionary, should work are well and truly broken. Combine that with the legendary stability of Excel 2008, it's patchy support for Mac OS conventions (such as command+a), its modal dialogues, and you have a recipe for a pretty shitty tuesday - at least until deciding to shift the work to another application. After that things became pretty nice.

      I don't want a return to VBA support in Excel, but at least that was pretty well documented and generally functional.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    69. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your friend should embrace virtualization. Could be more convenient and better performing for him than an old computer with KVM.

    70. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They weren't MAC only - many of their titles were released on other platforms as well. Oni, for example, was released on the PS2 and PC/Windows as well.

    71. Re:First post! by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      This is horrifiyng news. What would happen to Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign?

      They will be replaced by windows paint, microsoft viseo and microsoft publisher. PDF will be replaced by XPS

    72. Re:First post! by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Bungie was a Mac-only game company.

      Who would have guessed what happened next?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    73. Re:First post! by arivanov · · Score: 1

      Not quite so.

      Microsoft possesses "significant market power" as per monopoly laws definitions in most of the world. So in fact it is not allowed to do that.

      Similarly, Apple is marching bravely into the same territory. It may not be doing so on the computer front but it is nearly there with mp3 players, smart phones, etc. It is only a matter of time until it will get a visit from the office of Steelie Neelie (or whoever holds that position today) with a prospectus describing the virtues of not getting to the point of the 1Bn fine Intel paid recently.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    74. Re:First post! by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Yes, because there are no Windows versions of Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign already to look at.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    75. Re:First post! by rvw · · Score: 1

      Even Corel with all their troubles manages to build their apps properly for OS X.

      Do they even build for the Mac at the moment? I thought it was Windows only, and the "Mac" version is running in bootcamp/windows or parallels/vmware windows virtual machine. So Adobe is still doing a better job afaik.

    76. Re:First post! by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      What about what makes sense from the end user perspective?
      If a single company controls a piece of software you depend on, surely it's a huge risk to use it... What if they drop that software in part (ie drop it for the platform you use) or completely? I don't think i would feel happy running a business on software which can be pulled out from under me on a whim.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    77. Re:First post! by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Microsoft does patch management extremely poorly... They are way behind APT or Yum, you typically only get updates for what comes bundled with the OS and more recently for a few non bundled MS apps. Even many other MS apps don't get updated automatically, and no third party apps get updated at all as you pointed out, there is no way for third parties to integrate into the system update mechanism.

      I don't think i've ever encountered a system in active use which didn't have some non MS apps installed which either had a bloated update app running in the background, or just never got updated at all. Also these update apps typically need admin privileges to run, so if you run as non admin you don't get updates from them.

      Also if you have a large network using WSUS for updates, you might want to manually go round all those machines and verify that the updates truly are installed. But don't use the MS tools to verify patch installation, manually check the versions of individual files which should be replaced by the patches... You will get a pretty nasty shock on a handful of the machines.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    78. Re:First post! by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Somehow I doubt you'll find a "womb" on the hardware list of the people sitting on Mac users' faces...

    79. Re:First post! by AC-x · · Score: 1

      Eh? Macromedia cancelled Xres years before Adobe bought them.

    80. Re:First post! by John+Betonschaar · · Score: 1

      OSX's reputation was stained by lacking in API flexibility some even say the API is less substantial than Windows because its an incomplete API - not being an Apple programmer I dont know, but whats publicized in the news I do.

      Yes and no. The API's that were mentioned a lot in the news were in fact not publicly available/finalized until a while ago, and you could consider them 'incomplete' in the sense that they only support a few NVidia cards used in a lot of Macs. No ATI cards, and no pre-9-series NVidia cards IIRC. That said, they are API's that provide a complete H264 pipeline, from front to back, so if you are able to use them you basically have your decoder on a silver platter, which is different from (e.g) DXVA on Windows, which is more like a set of GPU accelerated video pipeline building blocks. They are more like VDPAU on Linux.

      Anyway, all that doesn't actually matter that much, since Adobe had plenty of other options to implement GPU accelerated video using public API's for years and years. GLSL comes to mind, which has been a supported option since the very first Macs that actually had the hardware to do GPU accelerated video. OpenCL would have been another option, which was added as a private API in 10.5 and publicly in 10.6. Both options would have been portable to other systems and GPU-independent. Instead of just getting to work or buying/commissioning someone else to develop a GPU decoder, Adobe decided to bitch and moan on every possible occasion how Apple was 'actively limiting their development options'. Meanwhile many other video encoding/transcoding software on OS X has had GPU acceleration for years. Just like the Linux version of Flash player and the desperate clinging to Carbon for Photoshop has shown, Adobe is either lazy, or they tried to take on too many products for too many platforms at once. Now they want to bring Flash to mobile, I wish them good luck getting that to work well on all these different devices and mobile OS's, seeing that they don't seem to be able support any desktop platform properly for Flash, except Windows 32-bit.

    81. Re:First post! by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Hi MR AC! Not very big on the reading are you? If you were you'd have seen I already tried that and Xres will not run stable in a VM for any length of time, in fact it will often either crash right out the gate or within 20 minutes of startup. whereas on the old 2003 it is solid as a rock and he can run it all day without a single hiccup. since he is actually using this to make money needless to say stability and functionality are job #1, and thanks to the way I have it set up it is simple as 1.-drag files to be worked on into shared folder, 2.- double click scroll lock, 3.-launch Xres and select files. It don't get easier than that and with a VM it was just too buggy to actually be used as a business tool.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    82. Re:First post! by ciderbrew · · Score: 1

      put some money in to GIMP and get that ready for show time.

    83. Re:First post! by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Games Blizzard had released before or around Bungie's purchase:

      Lost Vikings (1992)
      Warcraft (1994)
      Warcraft II (1995)
      Diablo (1996)
      StarCraft (1998)
      Diablo II (2000)

      the Diablo II expansion and Warcraft III weren't that far behind. Thanks for playing.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    84. Re:First post! by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Nobody uses Adobe reader on Linux.

      If you want to know what your PDF presentation will look like when shown at the conference computer (which almost certainly will be running Adobe reader on Windows), you have no option but to use Adobe reader to check. I don't want to buy Windows just to check presentations. You don't want to be mostly sure that it displays correctly, you want to be sure. The nice thing about Adobe reader is that it displays the same on Linux and Windows, so you can preview on Linux without caring about details.

      Also I've seen presentations (generated with LaTeX!) which worked fine on Adobe reader, but looked completely wrong when opened with a free alternative (I can't give you details, because I didn't write those presentations, nor do I know the details of the packages/options used; the presentations I make always seem to look right either way). This shows that simply assuming it will look the same in both is not a sure bet.

      Of course, on conferences where you use your own laptop, you are free to use whatever works on that. But I've been on conferences where they discouraged that.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    85. Re:First post! by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      You are right. I so hope this doesn't happen to be honest. Frankly this should still run into anti-trust issues. It could be seen as a clear attack on Apple PCs. Microsoft still has a huge share of the PC market and has already been convicted once of anti-trust.
      If anything Microsoft would have to keep producing Mac versions just as they do with Office. Frankly Microsoft going around and buying up companies is just annoying. Adobe really could use some compitions in those key markets and Microsoft if the made an effort could complete.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    86. Re:First post! by @madeus · · Score: 1

      Halo stopped being an RTS long before Microsoft bought Bungie (but it's true that was originally considered at one point, but not publicly). There are plenty of videos of pre-XBox FPS gameplay going about.

      The tragedy is that, despite being a decent game (and an impressive X-Box title) the original version never saw levels that were anything like as impressive as the size of levels in the demos (okay, Assault on the Control Room feels huge and *is* very impressive, but it's not one huge outdoor open map loaded at once).

    87. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not even Halo Wars?

    88. Re:First post! by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Bullshit.

      Then why were they producing games like Oni and having other developers do the Mac ports?

      The purchase of Bungie killed a lot of awesomeness, namely Oni 2 and multiplayer support for the original - a real shame, due to the unique awesomeness that Oni was (vs. Halo, which was more of the same - but with vehicles!).

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    89. Re:First post! by e4g4 · · Score: 1

      I remember one of the things they were pushing as a feature of those early, pre-acquisition builds was destructible terrain. I was disappointed it never made it into the game.

      --
      The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
    90. Re:First post! by e4g4 · · Score: 1

      This one was.

      --
      The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
    91. Re:First post! by Entropy2016 · · Score: 1

      Oni was a product of "Bungie West" an offshoot of Bungie itself. They had slightly different goals than Bungie did, namely making games that were Mac/PC/Console releases. People forget Bungie West existed mainly because Oni was their ONLY game before Bungie dissolved them.

    92. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The sad part is while this would probably kill most OSX sales"

      I very much doubt that - I don't think that the majority of Mac users only do so due to Photoshop. None of the Mac users I know bought one primarily because of the availability of Adobe software.

    93. Re:First post! by sootman · · Score: 1

      Yup, I remember well. Halo was going to be huge on the Mac.

      More details about Bungie -> MS here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo:_Combat_Evolved#Development

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    94. Re:First post! by sootman · · Score: 1
      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    95. Re:First post! by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Amen! FrameMaker is a terrible word processor and Word is a terrible book maker. If anything, FrameMaker could go away (forever please) and the chapter and heading functions could replace the terrible Word ones (forever please).

    96. Re:First post! by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      The sad part is while this would probably kill most OSX sales

      Out of all the Mac users I currently know, not one of them is a likely Photoshop user. I don't doubt that there are plenty of graphic artists that would migrate off of OS X if PS was no longer available for it, but I don't think you appreciate how many non-artists use Macs these days.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    97. Re:First post! by djdanlib · · Score: 1

      Hello! It looks like you're trying to create an inappropriate composite image of your boss!

      Would you like assistance?
      (a) Export to BMP
      (b) Encapsulate in Word document
      (c) CC to HR
      (d) All of the above

    98. Re:First post! by hcdejong · · Score: 1

      Having a bit of experience with FM, I'm surprised to hear anyone describe it as 'terrible'. True, in FM9 the UI has taken a nosedive, but otherwise it's one of the best word processors I've ever seen. It's consistent, and crucially it can separate the layout from the content. To get anywhere near FM's level of quality, you'd have to rewrite Word from scratch.

    99. Re:First post! by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 1

      Not only would they be Windows only, but suddenly Dreamweaver would produce webpages that only work with Internet Explorer.

    100. Re:First post! by Pandrake · · Score: 1

      Thar it is!

      I use Adobe on Mac instead of Windows not because I hate/love either operating system, but because I have 20 years worth of Applescript built for a unique workflow that involves much more than Adobe/Apple/Microsoft products.

    101. Re:First post! by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      The sad part is while this would probably kill most OSX sales, I honestly doubt Jobs would care. They are making so much money on consumer level gear like iPad, iPhone, and iPod that I doubt sales of Mac is even a blip on the radar anymore.

      I think Apple are always going to make sure their desktop systems are competitive in the creative industry, if only because Apple needs the tools themselves -- I doubt they'll switch to using Windows in-house.

    102. Re:First post! by dwightk · · Score: 1

      sowed the wind

      wha?

      --
      Like anyone can even know that
    103. Re:First post! by ooshna · · Score: 1

      Yeah but that just rode on the coat tails of the success of Halo 1 and 2. I don't remember if part 3 came our before it but non the less.

    104. Re:First post! by gagol · · Score: 1

      You DO realize Flash is more than a video container for youtube videos...

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
    105. Re:First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've played a few Halos and I don't remember any being RTS.

      Well, except the one that was a RTS, right? ;)

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_Wars

    106. Re:First post! by Kyusaku+Natsume · · Score: 1

      XRes was killed by a lawsuit that Adobe brought against Macromedia related to the user interface, IIRC it was related to the snap tool tabs and a too broad software patent granted to Adobe. At the time, Xres was a serious contender against Photoshop because it had a far better memory manager and it was compatible with almost all Photoshop plug-ins.

      --
      Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
    107. Re:First post! by Kyusaku+Natsume · · Score: 1

      They still do Painter in their several versions for mac. The last Corel Draw that they developed in 2001-2002 for Mac still works with some kirks on Snow Leopard, something that I can't say for many software from Adobe developed 2-3 years later. Certainly, Corel dropped almost all of its mac software doe to poor sales, but in Adobe's case, they still get strong revenue for mac customers, it is not like they don't have a business case for developing quality mac software.

      --
      Mexico: 100% conservative's America now!
    108. Re:First post! by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      What about what makes sense from the end user perspective? If a single company controls a piece of software you depend on, surely it's a huge risk to use it... What if they drop that software in part (ie drop it for the platform you use) or completely? I don't think i would feel happy running a business on software which can be pulled out from under me on a whim.

      It makes sense from a company. If 80% of the users on one platform have pirated it, they are not customers. One platform has more paying customers than the other. Financially as a company, you'd have to focus on the platform version that makes you more money. If you are a pirating user and the company drops the software because they aren't making money, maybe you should have paid for it to keep the company producing new versions.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    109. Re:First post! by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      That still screws the 20% of users who didn't pirate it...

      Regardless, the original point holds - why allow your business to become dependent on anything which is only available from a single source that can be pulled out from under you at any time?

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  3. Efficient by Again · · Score: 5, Funny

    Microsoft and Adobe merging is an option that would increase efficiency. That way I can direct my hatred in one direction with less distraction from various evil companies.

    1. Re:Efficient by Tackhead · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Microsoft and Adobe merging is an option that would increase efficiency. That way I can direct my hatred in one direction with less distraction from various evil companies.

      OK, if you Don't Wanna Be Evil, how about Google? They've got even more interest in Flash-on-mobile as a stopgap against Apple World Domination as Microsoft does, and could probably write a PDF viewer in less than 100 megabytes.

    2. Re:Efficient by RazorSharp · · Score: 1

      Microsoft and Adobe merging is an option that would increase efficiency. That way I can direct my hatred in one direction with less distraction from various evil companies.

      OK, if you Don't Wanna Be Evil, how about
      Google? They've got even more interest in Flash-on-mobile as a stopgap against Apple World Domination as Microsoft does, and could probably write a PDF viewer in less than 100 megabytes.

      GooDobeSoft

      --
      "From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
    3. Re:Efficient by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      I'd prefer the name Micradoble.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    4. Re:Efficient by confused+one · · Score: 1

      Micradooble woould be clooser

    5. Re:Efficient by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you'll get real lucky and oracle will buy microbe and then apple and we can have a single bullseye for all hatred and dissapointment.

    6. Re:Efficient by ooshna · · Score: 1

      If only Microsoft and Apple merged just to listen to the fanboy double talk

    7. Re:Efficient by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now if only they could get Oracle in on this--then we'd have a complete computational experience from hell

    8. Re:Efficient by socceroos · · Score: 1

      Then we can all make jokes about the size of their programmers genitalia.

    9. Re:Efficient by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      Google [...] could probably write a PDF viewer in less than 100 megabytes.

      Try Foxit Reader. Download size 7.5 Mbyte. Works well too, I dumped the Acrobat Reader after discovering Foxit.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
  4. How convenient by swanzilla · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One less company to hate.

    1. Re:How convenient by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      One fewer company to hate.

      Fixed that for you.

    2. Re:How convenient by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      No you didn't fix it.

      Remember at school, you learned "I before the E except after C". Then you discovered the exceptions.
      beige, cleidoic, codeine, conscience, deify, deity, deign,
      dreidel, eider, eight, either, feign, feint, feisty,
      foreign, forfeit, freight, gleization, gneiss, greige,
      greisen, heifer, heigh-ho, height, heinous, heir, heist,
      leitmotiv, neigh, neighbor, neither, peignoir, prescient,
      rein, science, seiche, seidel, seine, seismic, seize, sheik,
      society, sovereign, surfeit, teiid, veil, vein, weight,
      weir, weird

      Sorry, but learning English is more than just learning a grammar rule, it's also learning the exceptions. It's "one less", not "one fewer", despite what the rule you're thinking of might have led you to believe.

    3. Re:How convenient by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Then can you explain the exception? I'm serious.

      The 'rule' I'm talking about is that (my phrasing) "less goes with a number, fewer is with an uncounted quantity". Is it that there IS a number, BEFORE the word "less"?

      BTW, I wanted to quickly try to find a citation either way (I couldn't), and searching Wikipedia, I found far more pages using "one fewer" than "one less". At least the top results for "one less" were song references, actually.

    4. Re:How convenient by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The exception is that normal people say "one less" regardless of what your supposedly normative rule says. All spoken languages that aren't Lojban are descriptive, not prescriptive. So take the stick out.

    5. Re:How convenient by QRDeNameland · · Score: 1

      No you didn't fix it.

      Remember at school, you learned "I before the E except after C". Then you discovered the exceptions. beige, cleidoic, codeine, conscience, deify, deity, deign, dreidel, eider, eight, either, feign, feint, feisty, foreign, forfeit, freight, gleization, gneiss, greige, greisen, heifer, heigh-ho, height, heinous, heir, heist, leitmotiv, neigh, neighbor, neither, peignoir, prescient, rein, science, seiche, seidel, seine, seismic, seize, sheik, society, sovereign, surfeit, teiid, veil, vein, weight, weir, weird

      Sorry, but learning English is more than just learning a grammar rule, it's also learning the exceptions. It's "one less", not "one fewer", despite what the rule you're thinking of might have led you to believe.

      You forgot the second part of the rule: "I before E except after C or when sounded like A as in neighbor and weigh. That strikes a few off your exception list, and I would would also question the inclusion of the many words on that list that are directly taken from other languages.

      That's not to say that English doesn't probably have the most rule exceptions of any language...but then again once I discovered the exception of "codeine", I stopped caring about it so much. ;-)

      --
      Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    6. Re:How convenient by TechForensics · · Score: 1

      ....but the one company remaining you would hate more than twice as much.

      --
      Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
    7. Re:How convenient by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Except for the fact that, as I said, the Wikipedia pages have "one fewer" far more often than they have "one less".

    8. Re:How convenient by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      There's no more explaining it than there is in those exceptions to the i before e rule. It's just the way English is used by those skilled in the art of speaking it. Your approach of counting how it's used in wikipedia is on the right track. But it's hardly edited by experts in the English language. The news media is a better place to look. It's the job of sub-editors to know all the rules and exceptions. That's the approach taken by this investigator of your question:

      http://www.thatdanny.com/2008/11/20/one-fewer-or-one-less-a-definitive-answer/

      But it's the same result and much more fun if you ask the entire web.
      http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=one+less&word2=one+fewer

      My guess at the reason for the exception is simply that "one less" sounds better in a sentence than "one fewer". But whatever the reason, it is an exception.

    9. Re:How convenient by AJWM · · Score: 1

      In general "fewer" goes with a pluralized word, "less" doesn't. Thus "fewer pounds", "less weight", but "one less pound" or "two fewer pounds". "15 or less items" is just wrong.

      --
      -- Alastair
    10. Re:How convenient by QRDeNameland · · Score: 1

      Then can you explain the exception? I'm serious.

      The 'rule' I'm talking about is that (my phrasing) "less goes with a number, fewer is with an uncounted quantity". Is it that there IS a number, BEFORE the word "less"?

      BTW, I wanted to quickly try to find a citation either way (I couldn't), and searching Wikipedia, I found far more pages using "one fewer" than "one less". At least the top results for "one less" were song references, actually.

      Actually, you have it backwards. "Fewer" is for countable, indivisible items, where "less" is for uncounted or divisible items.

      "There are fewer people in Room 1 than Room 2, which means there's less of a crowd in Room 1."

      "There are fewer cars in Lot A than Lot B, but the cars in Lot B each have less gasoline."

      "You must correctly answer no fewer than 70 questions to pass this test, and you must complete it in 3 hours or less."

      Or maybe this is easier for the Slashdot crowd...if you'd count it with an integer, use 'fewer"; if you'd count it with a float or a decimal, use "less".

      But all that said...I'd still probably say "one less company" in most cases, just because "one fewer company", though technically correct, just doesn't feel natural in speech. It's like the word "whom"; many people know its correct usage but how often do you ever hear anyone say "To whom should I send this email?" It feels like reciting Shakespeare when you say it out loud.

      --
      Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    11. Re:How convenient by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      You forgot the second part of the rule: "I before E except after C or when sounded like A as in neighbor and weigh.

      No, I didn't forget it. That wasn't part of the rule when I was at school. Presumably it was tacked on later to tackle some exceptions. But as you note it still doesn't get them all.

      I would would also question the inclusion of the many words on that list that are directly taken from other languages.

      English is filled with words from other languages. There's not much original in it! I think all the words in the list are in the Concise OED (apart from teiid, which is in Miriam Webster), so they all count as English (or American.) This of course makes the very attempt as making spelling rules problematical!

      Mind you it's not nearly as bad as the problem of genders in French. It's amazing how many rules have been invented to try and make sense of that, and there are still loads of exceptions.

      The best thing is just to loosen up, and not worry about rules. English is a living language, growing and changing year by year. If speaker and listener; writer and reader understand the same thing by a sentence, then the language has done it's job. Where there is dispute, common usage is the guiding light, not rules from books. The rules were written by people who were trying to describe English as it was used. Never by people who had the power to dictate what the language should be.

    12. Re:How convenient by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 1

      +1 for the B5 reference!

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    13. Re:How convenient by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Can you explain how "prescient" and "science" got into that list of 'exceptions'?
      Are they right-to-left exceptions in a left-to-right world?

      More seriously, most of the i's before e's are pronounced like "bee" and most of the exceptions are pronounced like "bye" or "bay".

    14. Re:How convenient by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Can you explain how "prescient" and "science" got into that list of 'exceptions'?
      Are they right-to-left exceptions in a left-to-right world?

      What is it about "i before the e EXCEPT AFTER C" you didn't understand?

      More seriously, most of the i's before e's are pronounced like "bee" and most of the exceptions are pronounced like "bye" or "bay".

      Most? So even after your suggested 3rd exception rule, there are still exceptions? My point is now underlined.

  5. Sure. by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 0, Troll

    Two companies that don't know shit about security teaming up. I have never been so happy I bought a Mac.

    --
    If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    1. Re:Sure. by darkain · · Score: 1

      I'm not a Mac user myself, but my very first thought of this whole thing was of my friends who DO use Mac systems... and that if Microsoft + Adobe happens, then what will happen to Photoshop and other Adobe based products on the Mac platforms?

    2. Re:Sure. by Skatox · · Score: 0

      hahaah right, imaging the power of combining their bugs into one system

    3. Re:Sure. by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If they make money, Microsoft will keep making them.
      EG: Microsoft Office for Mac

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    4. Re:Sure. by do0b · · Score: 1

      The same thing that is happening now. Adobe products on the mac aren't all that great anymore.

      --
      After 12 years and a few days, I finally gave in to the dark side and joined slashdot.
    5. Re:Sure. by BLToday · · Score: 1

      This whole week, I've had to deal with infections from Flash drive-by insecurity and stupid people still using IE.

    6. Re:Sure. by h4rr4r · · Score: 0, Troll

      You mean they would make a crippled version. Try using Office for Mac with sharepoint or Excel services.

    7. Re:Sure. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try using Office for Mac with sharepoint or Excel services.

      Does it suck? Because it sure sucks on my PC.

    8. Re:Sure. by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The same thing that is happening now. Adobe products on the mac aren't all that great anymore.

      You can blame Apple and their constantly changing direction for that. How can you add in new features if you have to rewrite the core of the software just to account for Apple's newest platform changes? Adobe is still catching up after Apple yanked 64-bit Carbon support out from under them.

    9. Re:Sure. by hedwards · · Score: 1

      It would make more sense for them to discontinue Photoshop altogether than to cut the OSX version. It would be much more likely that MS would sell the rights to Photoshop than discontinuing the OSX version, given that the professionals that use Photoshop mainly use OSX.

    10. Re:Sure. by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      EG: Microsoft Office for Mac ie MS Adobe for Mac: $$$ and massive version drift.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    11. Re:Sure. by eulernet · · Score: 1

      They perhaps don't care about security and but they are masters of software bloat !

      Their programs are insanely huge.

    12. Re:Sure. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes because your mac is so secure. the reason that your mac looks so secure to you is that anything would look secure when no one is trying to break in. there is no point when like 2 % of computers in the market are Macs. why would you waste your time trying to break in when it would only help you on that one machine when you could spend time trying to find a flaw in an OS that has a large majority of the market so you can reuse your flaw on practically every machine.

    13. Re:Sure. by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 1

      I have never used Mac Office, Open office has been good enough for my uses. Although I do know that Entourage is truly an abomination.

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    14. Re:Sure. by swimboy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Adobe is still catching up after Apple yanked 64-bit Carbon support out from under them.

      Boo-freakin-hoo! Apple told developers ten years ago that Carbon was just a bridge to the new OS and that Cocoa was the way to go. Adobe knew full well that sooner or later, carbon applications were going to be second-class citizens; and spent the last ten years with their heads in the sand about it.

      --
      Ask me how the Heisenberg Principle may or may not have saved my life.
    15. Re:Sure. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is just plain wrong. Microsoft has made some bad security mistakes in the past. They have also learned from them. No security is perfect but they have made some really good advances in it. They stuck by UAC because it was secure even though users didn't like it. They are also pushing their secure CRT library both internally and to other developers. Really, look back at how insecure Microsoft's products were a few years ago. It takes a while to change software but they really do understand security now.

      Now Apple doesn't really have a history in security. They are in the same position Microsoft was 15 years ago. All they care about is usability and features. Notice how iTunes installs bonjour by default (even though no one actually uses it). While Windows has moved in the direction of having networking services off by default -- or at least prompt. Apple has the advantage of an OS reset around the time the Internet and networking really took off. But I haven't seen any indication that they are really security experts.

    16. Re:Sure. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what will happen to Photoshop and other Adobe based products on the Mac platforms?

      Hmmm, lemmie think: large, bloated, buggy software that makes money hand-over-fist. Which software am I talking about: Photoshop or Office for the Mac?

      SOLD!!

    17. Re:Sure. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps they'd just cough up the $40 for Crossover after the people behind it were able to fully support the CS suite. Photoshop is already partially usable. If Microsoft discontinued CS for Mac, it's a safe bet that there are enough users to make it worth the effort to make everything work.

      I'd also bet that Photoshop would run in Boot Camp or in a Parallels/VMWare virtual machine...annoying, but an option.

    18. Re:Sure. by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      Adobe is still catching up after Apple yanked 64-bit Carbon support out from under them.

      Boo-freakin-hoo! Apple told developers ten years ago that Carbon was just a bridge to the new OS and that Cocoa was the way to go. Adobe knew full well that sooner or later, carbon applications were going to be second-class citizens; and spent the last ten years with their heads in the sand about it.

      I've seen this argument before, and research shows it doesn't hold any water. Besides, if this switch to Cocoa was so absolutely going to be required, why did Apple even suggest that 64-bit Carbon was going to happen? Why is Final Cut Pro, Apple's own software, still in Carbon? The Boo is on you sir.

    19. Re:Sure. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you thought you ran to Mac to avoid 'the borg'.

      Photoshop, Illustrator, and what other programs that make a Mac a Mac are involved here?

      I hear Ubuntu has a nice shiny OS to install, and you can get Gimp and Inkscape and Libre Office. .. tools I use to avoid that whole Mac/PC mess.

    20. Re:Sure. by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      Any company that couldn't figure out they should get off Carbon and migrate to Cocoa within ten years is too stupid to live.

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    21. Re:Sure. by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      Adobe's 32-bit carbon apps suck ass. They're somewhat better in Windows, but they've still got a horrible and inconsistent UI.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    22. Re:Sure. by Macrat · · Score: 1

      and that if Microsoft + Adobe happens, then what will happen to Photoshop and other Adobe based products on the Mac platforms?

      They'll continue to suck as they have for the past decade.

    23. Re:Sure. by ooshna · · Score: 1

      You are correct the creators of Final Cut Pro should have their company shut down and its assets sold off.

    24. Re:Sure. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its been over 3 years and at least 2 versions of CS. Where is the 64bit Cocoa CS? Yes, thats right. Nowhere. They have had plenty of time, they just don't care.

    25. Re:Sure. by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      iTunes uses Carbon.

    26. Re:Sure. by grouchomarxist · · Score: 1

      They'll keep making them, but the Windows versions will always be the main focus. They'll get released with the new features first.

      Actually, that's not too different than the way things are now.

      I really hope Apple buys Adobe instead.

    27. Re:Sure. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two companies that don't know shit about security teaming up. I have never been so happy I bought a Mac.

      Citation needed. Been running Windows networks in a corporate environment for 10+ years in the financial industry. No hacks, no unmitigated viruses, etc.

      It's always humorous when the FUDbois come out spewing unsubstantiated rhetoric.

    28. Re:Sure. by shugah · · Score: 0, Troll

      Because Apple really does know SHIT about security.

      --
      If you aren't part of the solution, then there is good money to be made prolonging the problem
    29. Re:Sure. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yanking? After how many years of telling Adobe it was going away and you'd better get on the stick? After pleading with them for almost a decade to at least try to develop their applications native for the Mac?

      I do not think 'yanking' means what you think it means.

    30. Re:Sure. by cbhacking · · Score: 1

      Remarkably similar to how they handled security, actually. MS has at least done a bit better there in the last few years.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    31. Re:Sure. by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      I suspect iTunes is in for a big overhaul soon, and not just because it uses Carbon.

    32. Re:Sure. by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      Why is Final Cut Pro, Apple's own software, still in Carbon?

      Because they're probably busy re-writing their many other apps in Cocoa. There's probably a Cocoa version of FCP being developed in the bowels of Apple as we speak.

    33. Re:Sure. by jimicus · · Score: 1

      If they make money, Microsoft will keep making them.

      It's not always as simple as that in these big companies.

      If you have two departments doing essentially the same thing and both pull in $1,000,000 per year while costing $600,000 per year, it is quite common to merge the departments, get rid of a number of staff and wind up with a single department that you hope will bring in $2,000,000 per year but only cost around $900,000. The numbers may vary but the idea remains much the same.

    34. Re:Sure. by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Any company that couldn't figure out they should get off Carbon and migrate to Cocoa within ten years is too stupid to live.

      I was about to argue that point, then I realized that both Final Cut and iTunes are in Carbon, which means you believe Apple is too stupid to live.. Kudos to you, you are smart little Apple-fan.

    35. Re:Sure. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      What are you disputing? That Apple didn't tell people Carbon was a crutch, ten years ago? They did. I was there.

      Apple did make a mistake. They kept Carbon going for too long, and they did mention 64-bit Carbon. Both were dumb. Both were likely done to try to keep Adobe functioning.

      As for FCP, Apple just hasn't gotten to it yet. Hints are that they finally have.

    36. Re:Sure. by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why would you spend the enormous amount of money to retool your applications into Cocoa when Apple is advertising 64-Bit Carbon?

      When Apple did their 180 and pulled the rug out from under not only Adobe, but many other developers, it's their that they were expecting what was advertised? They spent money towards that Carbon 64-bit, and Apple screwed them. Seeing how Apple has been treating Flash like a dirty condom, I can't help but wonder if Apple planned it this way. Final Cut vs Premiere. Aperture vs Lightroom. Maybe this was a planned move to try to get market share away from Adobe.

      Either way, what I was disputing with Final Cut, is that if Cocoa was 1: the way to go, and 1: ready, why didn't Apple get their FCP people programming in Cocoa long ago? According to all the fanbois, Adobe should have switched to Cocoa long ago, yet here's Apple's own FCP, one of Apple's software that could most benefit from a 64-bit edition. No moves there? Whats the hurry then?

    37. Re:Sure. by DinDaddy · · Score: 1

      It's getting better. It's still an abomination, but it wears a bag over its head of very sheer material that you can only mostly see through.

    38. Re:Sure. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Apple has been neglecting FCP for a long time. You'll notice they didn't do any NEW development in Cocoa, and any old products that were getting any kind of major development got rewritten in Cocoa.

      As I said, Apple should have cut Adobe off at least five years ago. They had plenty of warning. Any talking about 64-bit Carbon Apple did was also over and done with years ago. Adobe still hasn't made any moves. They've had LOTS of warning.

      They should have been moving over to Cocoa long before 64-bit Carbon was even a possibility. It wouldn't have been an enormous project either. It's just the UI and a few other bits and pieces. Photoshop et. al. could use a UI rethink anyway.

      But I can see, by your use of "fanbois" that you're probably not going to be swayed by rational argument anyway.

    39. Re:Sure. by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      pulled the rug out from under

      You keep using that phrase, but it doesn't mean whatever it is you think it means when you have ten years warning that Carbon is going away.

  6. Micro and Macro? by NoobixCube · · Score: 3, Funny

    Adobe bought Macromedia back in distant times, so if Microsoft buy Adobe, won't that make them Micromacrobe?

    --
    Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
    1. Re:Micro and Macro? by paimin · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I think simply "Microbe" is more fitting.

      See here

      --
      Facebook is the new AOL
    2. Re:Micro and Macro? by CdBee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well its another reason Flash will never make it to the iPhone !

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    3. Re:Micro and Macro? by airfoobar · · Score: 1

      If they call themselves that, I'll gladly switch back to Windows and buy Photoshop. That would probably render me homeless, however...

    4. Re:Micro and Macro? by phizi0n · · Score: 2, Funny

      The micro and macro cancel each other out so the merged company will call themselves Softmediadobe.

    5. Re:Micro and Macro? by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 1

      The micro and macro cancel each other out so the merged company will call themselves Softmediadobe.

      That sounds like the name of one of those sites that delivers malware under the guise of useful freeware.
      ...
      Oh, right...

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    6. Re:Micro and Macro? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Well its another reason Flash will never make it to the iPhone !

      Steve said no.

      Why do you need another reason.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    7. Re:Micro and Macro? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flash on iphone would be shit any way the only reason you want it is so you can watch porn !! hahahah

    8. Re:Micro and Macro? by bigrockpeltr · · Score: 1

      what could you ever be referrring to? Both are well known companies (as well as their products) in the security world!

      --
      $ unzip, strip, touch, finger, grep, mount, fsck, more, yes,fsck,fsck,fsck,umount, sleep
    9. Re:Micro and Macro? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they bought Intel it would be Maccabee, Yidobe, or maybe Judeosoft.
      Some slogans:
      "Kosher Computing"
      "Our Photoshop Maketh no Graven Images, we Promise"
      "We're a Monopoly, Chosen by God"
      "One God, One OS"
      "It's not Broken, just Keeping Sabbath"
      "Our Patches are like Manna from Heaven"

    10. Re:Micro and Macro? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flash doesn't need to make it to the iPhone.
      It made it to the Samsung Galaxy S which is giving the iphone some real
      nightmares.
      well...what do i know? :-)

  7. Get all your 0-days from us by cheeni · · Score: 1

    'nuff said - two of the worst security records and they want to merge.

  8. Possible Security Improvements? by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh God, I so hope this happens. Microsoft may have a bad reputation for security, but quite honestly nothing is as big a nightmare for IT than anything and everything Adobe. Reader, Flash, CS... it's all a perpetual pain in the butt that Adobe always drops the ball with deployment and maintenance.

    Plus maybe then we can stop every MS site from needing SilverLight and every MS application installing an XPS Viewer/Printer.

    --
    The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    1. Re:Possible Security Improvements? by masterwit · · Score: 0, Troll

      Oh don't worry, they will integrate Adobe Flash at the kernel level in Windows. That will make everything super safe!

      Or maybe integrate it into the context menus or associate it with explorer - we can only hope...

      Plus with automatic updates you can be sure that updating other operating systems will become "less important", but that is okay, like everyone uses Windows right?

      --
      We should start a new Slashdot and return control to the geeks. It actually wouldn't be that hard to get some users to
    2. Re:Possible Security Improvements? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My fault on Code "Comment Post Mode", forgot to reset that setting it seems...

    3. Re:Possible Security Improvements? by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Plus maybe then we can implement future Flash versions on top of Silverlight and phase out PDF in favor of XPS.

      FTFY

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    4. Re:Possible Security Improvements? by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 1

      Who cares? How many security holes have there been in XPS or Silverlight?

      I highly doubt they'd want to change the name from PDF or Flash, though. If you buy Adobe it's for brand recognition more than anything.

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    5. Re:Possible Security Improvements? by jimicus · · Score: 1

      Plus maybe then we can stop every MS site from needing SilverLight and every MS application installing an XPS Viewer/Printer.

      Purely out of morbid curiosity, how many times in the last 20 years have Microsoft bought out a company that has a competing product in their portfolio and switched to the newly-acquired product, ditching their own?

    6. Re:Possible Security Improvements? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Who knows, neither of those are big enough to be worthy of attack by hackers...

      Malware attacked IE when it had 90%+ market share, now that its share is down to around 50% it's a less attractive target.. However Flash (and a single plugin, not a choice of multiple implementations) is on 90%+ of target systems regardless of what browser they use so it now becomes the most efficient target for exploitation.

      Adobe reader is also a good target, also installed on 90%+ systems, although there are far superior alternatives to it.

      Malware authors want to ensure that the largest possible percentage of people who stumble across their trap will get caught in it.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    7. Re:Possible Security Improvements? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Reader, Flash, CS... it's all a perpetual pain in the butt that Adobe always drops the ball with deployment and maintenance."

      Maintenance a pain in the butt? What are you talking about? Adobe has plenty of Updater programs to keep all of that stuff up-to-date automatically for you.

      [LOL]

    8. Re:Possible Security Improvements? by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Who cares?

      Anyone who isn't a desktop Windows user? Flash for OS X and Linux may be behind the Windows version with respect to performance but they're fully feature-compatible and as far as I know Adobe is working on hardware acceleration for *nixes. Silverlight, on the other hand, is simply not supported on non-Windows platforms; Moonlight is an independent project that Microsoft just happens to like.

      If Silverlight were to replace Flash we'd see at best a half-assed Mono-based runtime on non-Windows systems. Of course that would probably kill the market for it as there are more compatible cross-platform video solutions and without Flash video a lot of people might decide to simply not bother installing the runtime.

      (Of course this also means that Microsoft probably wouldn't be stupid enough to replace Flash with anything Windows-centric.)

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    9. Re:Possible Security Improvements? by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'd love to see MS put Reader and Flash into protected mode and let us push out updates via WSUS. Adobe has dropped the ball on security so many times any buyout with new management will be good for end users.

    10. Re:Possible Security Improvements? by djdanlib · · Score: 1

      I agree. I would MUCH RATHER deploy Adobe updates via WSUS than have to visit every stinkin' system that has Flash or Reader and go through the inanities of "Adobe Updater needs to restart your computer so Adobe Updater can update Adobe Updater", then it can download updates for an indeterminate amount of time to update Adobe Reader 9.0.1.1.1.1.4 to 9.0.1.1.1.1.4a which ALSO requires a reboot. And THEN I get yet another update request for Flash. Gimme a break.

    11. Re:Possible Security Improvements? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I'd love to see MS put Reader and Flash into protected mode and let us push out updates via WSUS. Adobe has dropped the ball on security so many times any buyout with new management will be good for end users.

      You kids these days and your 386 Enhanced poppycock! Real men run everything in real mode. 640K is enough for anybody! If it ain't, you're just programming in some inefficient, bloated language like C and Pascal. DEBUG and COPY CON are all a real man needs! EDLIN? That's for people who never even used a typewriter!

  9. Then Microsoft could own the two most pirated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    pieces of software.

    Adobe Photoshop, and Microsoft Windows.

  10. So.... by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So....Flash will suck on my Ubuntu machines even more now? I'm going to go cry myself to sleep tonight.

    1. Re:So.... by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      No, at that point neither Ubuntu nor Mac OSX will have official flash players.

      It's either a tragedy or a triumph, depending on your point of view.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    2. Re:So.... by cf18 · · Score: 1

      May be they will try to make a silverlight + flash hybrid that will suck even on latest Windows.

    3. Re:So.... by Jesus_666 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Flash for Linux and OS X will be replaced with twenty megabytes worth of infinite loops. Linux and Mac magazines will remark how the new Flash is more stable while offering the same level of performance as before.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    4. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      That's fine - after all, Linux does infinite loops in 5 seconds anyway.

    5. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I thought that Linux could do an infinite loop in under 15 minutes!

  11. Microdobe? by tnk1 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Microdobe? Please.

    If Adobe is lucky, they will be "Adobe, an independently managed subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation".

    More likely, Adobe + Microsoft = Microsoft.

    Double the evil, double the fun.

    1. Re:Microdobe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, no shit, that's why Ballmer is discussing an acquisition, not a merger of equals.

  12. Mac Creative Suite Users Ever Where Twitch by Kostya · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's bad enough Mac users still have to install MS Office because it won't really interoperate with things like iWork or open office. Now imagine all those Mac creative types experiencing the pain of a MS-owned and focused Adobe.

    I have to say, this is a crazy time to be in IT, software, and the mobile space. It's almost reminiscent of the chaos of the dot-com days: constant tech churn, companies rising and falling, etc. Hopefully we can avoid the bubble part ;-)

    --
    "Doubt your doubts and believe your beliefs." -- Switchfoot, Ode to Chin
    1. Re:Mac Creative Suite Users Ever Where Twitch by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      I think it would be the best thing for the creative industry. Photoshop is long overdue for redesign, but Adobe don't want to spend the time and money on such things when people will still buy it either way. If anything happens to Photoshop, developers will be racing to fill the profitable gap with a much better product.

    2. Re:Mac Creative Suite Users Ever Where Twitch by programmerar · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't surprize me if Apple already has a Photoshop replacement ready for a situation like this. And with Apple, I somehow feel it's not impossible for them to actually win a lot of people over to this new software. Like they did with Final Cut Pro...

    3. Re:Mac Creative Suite Users Ever Where Twitch by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Hopefully we can avoid the bubble part ;-)

      *cough* facebook *cough*

      No way is that company worth 48 trillion dollars or whatever the current price is.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    4. Re:Mac Creative Suite Users Ever Where Twitch by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      MS however are in exactly the same situation - why improve anything if people will buy it anyway?
      MS buying Adobe wouldn't change much, you would just see the mac and linux versions of whatever they make gradually languish behind much like they already do, not quite shit enough to really spur development of an alternative.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    5. Re:Mac Creative Suite Users Ever Where Twitch by R.Mo_Robert · · Score: 1

      It's bad enough Mac users still have to install MS Office because it won't really interoperate with things like iWork or open office....

      Unfortuantely, MS Office for the Mac doesn't really interoperate with MS Office for Windows, either. The new version is supposed to be better, but I haven't tried it out yet...

      --
      R.Mo
    6. Re:Mac Creative Suite Users Ever Where Twitch by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Good luck making a "much better product" to replace an industry standard that has a 20-year head start.

    7. Re:Mac Creative Suite Users Ever Where Twitch by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      It's only an industry standard because it has no competition. Once the competition is there, people will switch. People switched from QuarkXPress to InDesign -- what will stop them from switching from Photoshop to something else?

    8. Re:Mac Creative Suite Users Ever Where Twitch by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Like I said...good luck to any competition when Photoshop has the 20-year head start. What will keep anyone from switching to Photoshop is because there is no viable alternative in the foreseeable future.

      I have been using LightRoom more and more (and used Aperture for awhile) but those are limited to photography, while Photoshop is so much more. Plus, my Photoshop files integrate seamlessly with my Illustrator/Flash/AfterEffects stuff. Yes, I like my walled gardens.

    9. Re:Mac Creative Suite Users Ever Where Twitch by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      I haven't had MS Office on my Mac in over 7 years. Then again, I don't bring work home and I'm no longer in school (the only two reasons a home user would ever need Office?).

    10. Re:Mac Creative Suite Users Ever Where Twitch by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      I think both Aperture and Lightroom show that Photoshop shouldn't be too relaxed about its position at the top. Many people used to do all their photo editing in Photoshop. I do most editing in Aperture, now, and only use Photoshop to fill the gap. But even then, other specialised apps often do a better job -- photo-stiching is a good example here. I also use Photoshop in web design, but while it's powerful enough for such things, it's hardly tailored to those tasks and there is a gap for a web-specific app that would make life much easier.

      Photoshop is a Swiss Army knife. And while those are really handy, they can often be replaced by specialised tools that work well together. The bigger and more bloated Photoshop becomes, the more demand there will be for apps that specialise.

      I agree that there is no viable alternative at the moment, but that's only because there is no urgent need for one. My main point was that if Adobe were to ever do something silly such as cut off CS for Mac (which I doubt they'll do), that's when I think you'll see viable Photoshop alternatives showing up, whether they're Swiss Army knives or a number of specialised packages.

    11. Re:Mac Creative Suite Users Ever Where Twitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see how it would hurt Apple to have Microsoft take on Adobe Products. The Mac versions of Microsoft Office are really good.

  13. whats that sound? by harddriveerror · · Score: 1

    Photoshop down the shitter?

  14. I wouldn't want to be the poor shlub... by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... that has to get Ballmer's sweat stains out of the furniture in that meeting room!

    --
    Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
    1. Re:I wouldn't want to be the poor shlub... by MBGMorden · · Score: 3, Funny

      I wouldn't want to be the one to get Ballmer's furniture out of the walls of the meeting room . . .

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    2. Re:I wouldn't want to be the poor shlub... by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 1

      Touché!

      --
      Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
    3. Re:I wouldn't want to be the poor shlub... by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't want to be the one to get Ballmer's furniture out of the walls of the meeting room . . .

      There's a lot to be said for job security in this economy.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    4. Re:I wouldn't want to be the poor shlub... by djdanlib · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, he'll throw it around and break it before you would have had to clean it anyway.

  15. Flash for Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I know we all hate Flash, but we need it (sometimes) and I doubt Microbe would continue development on Flash for Linux.

    1. Re:Flash for Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other than making your platform more insecure and unstable name one thing that there is not a better delivery system out there for than flash.

    2. Re:Flash for Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know we all hate Flash, but we need it (sometimes) and I doubt Microbe would continue development on Flash for Linux.

      Well, if it's any consolation, I doubt that they would continue developing Flash for Windows either. It's silverlight all the way, baby.

    3. Re:Flash for Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and retarded cousin moonlight without any drm support

    4. Re:Flash for Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other than making your platform more insecure and unstable name one thing that there is not a better delivery system out there for than flash.

      Silverlight

    5. Re:Flash for Linux? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      What exactly do we need it for? The only things that I can think or are as a bandage fix for what's ultimately MS' refusal to comply with the standards, and at this point it looks like that might start changing in the foreseeable future.

    6. Re:Flash for Linux? by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Are you the guy that chooses what everyone else uses as delivery systems? Because I'm not, so I have to accept what they provide.

    7. Re:Flash for Linux? by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      Dynamic content that runs at reasonable framerates for one. How about this video test? http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/does_html5_really_beat_flash_surprising_results_of_new_tests.php

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    8. Re:Flash for Linux? by Dracos · · Score: 1

      The only reason I keep a windows install around is for Photoshop and Illustrator. These two are unusable under Wine. Inkscape is slowly growing on me, but I just can't get used to GIMP. Everything else is covered by Linux.

      And after some of the things Jobs has said lately, I can't in good conscience buy any of his products.

    9. Re:Flash for Linux? by fermion · · Score: 1
      Flash is becoming less and less relevant. It is used for some things, but if MS buys it that will put the nail in the coffin. Look at what happened to IE when went really hardball and pulled it for Mac. MS Office 2010 ia not selling well, not necessarily because of quality, but because of trust.

      If Flash is pulled for linux, it would probably be enough to tip many people over to other technologies, if for no other reason than they would be afraid that MS may pull the Mac version. No one can afford to lose 10% of potential customers, especially when that 10% has cash(hear me blockbuster?).

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    10. Re:Flash for Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know we all hate Flash, but we need it (sometimes) and I doubt Microbe would continue development on Flash for Linux.

      With the raise of HTML5, why would it be so?

    11. Re:Flash for Linux? by JackAxe · · Score: 1

      I like Flash, so who's this we?

    12. Re:Flash for Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Way way way superior video codecs to flash, sorry. Since it can use DirectShow, it also lets you add new codecs, like oh, Theora. WPF/E is also a way way way superior mechanism for creating guis, and beats the holy tar out of flex even before you get into extras like workflow foundation or Azure. I know you feel compelled to hate Silverlight because the slashdot collective told you to, but if you can come up with an objective and intelligent reason besides "it's by Microsoft", please do elucidate.

    13. Re:Flash for Linux? by heypete · · Score: 1

      I recall the pre-Flash Video days.

      Say what you will about Flash, but it is a hell of a lot better than RealVideo and its player.

      With Flash, one need only install a single browser plugin and gain access to rich multimedia (audio [e.g. Pandora], video [YouTube, Hulu, etc.], and more) with essentially no problems. Sure beats the alternative of requiring various plugins and players for each codec (e.g. QuickTime player). HTML5 is promising, but isn't there yet.

      Yes, there's a lot to be desired in Flash (for my workplace, it's non-managed updates and updates requiring admin privileges), but I prefer it to the alternatives.

      That said, using Flash as a website layout tool is obnoxious and stupid. Using it as a multimedia plugin/viewer, that's fine.

    14. Re:Flash for Linux? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      There is always the risk that any product controlled by a single company will be pulled or taken in an undesirable direction... People already either accept that risk, or are ignorant of it...

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  16. That trainwreck would make me.... by couchslug · · Score: 1

    ....giggle like a schoolgirl.

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  17. That would make things simpler. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd have one less company's products to avoid.

  18. Long live .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MICROBIE!!!!

  19. I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by Motard · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Microsoft has replaced postscript with XPS. IE and Silverlight can display XPS, so goodbye Acrobat. Silverlight does video and RIA. Goodbye Flash. Expression Blend can do what Illustrator does, although it's not as mature.

    And with no one giving MS a chance of succeeding in the mobile space, the time may be right to sidestep antitrust issues.

    Microsoft gets a migration path from Adobe to Silverlight. Adobe shareholders get $$$'s and not uncertainty.

    The uncertainty will come from the government.

    1. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by AHuxley · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or Flash player for Mac and Linux will be 'out sourced' in an extra special way, suffer epic version drift and just be dropped for Silverlight Home.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by hedwards · · Score: 1

      If they did that, there'd definitely be antitrust suits in the future for them. They could probably get around it by releasing enough XPS documentation for other platforms, but still that'd be risky.

    3. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by dch24 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're spot on. Microsoft does not buy other companies to merge with them. Microsoft buys them out and shuts them down.

      If they can eliminate Adobe from the competition, then Apple is the only target left. Ballmer doesn't care at all whether CS, Flash, Acrobat, or mobile devices succeed. He only cares about shareholder profitability. We outsiders will guess and post on slashdot but it won't affect the outcome at all. If the deal goes through, Adobe will fade away.

      Personally, I like Adobe's past, though they've made some serious errors starting around 2001. It may be time to close up shop. I wonder.

    4. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft gets a migration path from Adobe to Silverlight. Adobe shareholders get $$$'s and not uncertainty. Users get RAPED UP THE ASS

      Fixed that for you.

    5. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I had mod points, I'd login and give bump this up...

      The first thing I thought of was replacing Flash with Silverlight. It makes a lot of sense to me with IE9 and Win7 Phone on the horizon as long as they get the system process requirements down to run.

    6. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by failedlogic · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, but MS Paint doesn't quite -yet- match Photoshop. ;-)

    7. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has replaced postscript with XPS. IE and Silverlight can display XPS, so goodbye Acrobat.

      Microsoft has changed directions before. If they were to buy Adobe they would probably switch direction and become the masters of PDF.

      Microsoft gets a migration path from Adobe to Silverlight. Adobe shareholders get $$$'s and not uncertainty.

      Pretty sure they won't can Flash quickly, because the authoring tools are comparatively fantastic. I imagine some third tool based on the unholy merger of the two with a third name.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft gets a migration path from Adobe to Silverlight. Adobe shareholders get $$$'s and not uncertainty.

      That would be pretty interesting. Microsoft coming to flash with open arms and hugging them like buddies. Suddenly you start to see versions of Flash getting Silverlight extensions. Finally, Microsoft rolls out some new technology (I guess "Windows Presentation {tm}) which ships to both the current install base for flash and silverlight. Flash is exterminated.

      If only we had some nifty four word phrase to describe said activity.

    9. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by Kjella · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The whole reason Silverlight exists is because flash is not Microsoft. Break every browser flash game by going Silverlight only? Microsoft is not that stupid, if they owned flash then they'd be all over it. Same with most other of Adobe's apps, pretty much everything in their Creative Suite has much higher brand recognition than Microsoft's products.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    10. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by artisteeternite · · Score: 1

      There have been discussions in the design world of Apple having the ability to replace the Adobe Creative Suite if Adobe pissed them off enough. If Microsoft was actually dumb/evil/malicious enough to screw over every single graphic designer in the entire world, then I think Apple would totally steal that entire market share in short order. I'm a designer but hate working with Macs. We all think plenty about Adobe sucks, but their software is so much better than any other graphic design software available on the market they're still our heroes. But I would be come an Apple fangirl in a second if Microsoft tried to replace Adobe design software with their own stuff.

    11. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by avatar139 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Microsoft has replaced postscript with XPS. IE and Silverlight can display XPS, so goodbye Acrobat. Silverlight does video and RIA. Goodbye Flash. Expression Blend can do what Illustrator does, although it's not as mature.

      Please don't confuse offering really bad alternatives with replacing things.

      Microsoft's been introducing alternatives for years but even in the 90s most companies doing multimedia and pagination knew better and continued to buy Apple as that's always the area that

      Microsoft has never offered anything remotely approaching the functionality of Display PostScript for its operating systems (I still get times even now when I'm working on a client's machine when the OS has problems loading because the resolution settings are so screwed up to the point where Windows can't display anything because the monitor can't correctly output the display settings) nor has it ever provided any built-in support for monitor calibration prior to the introduction of WCS in Vista.

      There's a reason that people were still buying Macs even throughout the 90s for multimedia and pagination purposes as Apple first introduced Colorsync back in 1993 and Microsoft has finally started to play catchup, and it only took them 14 years, but they still have a very long to go even with the most recent release of Windows 7!

      And with no one giving MS a chance of succeeding in the mobile space, the time may be right to sidestep antitrust issues.

      Doubtful, really, as Android has already filled the void for a consumer phone OS to fill the gap, and Microsoft really showed how great they could design a phone with the Kin. If they had managed to acquire Palm I think that would have been a smarter acquisition for them as they could give up on Windows Mobile (the big flaw of which is shown by the name in that Microsoft is still determined to port over a desktop experience to a phone rather than starting from scratch to create an OS specifically geared for mobile devices) and shift over to WebOS but given HP (who was huge driving force for Windows Mobile devices back in the day with its iPaq line) showed how confident they are in Microsoft's ability to create a quality mobile operating system by buying Palm out from under them!

      Microsoft gets a migration path from Adobe to Silverlight. Adobe shareholders get $$$'s and not uncertainty.

      The uncertainty will come from the government.

      I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say with that paragraph as it sounds like you're admitting that Adobe is actually making money from their offerings whereas pretty much the only profitable divisions of Microsoft at this point are Office, Servers, and Windows Desktop OS bundling sales which is really not the best way to support you're point.

      Bottom line for me is that Photoshop didn't get to verb status without Adobe doing something right. While I'lll freely admit I've had issues with Adobe's semi-recent trend of rolling out overpriced bloatware more and more quickly in recent years, for the most part the CS line is still the industry standard, so while I would love to see Adobe clean up it's act I don't think allowing Microsoft to acquire Adobe is going to help them in that practice!

      --
      I'm honest enough to admit I lie to myself.
    12. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by jackbird · · Score: 1

      Hey, they're working on it.

    13. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Microsoft has replaced postscript with XPS. IE and Silverlight can display XPS, so goodbye Acrobat. Silverlight does video and RIA. Goodbye Flash. Expression Blend can do what Illustrator does, although it's not as mature."

      Photoshop and Illustrator are the industry standards. Don't be silly.

    14. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by DeathElk · · Score: 1

      Embrace, extend, extinguish... profit?

    15. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by Pascal+Sartoretti · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has replaced postscript with XPS

      They tried. But who uses it, anyway ?

      Even on their own website, Microsoft uses more PDF than XPS. Just try to look e.g. for whitepapers and see for yourself.

    16. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by jimicus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Break every flash browser game today? Probably not.

      Stop development work on Flash, let it flounder and then when IE 11 comes out with a new plugin architecture (which oh-what-a-shame means Flash no longer runs) kill it altogether? I wouldn't bet against something like that.

    17. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 1

      No, but Paint.net doesn't suck too bad. It's a much better Paint, and it's free.

      --
      The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
    18. Re:I don't see much of Adobe products surviving. by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Luckily, Paint.net is not owned by Microsoft...yet.

  20. So, at long last the truth comes out by Linsaran · · Score: 2, Funny

    Microsoft and Adobe are now going to be Microbe, I always suspected they virus'

    --
    In a bit of shameless internet panhandling, I accept Litecoin Donations at Lbd2oH9QsthD1GfuUXPyka12YxvWJYnBVf
  21. Fine wit-it, if they put .NET back in Dreamweaver by LibertineR · · Score: 1

    .....and kill off Cold Fusion once and for all.

  22. How convenient by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Insightful

    >>>One less company to hate.

    "Arrogance and stupidity all in the same package. How efficient of you."

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  23. Bloat by phizi0n · · Score: 1

    It's bad enough that Adobe bloated Macromedia's products after the merger. MS would turn Dreamweaver into a 20GB version of FrontPage 97.

  24. Time to look for open source alternatives by peterhil · · Score: 1

    I guess I'll look seriously into starting to use Gimp, Xara LX and Inkscape. Are there any good open source photo editors / bitmap graphics applications?

    1. Re:Time to look for open source alternatives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      > I guess I'll look seriously into starting to use Gimp, Xara LX and Inkscape. Are there any good open source photo editors / bitmap graphics applications?

      Digikam for photo editor and Krita for bitmap graphics. Karbon14, Inkscape or LibreOffice Draw for vector graphics.

    2. Re:Time to look for open source alternatives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Are there any good open source photo editors

      More help with open source photography applications can be found here:
      http://blog.worldlabel.com/2010/photography-with-open-source-linux.html

      LPROF to create ICC colour profiles for your camera and monitor.

      Digikam or Darktable for the actual photo editing applications.

    3. Re:Time to look for open source alternatives by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Xara Xtreme (aka Xara LX) is dead and has been for years. :-(

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    4. Re:Time to look for open source alternatives by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Why if you are happy using proprietary Photoshop et al on OSX are you unhappy with doing the same on Windows?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    5. Re:Time to look for open source alternatives by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      For non technical people, because OSX is less hassle... No need to fuck around with firewalls, anti virus, anti malware and have having all this crap in the background wasting resources. Graphic designers don't want to deal with the hassle of maintaining a flakey OS.

      For technical people, because OSX is unix based just like pretty much everything else other than windows.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  25. Microsoft Flash by keird · · Score: 1

    Just what we need is _both_ Microsoft and Adobe screwing up flash on the Mac. That will ensure it never sees the light of day on an iPhone.

  26. It already exists... by littlerubberfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's called Silverlight.

    --
    Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
    1. Re:It already exists... by Microlith · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, it's Flashlight.

    2. Re:It already exists... by Fluffeh · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, it's Fleshlight.

      Fixed that for you.

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    3. Re:It already exists... by kimvette · · Score: 1

      You accidentally the whole thing!

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    4. Re:It already exists... by bell.colin · · Score: 1

      But there are already a billion entries for flashlight in the apple store.

  27. Re:Fine wit-it, if they put .NET back in Dreamweav by thestudio_bob · · Score: 2, Informative

    ColdFusion used to be great. When it was just owned by Allaire. Then MacroMedia walks into the picture, buys Allaire and starts putting out buggy ColdFusion releases. Then Adobe buys MacroMedia and people thought they would handle ColdFusion better, but soon found out that all they really were doing was cramming Flash in it to make it even buggier and bloated.

    I love CFML, but I haven't used Adobe's ColdFusion in over 2 years. Railo and BlueDragon for me.

    --
    The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains /.
  28. Good by mosb1000 · · Score: 0, Troll

    This might finally convince Apple to make their own graphics suite. Adobe hasn't been an innovator for a long time, and they don't write good software.

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

      OS X would beg to differ with you...

    2. Re:Good by whisper_jeff · · Score: 1

      Frankly, I agree. The threat of Microsoft pulling Office prompted them to make iWork and, quite frankly, I like the suite a great deal more than Office. If this pushes Apple to do the same for graphics programs, I'll be a very happy camper. Would the creative suite be as polished as Adobe CS right off the bat? Obviously not but Apple does know a thing or two about developing software packages so I'm pretty confident it wouldn't take them too long to get things working at a professional level.

    3. Re:Good by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Apple would have to perfect color seperation, trapping, CMYK, plug ins and work flows.
      Who knows what is left on the OS X dev side of Apple to make their own graphics suite?
      Anything on the open market?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:Good by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1
      "... Apple does know a thing or two about developing closed software packages"

      FTFY

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    5. Re:Good by Br'fin · · Score: 1

      Along those lines... How close do you think Apple is to already having such a Graphics software package? They've been sparring with Adobe around the edges for a bit with their video programs and such. And just like Microsoft Office and iWork, it's possibly a critical enough area for Apple to have some investment in preserving whether or not Adobe agrees.

    6. Re:Good by liquidsin · · Score: 1

      they used oss to build an os and a browser, among other things; maybe they can take the gimp to new levels. between that and the base they've built with aperture, i'm sure they could be competitive in the photo retouching world in short order.

      as someone who lives on adobe software on a mac, i feel like a little kid watching his parents divorce. why can't they just get along?

      --
      do not read this line twice.
    7. Re:Good by e4g4 · · Score: 1

      "... Apple does know a thing or two about developing closed software packages"

      Because Microsoft and Adobe are such bastions of open software...

      --
      The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
    8. Re:Good by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      Windows Mobile 6 and before were pretty open. It was only after Apple's success with the iPhone that WP7 will be locked down.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
  29. Sure Buddy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Saying a Mac is secure is like saying you can't get STDs from a fleshlight.

    The language is technically correct, but it implies a lack of experience and understanding.

    1. Re:Sure Buddy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you have the lack of understanding. Macs have less vulnerabilities than Windows. (I'm not saying none, just far less). Show me the last Mac worm or widescale virus on OS X. It's not for lack of popularity or trying either.

    2. Re:Sure Buddy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're saying you like to have unprotected sex with STD-ridden prostitutes?

      After all, that's what it's like using Windows on the internet.

      (This post made from Microsoft Windows Vista (tm))

    3. Re:Sure Buddy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Macs have less vulnerabilities than Windows.

      Untrue. They have less KNOWN vulnerabilities.

      I'm not saying none

      The fact that you would explain this shows you know little about computer security.

      Show me the last Mac worm or widescale virus on OS X

      *facepalm* To have a widespread infection you need widespread computers first.

      It's not for lack of popularity or trying either.

      VERY curious why you think this. Please reply.

  30. microdobe by dynamo · · Score: 1

    If this happened, the merged company should be called Adobe. MS would do best to try to leave it's past behind. And it's present.

    1. Re:microdobe by toddestan · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but I hate Adobe's bloated, buggy, poorly designed, insecure software worse than I hate Microsoft's.

  31. Hey there! by Dayofswords · · Score: 4, Funny

    It looks like you're trying to edit that spring break photo with that guy you thought was a chick.
    Would you like help?

    • Get help to make this guy look hot.
    • Get help pasting a model over him.
    • Get help for making you look so wasted you didn't know what you were doing.
    --
    Someday we'll hit the human carrying capacity. And the band will just play on.
    1. Re:Hey there! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It looks like you're trying to edit that spring break photo with that guy you thought was a chick.
      Would you like help?

      • Get help to make this guy look hot.
      • Get help pasting a model over him.
      • Get help for making you look so wasted you didn't know what you were doing.
      • Get you a bulk discount on tissues.
    2. Re:Hey there! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has stock in Facebook too, for humiliation integration!

      Now they just need tattoos, handguns, and tequila.

  32. Death of Flash by whisper_jeff · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, that merger would spell the death of Flash pretty damn quickly. What, you think Microsoft would keep Flash _and_ Silverlight? You think they'd keep Flash _instead_ of Silverlight? Don't kid yourself - they are a corporate culture company with political infighting of the worst degree. The Microsoft team would do everything and then some to ensure that all products that Adobe made that duplicated existing Microsoft products were wiped from the face of computing. If they're willing to nonchallantly stab fellow Microsoft execs in the back to ensure their product gets favoured treatment, just think how ruthless they'll be against non-Microsoft execs...

    1. Re:Death of Flash by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Well, that merger would spell the death of Flash pretty damn quickly. What, you think Microsoft would keep Flash _and_ Silverlight?

      Of course. You can troll Apple with Flash (by porting it to Android etc), but you cannot do that with Silverlight yet.

    2. Re:Death of Flash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really though? I mean, if Microsoft kills off Flash, what are the odds of HTML5 support actually coming together and making Silverlight, along with Flash, irrelevant? Microsoft would keep Flash as long as it requires users remain locked to their platform.. if they kill Flash, they've won nothing in this endeavor. If people have to move to an alternative, they might just move to a less locked down one. Those odds, Microsoft doesn't want to play.

    3. Re:Death of Flash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck wiping out Photoshop...

  33. Oh Crap! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    When these two bloated behemoths merge, a black hole will inevitably form... and my job is just on the other side of Lake Washington, at UW. There's no way we'll escape from the gravitational well!

    I think I'm gonna call in sick on the day they sign the merger papers.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  34. down with Flash and up with Silverlight? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ballmer seems to have a hard on to murder competing technologies (of which MS makes chinese knockoffs) and it would be terrible for everyone. I'm no fan of Flash but when the world changes to Silverlight, everyone is truly screwed... especially the non-Windows people.

    1. Re:down with Flash and up with Silverlight? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Yes live webcam streaming will be fun. Html5 support is ??, with flash knifed, Silverlight 4 support is CaptureDeviceConfiguration.AllowedDeviceAccess _captureSource.Start(); for all.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  35. Not good... by dtjohnson · · Score: 0, Troll

    This is a good example of why Microsoft's future looks so gloomy. Instead of coming out with new ways of doing things, better, more efficient ways, things that delight users, they think of ways they can screw other companies like Apple and Google that ARE doing those things.

    1. Re:Not good... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Cannibalism outside a monopoly is good when starting up.
      Play loss leader and grow. Long term, as you said "efficient ways, things that delight users" has to be the way.
      Generations should know, never use MS, in a few years what you did wont be supported in some area and is $$$ time.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  36. Okay, I'm siding with Jobs for once by guyminuslife · · Score: 1

    Clearly, any potential merger makes for a damn good reason to keep Flash off the iPhone, and support HTML 5. Platform neutrality is rather important here.

    --
    I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
  37. Software Quality by mishaneah · · Score: 1

    Both companies ship code riddled with bugs and obsolete code. They were made for each other.

    --
    Sand People code single file to hide their line count.
  38. PDF in Office by SilverHatHacker · · Score: 1

    As I recall, the reason OpenOffice can export to PDFs natively and Office can't is because Adobe didn't trust Microsoft with the relevant code. (Or it may have been something to do with licensing, could someone else chime in here? Either way, Adobe wouldn't let them do it.) Anyhow, I would expect we could see that feature "coming soon to a Ribbon near you".

    --
    Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
    1. Re:PDF in Office by RazorSharp · · Score: 1

      Office for Mac can because on OS X anything that can be printed can be turned into a PDF.

      --
      "From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
    2. Re:PDF in Office by bflong · · Score: 4, Informative

      As far as I know, that is not correct. PDF is an open format, and anyone can write software to create PDF's without needing a licence from Adobe. The reason PDF export isn't built into MS Office is because MS decided not to do it.

      --
      Why is it so hot? Where am I going? What am I doing in this handbasket?
    3. Re:PDF in Office by SilverHatHacker · · Score: 2, Informative

      Found the story about it, seems to be kind of a funny issue. Apparently Adobe sued MSFT in Europe because they didn't want the competition with Acrobat, but you're right, PDF is an open format, and Adobe at another time said anyone could work with it. Guess it's just because Office would be making money off it? Here's the story

      --
      Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
    4. Re:PDF in Office by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Save As PDF or XPS has been an option in Office since 2007, before they you could Print to PDF.

    5. Re:PDF in Office by Kwami · · Score: 1

      Office 2007 has a free plugin available from Microsoft that exports to PDF just fine. If I recall, Adobe sued Microsoft to prevent them from bundling this functionality with Office because they didn't want the competition with Acrobat. I don't know if Office 2010 has a similar plugin, but I bet it does.

    6. Re:PDF in Office by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      As far as I know, that is not correct. PDF is an open format, and anyone can write software to create PDF's without needing a licence from Adobe.

      If Microsoft buys Adobe, can they reverse that?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    7. Re:PDF in Office by bored_engineer · · Score: 1

      Here's an article that discusses the issue. Take a look at the comments after the article, too. The first one sheds some light on the matter. Personally, I think that Adobe was simply scared of the possibility of native support within Office for exporting PDFs. I've worked with folks who use Acrobat for nothing but writing PDFs, and you can be sure that Adobe knows that there are lots of folks spending money on their software for one single feature.

    8. Re:PDF in Office by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you talking about? Office 2007 and 2010 have .pdf as a choice for "save as..."

      Posted as AC to preserve moderations

    9. Re:PDF in Office by tyrione · · Score: 1

      PDF is an ISO standard. If MS Office customers want it it will be in there.

    10. Re:PDF in Office by radish · · Score: 1

      Ummm what? "Save As PDF" is built into Office 2007 (since SP2 in 2008) and 2010 (since release) on Windows.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    11. Re:PDF in Office by cbhacking · · Score: 1

      Office 2007 early betas ("Office 12 Beta") included PDF export out of the box. Office 2007 RC removed it, but Microsoft added an optional download that provided the PDF export capability. Office 2010 includes built-in PDF export.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    12. Re:PDF in Office by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Apparently Adobe sued MSFT in Europe because they didn't want the competition with Acrobat

      You can't sue someone just because you don't like them competing against you.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    13. Re:PDF in Office by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      PDF is an open format, all the specifications for it are available publicly and many others have implemented it (openoffice, macosx, kpdf, pdflatex etc).
      MS decided not to implement it because they never implement anyone else's standards unless they're forced to, and even then they try to implement them poorly and push users onto their own proprietary formats instead.

      In this case, MS wants people using their proprietary XPS format instead.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    14. Re:PDF in Office by glebd · · Score: 1

      Is there any other reason?

    15. Re:PDF in Office by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PDF export is built into Office 2010 and as a free add-in for Office 2007.

    16. Re:PDF in Office by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In since 2007 at least.

    17. Re:PDF in Office by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am imagining the fact I regularly save to PDF from Word, through the Save As -> XPS or PDF option?

      If so then then people I send the PDFs to are either also delusional or are just not interested in what I am sending them, as I have had no complaints so far...

  39. o_O by Tailhook · · Score: 0, Troll

    Buy Adobe for mobile? Is there an Adobe phone I haven't seen? Has Adobe developed a successful phone/pad OS I'm not aware of? What, pray-tell, does Adobe have in mobile?

    Perhaps this is about Flash. Silverlight must not be meeting expectations... Anyhow, few care about Flash in mobile, really. Both iPhonePad and Android are succeeding largely without it. Vector graphics and playing movies are solved problems.

    The only company with a credible counter to Apple's iPhonePad is Google, and Microsoft can't afford to buy Google. I really can't imagine how you rationalize what would be the huge purchase cost of Adobe on the basis of 'battle against apple' in the 'mobile phone' market when Adobe brings so little to the table.

    Anyhow, go buy Flash if you want Ballmer. HTML5 trumps all that nonsense anyhow. Canvas is already better than flash because it's not a plug-in. I've used WebM/VP8 with ffmpeg and it works fine and looks great. The only reason these new tools haven't replaced the legacy stuff is lack of motivation. Perhaps Microsoft will provide it.

    You can't buy the Internet Ballmer. It doesn't like you.

    --
    Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    1. Re:o_O by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Microsoft can't afford to buy Google.

      Nor would Google sell. Eric Schmidt, Larry Page and Sergey Brin still control 67% of the voting power, not random shareholders, and I doubt they would have any interest in selling.

  40. They each have an OS by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

    So will adobe reader be rebadged as windows 8?

    1. Re:They each have an OS by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      No, but it'll be the new Notepad. ~

  41. LOL by lullabud · · Score: 1

    I can't believe you just used "fleshlight" in the same sentence as "experience and understanding"

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

      It was in the next sentence...

    2. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He didn't; those are 2 sentences.

  42. It's time for Apple to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    make Aperture a Photoshop substitute.

  43. Silverlight Rules! by danparker276 · · Score: 1

    This would be great. Get rid of flash for silverlight and user expression blend. I guess they could keep PDFs.

    1. Re:Silverlight Rules! by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Try using it on any platform that is not the latest and greatest windows, if it does not already suck it will soon. XP will soon be doing without the latest silverlight, moonlight is a joke only made so MS can claim support while not really having it, and the OSX version is feature deficient and will only get worse. Say what you will about flash, but at least it really is cross platform.

  44. I felt a disturbance in the force by Rashdot · · Score: 1, Funny

    As if millions of geeks suddenly cried out in pain.

    --
    This is not the sig you're looking for.
  45. Crystal ball says Corel gets bought out too by chaosdivine69 · · Score: 1

    Ok, lets just play with this for a bit. Perhaps Microsoft should skip Adobe and buy Corel instead. They'd save tonnes of cash and get many high end and comparable products taht are very respectable and powerful (DRAW, Painter, Photopaint - they could kill off Word Perfect finally). Hmmmm, OK, lets look at this from a reciprocal fashion - maybe if Adobe gets taken over by Microsoft...Apple buys Corel instead. They get an instant professional quality office suite and the graphic programs too. Not only that, they get to decide if they'll play only on Mac OS or on Windows. Anyhow, if Adobe gets bought out I'd keep an eye North of the border...Corel is ripe for the picking too.

    1. Re:Crystal ball says Corel gets bought out too by chaosdivine69 · · Score: 1

      Google could sneak in and throw all this into a Tizzy if they bought out Corel, screwing everyone! LOL! Priceless...

    2. Re:Crystal ball says Corel gets bought out too by jayrtfm · · Score: 1

      I'd love to see Google Ventura Publisher

  46. Incompetence Multiplied by jjohnson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Two large, lumbering companies with zero agility that have coasted for a decade on their successful products from the 90s and failed with everything since, decide to become one larger company that's less agile, less creative, and even less likely to do something game changing or even newly profitable.

    Yeah, that's some scary competition. What did Bill Gates say so many years ago? Something like "We didn't want to become IBM"? Well, IBM, in a corporate sense, has become far more dynamic than MS is today. Don't see a merger with Adobe changing that.

    --
    Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
    1. Re:Incompetence Multiplied by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is this modded as insightful? Give credit to where it's due. You call Xbox 360 and Kinect resting on decade-old products?

    2. Re:Incompetence Multiplied by heypete · · Score: 0

      I wasn't aware that Windows 7 and the Xbox/Xbox 360 counted as "failures". Who knew?

    3. Re:Incompetence Multiplied by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      one larger company that's less agile, less creative, and even less likely to do something game changing

      You give good buzzword.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    4. Re:Incompetence Multiplied by slaingod · · Score: 1

      I can agree with most of that when it comes to the bulk of the Creative Suite, but since the purchase of Macromedia, Adobe has done some new good things, like Flex, Flash Catalyst, AS3 and the ability to load PSD's into Flash (the app not the plugin).

      I still say they should open source Flash (whatever the license, just let people help secure it) since it has become so ubiquitous and suffers from the frequent security issues.

      --
      http://blog.slaingod.com
    5. Re:Incompetence Multiplied by jjohnson · · Score: 1

      Call me when profit on the Xbox 360 covers the billion dollar losses on the original Xbox.

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
    6. Re:Incompetence Multiplied by jjohnson · · Score: 1

      Windows 7 isn't a failure, but it's another iteration of one of their successful products from the 90s, which is Windows. Office 2010 is also a success. That's still coasting on core products that are over a decade old. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but they're made repeated attempts to open other markets and simply failed. Xbox might be a success if they can make up in profit the billion dollars they lost on the original.

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
  47. Doubtful by igadget78 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I highly doubt that Microsoft will buy Adobe. More than likely, they are looking into possible ways to get Flash on their new Windows 7 Phone OS so that they can have a larger legion of developers making games for their new mobile OS to more easily compete with the iOS from Apple.

    1. Re:Doubtful by antdude · · Score: 1

      Can't MS use its Silverlight for their phones instead? Silverlight competes against Flash.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    2. Re:Doubtful by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Informative

      WP7 development platform is Silverlight - any WP7 app is either a Silverlight app or an XNA app.

      That said, it makes sense to try to draw an existing large pool of developers which have so far been not particularly well accommodated by other mobile platforms. Especially if your competitors are so much ahead of you there, and it's going to be a very hard struggle uphill.

    3. Re:Doubtful by wsgeek · · Score: 1

      Or maybe Microsoft wants to make Flash a Windows 7 thing only... Let it sit side-by-side with Silverlight and let developers choose which plugin to use. Either way, it takes away Apples future ability to ever have Flash, and it robs Flash from Android.

      Ballmer only knows how to get marketshare by buying it, so he might be thinking that Flash developers, while enraged at the lack of support on Android, would stick with their development tools anyway.

  48. could be good for consumers by cyberidian · · Score: 1

    If they include Adobe products in an MSDN subscription it might be a big win for consumers. Also I would be amazed if Acrobat, Photoshop and other products are discontinued. Those are very popular products, many of them the industry standard. I think the MS bashing is too much. MS products are a lot more accessible to the average consumer AND developer than Apple's products and Ubuntu. Plus MS has excellent product documentation and offers express versions of many products for free. They also have great partnering programs for developers with cheap access to full MSDN subscriptions. There are reasons why MS and Adobe are industry leaders. The complaints about bugs and security are exaggerated and unreasonable. This might be bad for Adobe employees and Apple, but for consumers and shareholders it makes sense.

    1. Re:could be good for consumers by gujo-odori · · Score: 1

      OK, I'll bite. What MS products are more accessible to the consumer?

      They sell lots of MS products at (for example) Fry's. They sell lots of Apple products at Fry's. Over the Internet, too. Sounds equally accessible.

      Both have good, free online knowledge bases and communities of expert users willing to help. Sounds equally accessible.

      Windows is easier to use and more reliable than it used to be. Apple products are easier to use and more reliable than they used to be. On the whole, easier to use and more reliable than MS products, too.

      For developers, MS has lots of stuff available for free through MSDN. Apple has lots of stuff available for free through their equivalent. Forget what they call it.

      Ubuntu? Not much available in computer stores, but you can download the OS for free or order a CD cheap. Once you have it, it's easier to install than either Windows. Maybe easier than Mac.
      You can get it pre-installed if you really want, but that does limit your choice of hardware/vendors.

      Online support is free and very good. As with Windows and Mac, lots of knowledgeable people will help you for free.

      Ubuntu is easier to use and more reliable than it used to be. Easier than or equal to Windows in most areas. Easier than or equal to Mac in a few.

      For developers? It's all free. Knock yourself out.

      Ubuntu may be still a bit rough around the edges in some areas compared to Windows, and more so compared to Mac, but it also beats them both (especially Windows) so soundly in areas such as ease of software installation and updates, price, and security that I would call it a three-way tie in terms of accessibility to both users and devs.

      Considering how much farther ahead Win and Mac were when I first tried Linux over 10 years ago, I suspect that 3 - 5 years from now, it may be game/set/match Ubuntu in terms of accessibility.

  49. I hope so.. by jcr · · Score: 1

    If Microsoft buys Adobe, then Apple would go ahead and develop replacements for Photoshop and Illustrator.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:I hope so.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Develop replacements"? Just bust out your copy of MacPaint, and problem solved.

    2. Re:I hope so.. by artisteeternite · · Score: 1

      That's been a rumor going around in design circles. That if Adobe pissed off Apple enough that they'd just make their own replacements. And as the odd designer that prefers a Windows machine and detests working on a Mac, I'd totally become an Apple fangirl if it came to that.

    3. Re:I hope so.. by tf23 · · Score: 1

      After Apple bought NeXT, it's said they kept the Intel version developed behind closed doors for all those years.

      If Jobs were a smart man, and I think he is, when they realized they'd block flash on the to-be iOS platform (which was far more ahead of when they announced it), they started work on a graphics app to replace Photoshop. "Just incase" they'd need it.

    4. Re:I hope so.. by webdog314 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Personally, as a designer, I'm completely sick of Adobe's bloated crap. Between Photoshop, Illustrator, Fireworks, and Dreamweaver, you would think they could produce an integrated product that could easily design and build a website. You would be wrong. It USED to be easy, before CS. Now it's crap. They keep adding features, but they completely fail to address even the most basic levels of the production process.

      I would LOVE to see some of Apple's UI mojo thrown on a project like that.

    5. Re:I hope so.. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      If Microsoft buys Adobe, then Apple would go ahead and develop replacements for Photoshop and Illustrator.

      You say that like they still care about the Macintosh. I heard they're not even going to port FCP to Cocoa.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    6. Re:I hope so.. by mikael_j · · Score: 1

      Well, Steve Jobs himself has stated that they're not abandoning FCP and I suspect they have no intent on abandoning the Mac and OS X either. They want a complete ecosystem available (even if they're not forcing you to run Apple-everything to make things work).

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    7. Re:I hope so.. by jcr · · Score: 1

      I heard they're not even going to port FCP to Cocoa.

      That's probably true, but it doesn't mean what you think it does. Apple owns the pro video and film editing business. They're not going to give that up. That being said, a "port" of FCP to Cocoa doesn't make any sense. What would make sense is a full rewrite, using Cocoa, Core Image, Core Video, and Core Animation.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    8. Re:I hope so.. by jcr · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'd love to see them revive the "MacPaint" and "MacDraw" names. They could issue an equivalent to Photoshop and bundle it with iLife, or even publish the code as a developer sample project like they do with TextEdit.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    9. Re:I hope so.. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Probably two products, just like everything else. MacPaint with iLife to replace Elements, and something else for the pro line to replace Photoshop.

      We can only dream though. Photoshop will likely continue to stagger along with a crappy Cocoa port.

    10. Re:I hope so.. by DinDaddy · · Score: 1

      Adobe CAN write good stuff, they just aren't being forced to. If you compare Lightroom and Aperture, they're pretty comparable. In fact, personally I'd even give Lightroom the edge, which I don't want to as I can get Aperture substantially cheaper.

      So Apple writing some competing software would likely give us a drastically improved UI on CD as well, right quick.

    11. Re:I hope so.. by DinDaddy · · Score: 1

      on CS that is.

  50. Just what photoshop needed... by Snufu · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Clippy.

    "You look like you're trying to paste Sarah Palin's head on that lolcat. Can I suggest a theme?"

  51. Market Cap. by hydromike2 · · Score: 1

    Microsoft and Apple have market caps something like 220 and 260 Billion respectively, and apple looks to have made profits in excess of 15 billion in just the last 2 years, http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/07/20results.html. This could just be Adobe trying to spark an interest in Apple to look into buying them. I think that it would have some potentially positive effects, mostly that there would be the king of creative production suites. However, flash would most certainly be killed off which can be taken different ways depending on you camp. If MS acquired Adobe there is again potential for a comprehensive software suite, gosh I wish you could merge acrobat and word.

    1. Re:Market Cap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft and Apple have market caps something like 220 and 260 Billion respectively, and apple looks to have made profits in excess of 15 billion in just the last 2 years, http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/07/20results.html. This could just be Adobe trying to spark an interest in Apple to look into buying them. I think that it would have some potentially positive effects, mostly that there would be the king of creative production suites. However, flash would most certainly be killed off which can be taken different ways depending on you camp. If MS acquired Adobe there is again potential for a comprehensive software suite, gosh I wish you could merge acrobat and word.

      MSFT made 18 billion in profit in the last ONE year: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=msft. Sometimes I still shake my head in amazement when I see MSFT declining in value in the same period it set a new record for quarterly and annual profit.

  52. Bad idea... by __aagmrb7289 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't see this as a good idea for either company. Both companies have similar strengths and weaknesses - call them evil, rail against them or whatever - the companies have products that hit the same value curve in the market place. They are weak against their competition in the same ways, and strong in the same ways, to state the point again. Add to that the other points brought up in this conversation - how Microsoft has already attempted to compete against every one of Adobe's primary products - and there isn't much motivation for Microsoft or Adobe to make this happen. I'm a little skeptical that this will go anywhere.

    1. Re:Bad idea... by ewieling · · Score: 1

      Anything that is bad for Microsoft is a good thing for just about everyone else. I was very happy to see Goldman Sachs downgrade their rating of MS stock to "neutral". I will throw a party if they ever downgrade it to "sell".

      --
      I really shouldn't have used someone else's email address for this account.
    2. Re:Bad idea... by Lugae · · Score: 1

      I think that this would be pretty strange on Adobe's part. They have a good market on Apple computers for graphic design. Flash can always be on other OS's than iOS, and getting it on Windows Mobile isn't exactly going to gain them large amounts of market share. Flash is the same type of product as Silverlight. Look at ColdFusion: web scripting language based on JSP and Java. Sounds like a competitor to ASP.NET, based on the .NET Framework. I'm not saying that ColdFusion is THE way to go by any means, but it's a product in the same space. Microsoft wanted to replace PDF with XPS a few years ago, which never took off. These two companies have too many common and opposing products for this to make any sense.

    3. Re:Bad idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was always under the impression that one had to reduce any rating by an analyst by at least one notch: so neutral *does* mean sell.

    4. Re:Bad idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, obviously MSFT execs have a review goal to "acquire a large company in a multi-billion dollar deal and tank the investment within a year". Just look at past acquisition outcomes, there can be no other explanation.

  53. Ohh the security vulnerabilites... by SimonSaysBleed · · Score: 1

    It is amazing what the two of them can do separately, imagine what incredible damage they could do together...

  54. One fewer, yes. But... by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 1

    You'll surely hate the remainder twice as much.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
    1. Re:One fewer, yes. But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'll surely hate the remainder twice as much.

      As long as the hate amount remains unchanged, I don;t see the problem.

    2. Re:One fewer, yes. But... by DinDaddy · · Score: 1

      "You'll surely hate the remainder twice as many"

      There fixed that . . . sorry got carried away.

  55. ColdFusion and Photoshop by QuebecNerd · · Score: 1

    For my part, I just hope that they don't do with ColdFusion what they did with Visual Fox Pro. It was a shame at the time and it would be the same now.

    I also use Photoshop and Lightroom but they are cashcows and MS has nothing to compete against so I guess they will be safe for a while until Microsoft does a rewrite and completely FUBARs them.

    1. Re:ColdFusion and Photoshop by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      So, what is the bad side of someone putting ColdFusion out of its misery once and for all?

    2. Re:ColdFusion and Photoshop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've programing in CF for 15 years and I think it's the best out there for RAD.

      But of course oppinions may vary.

    3. Re:ColdFusion and Photoshop by QuebecNerd · · Score: 1

      You obviously haven't used it seriously. It's really a great language for web applications.

      There's a really good open source community for alternative coldfusion server environment but still, the principle is that Microsoft could be tempted to kill it to push .net and ***vomiting*** ASP.

  56. Interesting by bill_kress · · Score: 0, Troll

    I've always hated adobe. Adobe reader is the one thing throughout history that has been able to crash my browser. It's like they don't have a clue how to write a good program (Less offensively, I'd guess that they have no fear wiring too deeply into the OS where perhaps they should). Before acrobat, ATM for Windows was one of the most destabilizing pieces of software around, so I already kind of had an attitude about them.

    Then came Flash. Holy cow they started to give Adobe a run for their money when it came to the ability to crash browsers at will and they added something new into the mix--they could eat a CPU like nobody's business. Luckily they merged--I don't like it when my hate becomes defocused.

    A low-lying dislike underneath all this has been Microsoft. I don't find them as annoying as the other two--I think MS has a HUGE job and takes on too much. Lately though I've been avoiding windows--mostly because of the swiss-cheese security (I refuse to use a credit card on any windows PC--I'm fairly sure they are all infected with some kind of rootkit)

    Anyway, since I've moved all my home PCs to either Linux or OSX, I would really appreciate it if Microsoft would do me the favor of once more refocusing my hate back into a single horrifying but somewhat avoidable target.

  57. You'd be surprised. by dakameleon · · Score: 1

    I think that many people would reuse their existing hardware to install a new OS and learn it rather than dump their library of existing digital "assets" and expertise in favour of an unknown solution delivered at an unknown point in the future by an unknown competitor.

    --
    Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    1. Re:You'd be surprised. by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

      Chances are, unless it doesn't work well in such situations, Parallels and the competition thereof will be put to use.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
  58. I will miss Adobe Photoshop for Mac... by hotfireball · · Score: 1

    ...and as well as Adobe Illustrator, whe M$ will acquire Adobe.

  59. Bye-bye Youtube. You will be missed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If M$ buys the company that controls Flash, what do you think will happen to us Linux users? This is why corporate suits shouldn't have control of the way information is delivered on the net.

    I'm sure after the acquisition they would either:
    *kill Flash entirely and replace it with Silverlight
    or
    *suddenly stop providing and supporting the Linux version of Flash

    1. Re:Bye-bye Youtube. You will be missed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hear that there is some new fangled thing, html5 or some such nonsense, anyway the rumor is that this new html thingie will make flash completely unnecessary. I read it on the internet so it must be true. Right?

  60. Microbe by ooloogi · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Microbee was a home computer from Australia in the early 80s. With a merger between Microsoft and Adobe, they may just catch its performance.

  61. The power of 1/2 by Old97 · · Score: 1

    When 2 of the losers in the mainframe wars, Sperry-Univac and Burroughs merged they touted the deal as being "the power of 2" as in exponential power. Those of us who worked with these companies or their products and a lot of others more accurately described the merger outcome as "the power of 1/2".

    --
    Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
  62. Given that Adobe hasn't upgraded to Cocoa by tlambert · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Given that Adobe hasn't upgraded to Cocoa precisely because they don't want to orphan people's libraries of existing photoshop plugins (which Adobe is terrified might cause them to switch to a different piece of software, if they're going to have to re-buy everything anyway), I doubt people will switch to a different OS and force that same re-buy on themselves voluntarily.

    Microsoft has crippled Office on the Mac by not providing MS Access and binary compatible automation piece to let people build their own groupware out of it, but it's unlikely they would do the same to Photoshop. They are far far more likely to introduce a "Flash II" product *cough* Sliverlight *cough*, which is basically the same thing they did when they introduced Microsoft Money.

    -- Terry

    1. Re:Given that Adobe hasn't upgraded to Cocoa by catmistake · · Score: 1

      Given that Adobe hasn't upgraded to Cocoa precisely because they don't want to orphan people's libraries of existing photoshop plugins

      Complete and utter rubbish! Where did you even get that? It's ridiculous that Adobe would care so much for something that would have no effect on their profit. I mean... perhaps that is an incidental truth, but make no mistake, Adobe didn't want to pay for the cost of migrating, i.e., realized that actually employing a significant number of developers to migrate/rebuild the software would be expensive, and they couldn't then have as many highly paid execs riding the coattails of the fruits of the previous decade's developers. They did carbonize their software, after all... because that took a minimal amount of effort... you think carbonization left plugins intact? Your statement is just wild. That's like saying that music CD's never came down in price because major record labels didn't want your record player to become obsolete... the notion is absurd that Adobe would care about their customers. I point to their fleecing with CS3 & 4 as evidence... WTF was the point of those? Getting an extra thousand bucks from every graphics professional every 2 years, perhaps? "We put it in a new box! This box is better than the last box. You need this new box."

  63. I don't know anyone who suggested 64 bit Carbon... by tlambert · · Score: 1

    I don't know anyone who suggested 64 bit Carbon...

    It was pretty obvious to me that you couldn't jam a 64 bit inode and a 128 bit volume UUID into a file manager binary file format that could only store two 32 bit values.

    But then, I can do math.

    -- Terry

  64. Headline made me ill... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please, please tell me this isn't true. I had to check my calendar to see it wasn' t April 1. This is a nightmare... Silverlight, never... Flash is dead, long live Flash.

  65. Re:Windows only? But why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I'm open to being corrected.

    And, if you've read about DR-DOS, it wouldn't be the first time.

    But why argue, just rank me as flamebait... easier than thinking, isn't it?

  66. Good Day for Exploits... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm. Two companies that don't get security in software. It's a hacker's wet dream...

  67. Floats? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please, no floaters from Ballmer!

  68. Must vulnerable/patched Internet apps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This makes perfect sense! Adobe makes two of the most constantly vulnerable Internet-facing apps: Flash and Acrobat. Microsoft is tired of playing second-fiddle to them and wants to regain the "most-hackable and needs the most patches" status, so they'll just buy Adobe.

  69. Printing pdf's by fadethepolice · · Score: 1

    Will this help re-establish the ability of the printers in my office to reliably print the various editions of pdf's to 2001 standards?

  70. Good Riddens by neoshroom · · Score: 1

    I sort of hope they do, because the way Apple plays things, you'd know at the next "big thing" event we'd get a less bloated, faster Photoshop clone. Honestly, Apple could probably merge Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign into one speedy app: iDesign.

    --
    Big apple, new Yorik, undig it, something's unrotting in Edenmark.
    1. Re:Good Riddens by adtifyj · · Score: 1

      I sort of hope they do, because the way Apple plays things, you'd know at the next "big thing" event we'd get a less bloated, faster Photoshop clone. Honestly, Apple could probably merge Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign into one speedy app: iDesign.

      iDesign is trademarked, heavily.

    2. Re:Good Riddens by RazorSharp · · Score: 1

      Yes, but iDesign would be the stripped down consumer version. Design Studio Pro would do what you're talking about.

      --
      "From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
    3. Re:Good Riddens by znerk · · Score: 1

      iDesign is trademarked, heavily.

      ... and interestingly enough, not by Apple. How long do you think that will last?

      --
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
  71. Macrobesoft - the feeping horror by wowbagger · · Score: 1

    First of all people, if Microsoft merges with Macrobe, either the Micro and Macro cancel out, and you get Adobesoft, which is too sensible, or you drop the Micro (being smaller than Macro) and run with Macrobesoft, which is just right for a slow, bloated mess of feeping creaturism.

    Second of all, it won't happen, because it would be opening the Sixth Seal, and the resultant horror would make Cthulhu blanch. It would exceed the Planck limits for the amount of evil in one area, and thus the laws of Cosmic Censorship would force a M-Brane to wrap the whole lot up in a nice event horizon.

  72. Lets Face it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lets face the facts here. Adobe can't get much worse then the already are. Being owned by Microsoft might be an improvement. Illustrator crashes more than any program i've ever used in my life... including all Microsoft product.

    1. Re:Lets Face it by herojig · · Score: 1

      I can't disagree more. The creative world is based on Adobe products: Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, AfterEffects, and Dreamweaver. 3D apps like Cinema 4D, Maya, and all the rest use PSD & Illustrator files as a base for compositions. AE is used in the film industry like crazy, and many docu film makers even use PremierPro as a primary NLE. Every app mentioned works flawlessly in CS5 on a Mac, and is critical for uncountable small businesses around the world. Granted, all of the above is way overpriced and ridiculously bloated, but it all does work, and in most cases, exceptionally stable. Talk of open source alternatives in this regard is just that, talk. So I can't imagine what MS could bring to the table to make an improvement, but I can imagine how it could frack it all up. So I for one hope this never comes to pass. I make my living based on Adobe software, and I don't want MS messing around in that. Here's to many more years of CS++, at least till I retire...

      --
      I think therefore I can't be ~TTNH
    2. Re:Lets Face it by mikael_j · · Score: 1

      3D apps like Cinema 4D, Maya, and all the rest use PSD & Illustrator files as a base for compositions

      Yet for some reason most 3D artists use targa or tiff for most things (with a few crazy holdouts insisting on using IFF).

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    3. Re:Lets Face it by herojig · · Score: 1

      I guess they must be old school; everything that I do in 3D goes into PSD layers for further work, or straight out to animations (.mov), or out to AE projects. tiff and targa are just output targets that seem to have little use these days, at least in my world.

      --
      I think therefore I can't be ~TTNH
    4. Re:Lets Face it by mikael_j · · Score: 1

      From what I've seen most 3D artists use TIFF or targa for both input files (textures and maps) as well as output. Part of it is probably tradition but also the fact that occasionally 3D software screws up when dealing with PSD files (since the level of complexity is higher than with TIFF or targa) and it kind of sucks to realize after running a long render job that either your textures weren't loaded properly or the output data is corrupt to everything but the application that created it...

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    5. Re:Lets Face it by herojig · · Score: 1

      We use Poser 2010, C4D 11.5, Maya 2010, PS CS5, Vue X-Stream 8.5, Mac Pro w/ OSX 10.6.4, and never with a Tiff nor Targa with no problems whatsoever using PSD layers. We render all day all week. If renders are getting corrupt or textures don't work, it's a system problem. But even so, I can't see anyone doing this work and not being a PS expert and using PS to create the tiffs/targas anyway.

      --
      I think therefore I can't be ~TTNH
    6. Re:Lets Face it by mikael_j · · Score: 1

      I've seen plenty of corruption when trying to use PSD files with other software, it's been getting better over the years but like most people who have ever wasted a lot of time due to trouble reading/writing PSD files I've ended up using file formats I know will work (while obviously keeping copies of all textures and maps in PSD format).

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
  73. Re:Windows only? But why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Erm, you know you can troll just like that and still get a 2 score, don't you?

    Imagine that, trolling and getting points. Don't waste opportunities, my boy!

  74. NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! by ebinrock · · Score: 0

    NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! If Microsoft buys Adobe, then they'll turn the revered Creative Suite products into a steaming pile of dung, and all our current efforts to get CS on Linux will be crushed once and for all.

  75. I don't think so by friendofthenite · · Score: 1

    I don't believe this is really on the cards:
    a) Releasing spurious leaks to the press seems to be par for the course in business negotiations now.
    b) Adobe are desperate to somehow put the shitters up Apple, and get them to allow Flash on their phones.
    c) If this was legit it would be very unlikely to be leaked the way it has been.

    1. Re:I don't think so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With Apple's miniscule share of the phone market (which is going to get smaller when Android hits its stride) why are Adobe so het up about Apple not allowing Flash?
      Sure, iPhones are popular but only with a segment of the public. Android phones, with their open-source economy, should hog the market.
      Has Adobe put out a Flash plug-in for Android?

  76. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  77. What have I learned from this? by pizzach · · Score: 1

    It isn't users that dislike software diversity as much as it is software companies. The overlap between Adobe and Microsoft is huge just like it was for Adobe and Macromedia. No one should be happy about this. We will only end up with more "Gimp vs Photoshop" type of arguments as there will be no other choices but the 1 comercial and the one open source one.

    --
    Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
  78. XPS shows what is wrong with MS by Ilgaz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    XPS shows everything wrong with MS, even with a rival (!) like Adobe.

    They come up with a "document" standard and yet they didn't even ship a viewer (let alone some virtual printer) for OS X. I am not even mentioning Linux support which is big deal on corporate. I don't want to cost anyone their job at that weirdo company so not giving any examples but it seems, they do create a lot of docs on OS X, export to PDF (or PS), re-export to XPS on a Windows machine/bot.

    That is supposed to be Microsoft's answer to PDF. Just imagine if XPS really replaced PDF. It wouldn't be a nice day for anyone not using Windows on Desktop/Mobile. I am not even sure if there is an official XPS viewer for Windows 7 Mobile.

    I got creative friends and imagine my surprise when I find out about "Expression" software, as I am not in that segment, I asked them and they -too- didn't have a clue about that software. They had a good laugh when they heard they are supposed to use "that thing" (their words) to do work for Silverlight. You know, in dream World of MS (and Ballmer), designers even use MS Visual Studio and OS X using designers install Eclipse to do Silverlight. Yea, right.

  79. nooooooo!! by johnrpenner · · Score: 1

    the software with good designers taken over by the company with the bad designers.. ugh. please, no. com'on - apple - adobe - please forget about your flash/html5 differences -- the creative suite would die the death of a thousand papercuts if it became run by the people who designed microsoft word. ugh. please, no.

  80. Missstaaaake!! by jimmydigital · · Score: 1

    This merger is the best idea to come out of tech since AOL/Timewarner!

    --
    Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. -HLM
  81. How often.... by swb · · Score: 0, Troll

    ...did you get the living shit beat out of you in school?

    1. Re:How often.... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Actually, I was the one defending the weak and the special needs kids from the school bullies.

      You're welcome. No thanks required.

  82. Both pimp four useless upgrades to each good one by SlappyBastard · · Score: 1

    Seems like a good match to me, considering both companies are notorious for pushing the upgrade cycle at twice the speed it needs to go while consumers just ignore them and say, "Hey, I'm fine running Photoshop 6 on Windows XP!"

    --
    I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
  83. Wrong way by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Enjoy your new all Silverlight Photoshop.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Wrong way by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      Enjoy your new all Silverlight Photoshop.

      It can't possibly be worse. We've all heard a thousand times how wonderful and "standard" Photoshop is, but have you ever actually used it? I had the occasion to recently, and it was horrible. Just absolutely terrible in every way. It seemed as though the sole interface guideline was "don't do anything like any other program a customer might have ever used, and make it slow and unresponsive while you're at it". Is no one at Adobe aware that OS-native windowing toolkits come with a lot of widgets these days, and it might be a nice idea to use some of them?

      Frankly, a Silverlight Photoshop would probably be a vast improvement over the current state of affairs.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  84. That decides it... by mortonda · · Score: 1

    I was on the fence before in this adobe vs apple thing... but if adobe jumps in with ms like that, I'm definitely on apple's side!!!

  85. makes no sense by kehren77 · · Score: 1

    Microsoft Silverlight is a competitor with Adobe Flash. Neither are supported on the iOS platform. How will this help them team up against Apple? Let them buy Adobe. The only people who that will hurt are the people at Adobe.

  86. No the point is this by Jeffrey_Walsh+VA · · Score: 1

    "Nothing intrinsically wrong"
    It is a business trust and it's illegal.

  87. Re: Look forward to? by __aazsst3756 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "we can look forward to bloated, insecure flash". Bloody hell, it's here today!

    P.S. - Thank you developers of Flash Block

  88. Hmm by drolli · · Score: 1

    They could hit Apple where it hurts.

    Adobe/MS could give an Update of the CS suite for free for anybody who has an CS for Mac OS X and switches to Win. Or: MS give a boiled-down Version of the CS (e.g. no CMYK mode in the free version would probably be enough to keep professionals buying the real product) for free with windows or they add it on to the MS office suite. In that case Adobe tools would be standard immediately, and people could use a decent editor for vector art.

    And a discontinuation of Flash for OS X would make consumer consider to switch.

    1. Re:Hmm by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Adobe/MS could give an Update of the CS suite for free for anybody who has an CS for Mac OS X and switches to Win

      Last time I checked (CS3) I receive codes for both OSX and Win but needed to buy separate media kits, so this seems to have already happened

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  89. Apple and its control of the mobile phone market?? by brunes69 · · Score: 1

    Last I checked, the number of Android handsets that will ship this year absolutely dwarfed the number of iOS handsets. Meanwhile, Flash is huge on Android.

    I see more for Microsoft to gain from this arrangement than Adobe.

  90. RE: Against Apple ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What would a real man do?

    He would take a battleax in right hand and tourch on stick in left hand and walk up to Steven P. Jobs and ...
    hack with ax and burn with tourch.

    These however, are NOT, real men.

    From the photos, i.e. images, Shantanu looks like he thinks the SHIT is about to be kicked out of him and Balmer looks like Blaster sans Master.

    Apple and Steven P. Jobs have nothing, NOTHING, to worry about.

    Microsoft might wonder if Shantanu and Balmer will be the next Microsoft Gay Couple! Oh Dear!

    Toodles!

  91. New Paint = Photoshop? by Fippy+Darkpaw · · Score: 1

    I'm fine with this if Photoshop is the new MS Paint.

  92. I've been pissed ever since by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember seeing the demo on the then just announced G4. It looked awesome. Fuckers.

  93. No more Adobe Reader? Yay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Such a merger will save admins millions of hours they normally spend installing Adobe Reader on every Windows machine they ever set up.

    Why Microsoft never preinstalled a PDF reader on Windows is something I'll never understand.

  94. And by mahadiga · · Score: 1

    Adobe doesn't manufacture gadgets.

    --
    I'd like to buy homeland for our 10 million people. http://twitter.com/mahadiga
  95. Apple could make a competitor to photoshop by jsepeta · · Score: 1

    Apple could release a program to compete with Photoshop and it might actually work all right. But I'm not sure they could make an entire line of products as good as Illustrator, Indesign, Flash, or Dreamweaver. It would require a great deal of effort and a large team of programmers to make viable alternatives to Adobe's stranglehold on creative products.

    --
    Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
  96. Maxidobe would be the perfect name ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least from a French speaker point of view ...
    Microdobe can be understood as Microshit.
    Maxidobe would be better for such a crapy merge !

  97. Now aren't we glad by Zelgadiss · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Glad that we have HTML5, it's not as mature as flash but it's getting there.

    HTML5 that has no chance of dying all of a sudden because it's parent company got bought out and the it's new owners decides to drop it.

    And suddenly Steve Jobs looks like a genius again.

    Can you imagined if Flash was popular on the iPhone as an app platform, popular to the extend that the iPhone relies heavy on it for applications - like the way the web depends on Flash for various things?
    Apple would be fucked. Thankfully for Apple, it isn't, and Apple has nothing to worry about.

  98. Waste of Shareholder's Money by bkmoore · · Score: 1

    I don't think Microsoft ever profitably merged/acquired another company. Often Microsoft uses mergers to shut down competitors. But Adobe doesn't compete directly against Microsoft in Microsoft's only two profitable businesses: Windows and Office. Adobe does compete against Microsoft with Flash, but Silverlight is more of a hobby for Microsoft anyway. Acquiring Adobe is bound to be expensive, and if Microsoft has any business sense, they would continue improving Adobe's profitable product lines, including Photoshop for Macintosh. Otherwise, Microsoft is just wasting the share holder's money. I think as a share holder, I will join the calls for Steve Ballmer's removal if he blows a few tens of billions on this.

  99. Think Positively by heypete · · Score: 1

    As bad as this would likely be, I can think of a single benefit: Adobe patches being deployable over WSUS.

    At my work, I maintain the WSUS server that manages updates for a few hundred Windows PCs. Centralizing Windows Updates is a Good Thing, but we still have to send a minion around every month or so to make sure that Flash, Adobe Reader, Acrobat Pro, and non-MS browsers have all their patches. Being able to keep common threat vectors (Flash and Adobe Reader) patched easily and centrally managed would be a huge improvement. I'd imagine it being even better for larger organizations.

  100. Mobile phones by tehcyder · · Score: 1
    What advantage would Microsoft gain from buying Adobe if they're worried about losing the mobile phone market? Shouldn't they buy Nokia or something instead?

    I doubt they're going to produce a Flash-based phone with Photoshop thrown in.

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    1. Re:Mobile phones by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      "I doubt they're going to produce a Flash-based phone with Photoshop thrown in."

      I don't know, that kind of sounds like something Microsoft and Adobe would do.

  101. Re:Fine wit-it, if they put .NET back in Dreamweav by tehcyder · · Score: 1

    Railo and BlueDragon for me.

    * blank stare *

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  102. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microdobe means Micro-shit in french

  103. Only a few competing products? by brokeninside · · Score: 1

    Between Expression, Silverlight, FrontPage, Movie Maker and the like on the desktop and various server offerings, I think Microsoft has a direct competitor to almost everything in Adobe's product line. The two notable exceptions are Adobe's Soundbooth and Premier. To my knowledge, Microsoft does not have professional grade audio and video software.

    I don't see a merger getting past The Man without a firesale of most of the present Adobe product line. But that product line would be the entire reason Microsoft would want Adobe. Consequently, I don't see a merger happening anytime soon. I suspect that the real reason for the scuttlebutt about a possible merger are negotiations both companies are having with third parties.

  104. End of an era... by quibbler · · Score: 1

    As a user of Photoshop since 2.0 on the Mac, a user of most of Adobe's other products since they were owned by other companies I might offer a bit of a different take on this:

    Adobe used to be a valued partner both in business and spirit for Apple. Both companies grew. Apple maintained much of its entrepreneurial spirit. Adobe didn't. Since the early days, Apple has transformed numerous times in numerous ways. Apple's newest direction indeed takes it more towards broad consumer 'data ubiquity' devices much like what Ford's did with cars. That doesn't mean they are abandoning the Mac "truck" (to use Steve's analogy) line, but that line is mature.

    In the same time, Adobe has done about a millimeter beyond porting their software to different architectures and platforms. I've watched them do nothing year after year. I like the heal brush, and I use it occasionally. I like the increased integration of pdf/illustrator. To be fair, InDesign is nice, but largely unrealized and unpolished. Is that 15 years of development? When Adobe was a bright star, the applications were written by teams in the 2-digit range. Adobe has adopted the Microsoft 4-digit development team strategy, and it shows. Watching Adobe's fit about Apple's (good) decision regarding flash was simply sad to watch, and I knew how bad things must be in SanJose.

    Today, I dread launching any Adobe product, especially on anything less than a 8-core Mac Pro. I use it when I must because its the mortar between the bricks.

    What Adobe doesn't understand is that today, to write a Photoshop killer, an Illustrator killer, even an InDesign killer is possible and Adobe's monopoly stranglehold on the graphics industry has almost decayed completely from a technical point of view. If the merger happened today, I'm afraid Apple would have (superior) replacements available quickly. I look forward to these. People will migrate easily, and then the inevitable; some Windows-users will actually switch just to get them, and Apple gets stronger. (If this seems like a fanboy fantasy look into the history of Safari/webkit, Final Cut Pro, and Aperture.)

    I already miss the old Adobe, I won't miss the current husk that it is now.

    Suggestion to Adobe: instead of merging with another bloatware company, consider focusing on efficiency, hiring some imaging-technology innovators and axing the old guard.

  105. Apple's Control? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean, Microsoft's lack of dominance. Apple is far from controlling the market.

  106. NOOOOO!!!! by FreeXenon · · Score: 0

    Please dear God... NO! I loves my Dreamweaver! I do not want it destroyed the M$. The internets tubes will never be the same again! =(

    --
    www.ArionsHome.com
  107. Upgrade now! by U8MyData · · Score: 1

    Adobe's next release should this merger happen will be called Adobe ME (Microsoft Edition) which will be closely related to Windows ME. Not only that, it will be integrated in the Windows Explorer further adding value and innovation to our customers by allowing many exciting media manipulation tasks without having to load additional programs! Min. Sys. Requirements: Dual quad processors, 48 GB Memory, Flux capacitor and 10 TB of usable storage. ROFL. Good morning...

  108. Re:I don't know anyone who suggested 64 bit Carbon by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

    How about a little known guy named "Steve Jobs"? He can do math too.
    link
    link

    Even better, check the endgadget coverage of the 2006 WWDC. IT'S RIGHT ON THE BIG SCREEN. Article
    Direct Link to image

    If you think Adobe was the only large company to get screwed by Apple's change, read a Nokia technician's perspective on this: link

  109. Adobe's Not Done!!! by stewbacca · · Score: 1

    But Adobe isn't finished buying out the myriad of small companies it uses to supply all the smaller stuff in their suites. RoboHelp, InDesign, FrameMaker, Captivate, Dreamweaver, Flash to name a few, were all developed by smaller companies bought out by Adobe. They are now in the unenviable position of trying to make all those products work well together and have a similar look/feel. They are failing. If Microsoft buys all that stuff out, I'll probably be done with Adobe products (other than AE and PS).

  110. Paint! by stewbacca · · Score: 1

    MS Paint might actually become usable if they acquire that secret cropping function that Photoshop has had since 1990!

    1. Re:Paint! by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      You mean the one they added to the version of MS Paint that ships with Windows 7?

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    2. Re:Paint! by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      I have Win7 at home. I'll have to check and see. Given Microsoft's history with adapting to graphic design standards, let's just say I'm not too hopeful.

    3. Re:Paint! by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they re-vamped MS Paint, CharMap, Calc, Minesweeper, and the solitaire card games (among other things, probably). I can’t say I’m terribly excited about what they did to Minesweeper and Calc (having to switch between Scientific and Programmer modes all the time just to convert a number to binary or hex, ffs), but the crop feature in Paint was a much-needed change.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  111. Cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The merger of one moribund, unimaginative company with another of the same. They need to bring Yahoo in the mix. And AOL!

  112. I just lost all hopes by gagol · · Score: 1

    I wished to, one day, see a native version of Adobe creative products running on Linux... if the deal goes forward this will never happen.

    --
    Tomorrow is another day...
  113. Oh yes, have used it... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    It can't possibly be worse. We've all heard a thousand times how wonderful and "standard" Photoshop is, but have you ever actually used it?

    I've heard how wonderful it is but standard? I don't know I've ever heard that. As you say, it's a huge departure from convention regardless of platform it's on...

    But to paraphrase an old quote, it's the worst graphics editor except for all the others. I myself mostly use other editors too but I do a lot of photographic work and sometimes you just have to work in Photoshop.

    I wouldn't fear a Sliverlight photoshop so much as breaking UI conventions, as just simply breaking... though honestly it would be good for everyone probably as it would force people to find alternatives (after CS5 stopped working on any modern hardware ten years hence or so).

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  114. ALL HAIL BLOATWARE!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hypnotoad says, you love 80s Chic! You want a phone that weighs 8 lbs --only half as much as its user manual, and costs half as much as that too!

  115. Amin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do you still put the pic of Bill Gates?

  116. So basically what you're saying is by shoehornjob · · Score: 1

    Don't buy the next version of Photoshop because it's now winshop. Way to take a good thing and fuck it up.

    --
    "We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine