3 ms·

Adobe has been in the game for a long time, and they know how to play. For example, early on in postscript days, they had proprietary fonts... which they made f

Adobe has been in the game for a long time, and they know how to play. For example, early on in postscript days, they had proprietary fonts... which they made free at about the right time to have reaped profits without fueling a competitor. A short-sighted company might have hung on; a non-profit might have given it away from the start. - they allow photoshop to be pirated - removing fuel for competitors - it's difficult (and uninteresting/not technically challenging) to make UIs easy to use; hence the gimp - pdf is free-to-read, pay-to-write. They keep adding new features, so companies will keep buying it - maybe I read too much into this: but I once noted that postscript/pdf are the only mainstream "vector" graphics on the market (well, splines, not vectors, but I just mean that they're drawn)... apart from flash, which (to me) it seemed could make inroads on publishing. Then... adobe acquired flash (macromedia), giving them a monopoly on vector graphics. They let flash languish, consistent with my view... Adobe know what they're doing, to maintain digital standards/monopolies throughout the lifecycle.

samspenc 9y ago
This. Plus network effects. Once you have people sharing files in Photoshop, Indesign and AE formats, everyone who's working with you has to adopt Adobe as well. GIMP proves that it's possible to build a competing product that has all the features, but doesn't come with the same ease-of-use or shortcuts or support for proprietary file formats. Which means slow adoption, and ensures that it's hard to compete with Adobe in this field.
- solarkraft 9y ago
  There are many products able to somewhat import psd, but due to its (perhaps intentional) complexity many fail to fully support it. See Xee developer Paracelsus: > Trying to get data out of a PSD file is like trying to find something in the attic of your eccentric old uncle who died in a freak freshwater shark attack on his 58th birthday... I am spending a lot of time imagining amusing fates for the people responsible for this Rube Goldberg of a file format. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/30/xee_photoshop_psd_code_rant/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/30/xee_photoshop_psd_c...
shaftway 9y ago
Adobe pushed really hard on SVG (also vector based), before the Macromedia acquisition. They were part of the W3C group that designed the spec and they produced the most popular browser extensions to support it. The Macromedia acquisition was most likely in response to a lack of interest in SVG from the public. Source: I worked on the SVG extension at Adobe.
ccajas 9y ago
Possibly controversial opinion, but I think UI in most open-source software needs a lot of work. GIMP is one such example of it. Good programmers aren't necessarily good UI designers. For vector graphics, I use Inkscape for SVG editing and retouching, though. It is at least bearable to use for me. This might be more due to my experience as a programmer, but I see the most success in creating good UIs in open-source code editors. Perhaps because as programmers, they are already better at judging what kind of things work and don't work for UI and UX in this kind of software, compared to digital paint tools, 3D modeling, etc.
Someone 9y ago
”they had proprietary fonts... which they made free at about the right time to have reaped profits without fueling a competitor.” Are adobe fonts free? They opened up the Type 1 font specification when Apple and Microsoft threatened to make them irrelevant because TrueType fonts were good enough (at least for consumers) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueType#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueType#History) ”pdf is free-to-read, pay-to-write.” I think you can legally create a PDF writer that supports most, if not all, PDF content without paying any license costs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Document_Format#Intellectual_property https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Document_Format#Intel...: ”Anyone may create applications that can read and write PDF files without having to pay royalties to Adobe Systems; Adobe holds patents to PDF, but licenses them for royalty-free use in developing software complying with its PDF specification.”
- hyperpallium 9y ago
  > you can legally create a PDF writer I just meant Acrobat Reader was free, Acrobat writer was not. (People tried this with the web - browser free, server not - but it didn't work out.) Your point about 3rd party readers/writers is also consistent with sensible and long-term profitable management of a digital standard: your competitors promote your standard instead of competing with it.

samspenc 9y ago

This. Plus network effects. Once you have people sharing files in Photoshop, Indesign and AE formats, everyone who's working with you has to adopt Adobe as well. GIMP proves that it's possible to build a competing product that has all the features, but doesn't come with the same ease-of-use or shortcuts or support for proprietary file formats. Which means slow adoption, and ensures that it's hard to compete with Adobe in this field.

solarkraft 9y ago
There are many products able to somewhat import psd, but due to its (perhaps intentional) complexity many fail to fully support it. See Xee developer Paracelsus: > Trying to get data out of a PSD file is like trying to find something in the attic of your eccentric old uncle who died in a freak freshwater shark attack on his 58th birthday... I am spending a lot of time imagining amusing fates for the people responsible for this Rube Goldberg of a file format. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/30/xee_photoshop_psd_code_rant/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/30/xee_photoshop_psd_c...

shaftway 9y ago

Adobe pushed really hard on SVG (also vector based), before the Macromedia acquisition. They were part of the W3C group that designed the spec and they produced the most popular browser extensions to support it. The Macromedia acquisition was most likely in response to a lack of interest in SVG from the public. Source: I worked on the SVG extension at Adobe.

ccajas 9y ago

Possibly controversial opinion, but I think UI in most open-source software needs a lot of work. GIMP is one such example of it. Good programmers aren't necessarily good UI designers. For vector graphics, I use Inkscape for SVG editing and retouching, though. It is at least bearable to use for me. This might be more due to my experience as a programmer, but I see the most success in creating good UIs in open-source code editors. Perhaps because as programmers, they are already better at judging what kind of things work and don't work for UI and UX in this kind of software, compared to digital paint tools, 3D modeling, etc.

Someone 9y ago

”they had proprietary fonts... which they made free at about the right time to have reaped profits without fueling a competitor.” Are adobe fonts free? They opened up the Type 1 font specification when Apple and Microsoft threatened to make them irrelevant because TrueType fonts were good enough (at least for consumers) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueType#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueType#History) ”pdf is free-to-read, pay-to-write.” I think you can legally create a PDF writer that supports most, if not all, PDF content without paying any license costs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Document_Format#Intellectual_property https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_Document_Format#Intel...: ”Anyone may create applications that can read and write PDF files without having to pay royalties to Adobe Systems; Adobe holds patents to PDF, but licenses them for royalty-free use in developing software complying with its PDF specification.”

hyperpallium 9y ago
> you can legally create a PDF writer I just meant Acrobat Reader was free, Acrobat writer was not. (People tried this with the web - browser free, server not - but it didn't work out.) Your point about 3rd party readers/writers is also consistent with sensible and long-term profitable management of a digital standard: your competitors promote your standard instead of competing with it.