3 ms·
it took me many decades to decode the economics of the intense Desktop Publishing era.. as far as I can see, Apple made hardware, requiring long lead times, lar
by mistrial9 3y ago
it took me many decades to decode the economics of the intense Desktop Publishing era.. as far as I can see, Apple made hardware, requiring long lead times, large cash reserves, deep industrial secrets.. while Adobe made software and intellectual property, which was fundamental to the written word, changed the entire publishing world, but was copied without paying Adobe. The ecosystem of developers, business and small business around the publishing world, was watched by every literate eyeball, but did not have a transaction model that made Adobe money. Apple in comparison, made plenty of money on each new sale of hardware, but the infrastructure to do that was huge and expensive.
When Apple turned on Adobe, over and over again, I did not understand how "Apple bites the hand the feeds it" .. Adobe was a likable brand. Of course, Microsoft betrayed and undermined Apple not repeatedly, but as often as possible, inventing new ways to do it with vigor. No review is possible without mentioning the day that Apple, Microsoft and Adobe were on stage at a trade show, and Apple+Microsoft announced the TrueType standard, and John Warnock literally wept in front of thousands with the shock and betrayal of it.
very strange days indeed
RIP John Warnock, bright intellect, inventor, leader
- executesorder66 3y ago> it took me many decades to decode the economics of the intense Desktop Publishing era So what did you decode about the economics of the intense desktop publishing era?
- hasmanean 3y agoUsually the hardware makers are the first to profit after a revolution, but then the next biggest thing in the stack (software) makes 10x the money. In the 1990s Cisco and the ISPs were the biggest internet companies, then it quickly moved to yahoo and google, then mere websites (Facebook, Twitter etc). Methinks apple and Microsoft just bullied Adobe and kept them down.
- CharlesW 3y ago> When Apple turned on Adobe, over and over again, I did not understand how "Apple bites the hand the feeds it" .. Adobe was a likable brand. It was no Quark, but Adobe was never a likable brand, and has always been as much (if not more) of a monster as Apple. Remember that TrueType was an Apple/Microsoft response to Adobe's behavior around Adobe's monopoly on core desktop publishing technologies. The reason Warnock was on the verge of tears at Seybold in 1989 is because he was forced to compromise on price and terms to keep PostScript on LaserWriters.
- mistrial9 3y agomaybe they needed "balanced DRM outcomes" ? I was there and I do not agree with your summary of the situation. I doubt that anyone knows now except a few C-level and their attorneys.