39 ms·

I'm surprised at the number of Adobe supporters in this thread; it's Stockholm syndrome-esque. For those who like the UI: Sure, it's better than the GiMP. But

by bonaldi 18y ago

I'm surprised at the number of Adobe supporters in this thread; it's Stockholm syndrome-esque. For those who like the UI: Sure, it's better than the GiMP. But it's still awful. http://adobegripes.tumblr.com/ http://adobegripes.tumblr.com/ has been on HN before. It's a compendium of more-or-less small things that are just howlingly wrong. For those suggesting the installers aren't awful, Bynkii has spent plenty of time destroying that idea (and, yes, he swears): http://www.bynkii.com/archives/2008/10/dear_adobe.html http://www.bynkii.com/archives/2008/10/dear_adobe.html (the installer rant that ultimately led to a meeting with Adobe and the installer team starting a blog) http://www.bynkii.com/archives/2008/10/why_wont_they_stop.html http://www.bynkii.com/archives/2008/10/why_wont_they_stop.ht... (Why install two out-of-date copies of Opera, Adobe?) http://www.bynkii.com/archives/2009/02/adobe_takes_back_the_crown.html http://www.bynkii.com/archives/2009/02/adobe_takes_back_the_... (Comedy licensing ineptness) http://www.bynkii.com/archives/2008/11/dont_manage_the_message_tell_t.html http://www.bynkii.com/archives/2008/11/dont_manage_the_messa... (on John Nack's message-massaging over the installer nightmare) So, Adobe software "shamefully, frustratingly incompetent"? Seems spot-on to me. The most frustrating and depressing thing is that it wasn't always this way. This is the firm that gave us Postscript, Photoshop, usable digital typography, Illustrator, PDFs and arguably played a large role in the birth of DTP, FFS. How have they become this marketing-encumbered hell-shop, trying to ram Flash everywhere and stamping all over their heritage?

joe_the_user 18y ago
Part of the reason for both Adobe's awfulness and for it's loyal following is that it has been the most faithful "paper emulator" of any major software company. Their software emulates all the awful pen-and-paper techniques that real artist used before there were computers. PDF is like having a real piece of paper jammed awkwardly inside the cover of your laptop and trying to push it around a track ball. And so forth. The thing is those folks who knew the paper-pencil techniques has generally been those who had no use for learning anything about computers, including how to use efficiently or whether there were alternatives. So Adobe's paper emulation has massive, undeserved loyalty built into it.
- access_denied 18y ago
  Your analyses regarding what Adobe does is spot on. Except your contempt for the techniques of a whole area of human creativity is below par. Also you are right in noting that most of "those folks" had no use for learning anything about computers. But is this necessarily a bad thing?

by bonaldi 18y ago

joe_the_user 18y ago

Part of the reason for both Adobe's awfulness and for it's loyal following is that it has been the most faithful "paper emulator" of any major software company. Their software emulates all the awful pen-and-paper techniques that real artist used before there were computers. PDF is like having a real piece of paper jammed awkwardly inside the cover of your laptop and trying to push it around a track ball. And so forth. The thing is those folks who knew the paper-pencil techniques has generally been those who had no use for learning anything about computers, including how to use efficiently or whether there were alternatives. So Adobe's paper emulation has massive, undeserved loyalty built into it.

access_denied 18y ago
Your analyses regarding what Adobe does is spot on. Except your contempt for the techniques of a whole area of human creativity is below par. Also you are right in noting that most of "those folks" had no use for learning anything about computers. But is this necessarily a bad thing?