3 ms·

Because Adobe dont understand the web,it's not in their culture. They never invented one successfull webdeveloper product, and those they bought from Macromedi

by camus 13y ago

Because Adobe dont understand the web,it's not in their culture. They never invented one successfull webdeveloper product, and those they bought from Macromedia ( Dreamweaver , Fireworks , ColdFusion , Flash)...havent evolved a bit or are dead. They fired most of the legacy Macromedia work force anyway. They should sell all these tools or open-source them.

laumars 13y ago
You've clearly never heard of Edge[1]. Adobe are now putting great strides in providing HTML5 tools. That said, I personally would still avoid Edge just because of Adobe's past record. It might seem petty, but I've lost faith in the company so there's little incentive to pay to join their HTML5 services. [1] http://html.adobe.com/edge/?promoid=KAGMS http://html.adobe.com/edge/?promoid=KAGMS
- faboo 13y ago
  To be fair, if camus hasn't heard of Edge it isn't his fault - it's Adobe's. Which, in a way, helps to emphasize his point.
  - laumars 13y ago
    That would be fine if we were talking about some small hidden product, but Edge has been well covered on HN and it's included with Adobe's Creative Cloud - which has also been well advertised. Plus at some level you have to expect people working in the industry to take responsibility for their own research (assuming he does work in IT, rather than being one of those "arm chair critics" that lesser forums are often plagued with).
jfb 13y ago
I don't know if Adobe doesn't understand "the web"; I think what happened here was just the landscape shifting out from under Adobe. The iPhone wasn't going to support Flash, initially because the power economics didn't work. Once the App Store was released, there was no way Apple would allow out-of-band application development technologies. So what happened is that, to reach this new segment of the market, web developers needed to develop two versions of their applications -- one for iOS and one for everybody else. This in turn spurred development of non-native web technologies, for those applications where a fully native version wasn't feasible, which further reduced the demand for Flash. Adobe was forced to try and play catch up, and that's a really tough position to be in. Good riddance, but I'm fully expecting Flash's niche as a provider of abusive advertisement and wretched restaurant menus to be filled soon enough. To paraphrase Jurassic Park, "shitty software will find a way."
derefr 13y ago
As a tangent: oh man, if just Fireworks was open-source, I'd never have to pay for an Adobe product again. Most of my high-level design occurs in CSS, so the only thing I actually need software for is creating tiny icons and textures, and Fireworks excels at that. Heck, if someone made an OSS clone of Fireworks I'd be happy. Why is everyone in the open-source community with graphics knowledge trying to clone either Photoshop or Illustrator? (And no, I don't mean "a pixel-art editor" in the style of Pixen; Fireworks indeed does that, but also contains the live vector texturing and manipulation logic from Flash.)
- camus 13y ago
  I've been using fireworks for 10 years. That's an amazing peace of software indeed.

by camus 13y ago

laumars 13y ago

You've clearly never heard of Edge[1]. Adobe are now putting great strides in providing HTML5 tools. That said, I personally would still avoid Edge just because of Adobe's past record. It might seem petty, but I've lost faith in the company so there's little incentive to pay to join their HTML5 services. [1] http://html.adobe.com/edge/?promoid=KAGMS http://html.adobe.com/edge/?promoid=KAGMS

faboo 13y ago
To be fair, if camus hasn't heard of Edge it isn't his fault - it's Adobe's. Which, in a way, helps to emphasize his point.
- laumars 13y ago
  That would be fine if we were talking about some small hidden product, but Edge has been well covered on HN and it's included with Adobe's Creative Cloud - which has also been well advertised. Plus at some level you have to expect people working in the industry to take responsibility for their own research (assuming he does work in IT, rather than being one of those "arm chair critics" that lesser forums are often plagued with).

jfb 13y ago

I don't know if Adobe doesn't understand "the web"; I think what happened here was just the landscape shifting out from under Adobe. The iPhone wasn't going to support Flash, initially because the power economics didn't work. Once the App Store was released, there was no way Apple would allow out-of-band application development technologies. So what happened is that, to reach this new segment of the market, web developers needed to develop two versions of their applications -- one for iOS and one for everybody else. This in turn spurred development of non-native web technologies, for those applications where a fully native version wasn't feasible, which further reduced the demand for Flash. Adobe was forced to try and play catch up, and that's a really tough position to be in. Good riddance, but I'm fully expecting Flash's niche as a provider of abusive advertisement and wretched restaurant menus to be filled soon enough. To paraphrase Jurassic Park, "shitty software will find a way."

derefr 13y ago

As a tangent: oh man, if just Fireworks was open-source, I'd never have to pay for an Adobe product again. Most of my high-level design occurs in CSS, so the only thing I actually need software for is creating tiny icons and textures, and Fireworks excels at that. Heck, if someone made an OSS clone of Fireworks I'd be happy. Why is everyone in the open-source community with graphics knowledge trying to clone either Photoshop or Illustrator? (And no, I don't mean "a pixel-art editor" in the style of Pixen; Fireworks indeed does that, but also contains the live vector texturing and manipulation logic from Flash.)

camus 13y ago
I've been using fireworks for 10 years. That's an amazing peace of software indeed.