Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Kills Expression Suite — And Makes It Free, For Now

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the free-for-now-ware dept.

Software 89

mikejuk writes "Microsoft has announced that the Expression suite of design tools is no more. It has been removed from sale immediately and it has been placed on a maintenance only status until it reaches its end of life. Expression was Microsoft's offering for designers and competed directly with Adobe products. You can now download the components of Expression — Design 4, Web 4 and Encoder 4 — for free but you can't buy them. Of course, knowing that you are using 'doomed' products, even for free, takes some of the icing off the cake. The central component of the suite the UI designer Blend is to be integrated with Visual Studio 2012 probably along with Update 2. It looks as if Microsoft is giving up on trying to get designers to use its tools."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Maybe (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42368117)

They should just open source it

Re:Maybe (4, Interesting)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 2 years ago | (#42368215)

They should just open source it

Possibly. They open sourced their F# compiler. It's not too uncommon for them.

Re:Maybe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42369011)

even more, C# is an ISO standard.

Re:Maybe (2)

jiteo (964572) | about 2 years ago | (#42369027)

Standard != open source

Re:Maybe (3, Informative)

dimeglio (456244) | about 2 years ago | (#42369063)

libre != open source

ftfy

Re:Maybe (1)

dimeglio (456244) | about 2 years ago | (#42369075)

Oups. I erred, should say

and libre != open source

(remove ftfy)

Re:Maybe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42372081)

And open source != GPL

remember there are many licenses that allow access to the source code.

Re:Maybe (0)

symbolset (646467) | about 2 years ago | (#42371637)

ISO is a rubber stamp for Microsoft any more. They corrupted the whole organization.

Re:Maybe (0)

jopsen (885607) | about 2 years ago | (#42368579)

They should just open source it

And you would be bitching about how companies just dumps products as open source and expect the community to fix it...

The code is probably useless anyway... :)

Re:Maybe (1)

nine-times (778537) | about 2 years ago | (#42368965)

You don't need to "expect the community to fix it." Just make the source code available.

The bigger problem is the potential for legal/PR problems. Before Microsoft open sourced something like this, I'd expect they'd want to go through the code and comments making sure there's nothing problematic.

Re:Maybe (2)

Patch86 (1465427) | about 2 years ago | (#42370563)

Better than killing a product and keeping the source private. At least by open sourcing, they allow users who are dedicated to it (either emotionally or for real technical reasons) to keep it going themselves, and perhaps even improve on it. Which is sort of the point of FOSS in the first place, right?

Re:Maybe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42371883)

Not to mention the goodwill. If it's not going to make you money, find another way to turn it into a win.

And hey, who knows, if it finds new life as an open source project they can develop a profitable ecosystem around it.

Re:Maybe (4, Informative)

Eirenarch (1099517) | about 2 years ago | (#42368861)

/. makes this sound like a bad news but the devs who used expression (including the team I work on) view this as really positive move. While Expression Blend/Web/etc. was not a bad product everyone was frustrated that they needed to switch between Expression Whatever and Visual Studio. Everyone just wished features were part of VS as they are supposed to be now. This is not abandoning the tools this is improving the tools. Also this would never meant to compete with Adobe. Expression were tools to create UI for MS dev tools (XAML and Web) and did not include anything like Photoshop. Saying that Expression aimed to compete with Adobe is plain wrong.

Re:Maybe (1)

johnkoer (163434) | about 2 years ago | (#42368971)

I agree completely with you. I understand Microsoft's desire was that designers could use blend and developers could use VS to get things done, but most developers end up using blend more than the designers to tweak things or to develop interfaces when the designers just give them a photoshop rendering to use as a basis. And in the cases of small companies the developer is the designer, developer, tester and deployer, so they end up having to switch between all sorts of tools.

Re:Maybe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42372745)

I always thought Expression was targeted mostly at Silverlight developers which, yes, was intended to compete with Adobe - right?

Re:Maybe (1)

Javaman59 (524434) | about 2 years ago | (#42372975)

As a web developer I use VS predominately, but also Expression Web to prototype tricky HTML/CSS features, because it's WYSIWIG and HTML/CSS is so good. However, the process was always slowed by switching between the two tools, so I also see this progress, ie. incorporating ExpWeb into VS.

Viva la Blend (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42368121)

It's a shame.

But Blend is the secret-ish weapon. However anyone who's used Blend extensively for WP and Win8 dev on large projects, while it has it's short comings, it rocks. We're seeing our WP and Win8 projects delivered considerably cheaper than our other platforms, prototype designs built as apps, not on paper, allowing us to prototype during the design phase.

Re:Viva la Blend AKA Paint By Numbers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42368193)

Blend, See: Glorified Dialog Editor, XAML targets

Re:Viva la Blend AKA Paint By Numbers (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42368365)

Sounds a lot like glade to me.

Re:Viva la Blend (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42368417)

How can you know so much about such an arcane topic yet can't tell its from it's?

Re:Viva la Blend (3, Insightful)

Eirenarch (1099517) | about 2 years ago | (#42368775)

I like the Blend products' features but I never understood why they were not part of Visual Studio. I've always been frustrated having to switch between the two environments. I consider merging Blend with VS a great step forward.

Re:Viva la Blend (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42370081)

So, it's similar to QT designer?

Re:Viva la Blend (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42370615)

Fuck, I didn't know QuickTime had a designer tool. Where can I get it? :P

Did n't even know (3, Insightful)

PCK (4192) | about 2 years ago | (#42368123)

that Microsoft even had a design suite. I guess that shows how successful it was.

Re:Did n't even know (5, Insightful)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 2 years ago | (#42368169)

Indeed. Please tell me all tools of which you are aware. All tools not on your list will be unsuccessful. Your lack of knowledge will determine the fate of untold hundreds of tools!

Re:Did n't even know (2, Informative)

PCK (4192) | about 2 years ago | (#42368229)

I use Visual Studio and never heard of it before today yet apparently I should have because it is now being integrated in to a product that I use on a daily basis.

Re:Did n't even know (1)

pegisys (1616521) | about 2 years ago | (#42368703)

I have only used Blend for XAML design, but it's leaps and bound better than the editor built in to visual studio. However, when using it I always question why VS couldn't also have these features. I think this is a good move for MS because: 1.) As a developer also creating the UI I would have to switch between application to do code and UI work. 2) Any shop that is would have a need for Blend probably already has Visual Studio.

Re:Did n't even know (1)

SomePgmr (2021234) | about 2 years ago | (#42371965)

Expression Web is a Dreamweaver knockoff.
Expression Blend is a XAML UI designer for WPF/Silverlight
Expression Design is for vector (and raster) design
Expression Encoder is a screen recorder and modest editor

The suites have been part of the BizSpark and DreamSpark programs for a while now.

Yes, MS devel customers didn't know of it = fail (1, Troll)

raymorris (2726007) | about 2 years ago | (#42368279)

Like the GP, I work in a Microsoft shop now. This agency even runs Windows for SERVERS. We have dozens of copies of Visual Studio. Yet, every desktop in my department has the $2,600 Adobe collection. The fact that we've never heard of Microsoft's alternative to Adobe is a giant fail by Microsoft. It's a fail by Microsoft marketing that they've never gotten word out about the product's existence. It's also a fail of the software that it's not good enough to get even a passing mention in industry press, web sites, etc. If you haven't heard of a product I personally wrote, like Clonebox, that's because my company is tiny. If Microsoft spends milions making an entire suite of products and doesn't bother to tell their own customers about it, that's a fail.

Re:Yes, MS devel customers didn't know of it = fai (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42368805)

a giant fail

It's a fail

It's also a fail

that's a fail

2003 called, they want their hackneyed quip back.

Also, education is a good thing. You might be interested in taking some English grammar courses.

Re:Yes, MS devel customers didn't know of it = fai (1)

Eirenarch (1099517) | about 2 years ago | (#42368809)

It is far fetched to say it is alternative to Adobe. For starters it does not provide an alternative to Photoshop. If you don't provide an alternative to Photoshop how can you provide alternative to Adobe CS? Expression has always been a tool for designing UIs for dev platforms MS supports (i.e. XAML and Web). It was never meant to compete with Adobe head to head. Expression was supposed to be the tool designers would use when working on a project with developers who use MS tools. It ended up being something that takes people out of Visual Studio and while it was relatively good everyone (including designers) was annoyed that the features were not part of VS to begin with.

Yes it does mean failure. (2, Informative)

msgmonkey (599753) | about 2 years ago | (#42368379)

If a potential customer does n't even know that the product exists, especially one who uses their other development tools thats a big massive fail in my book.

Re:Yes it does mean failure. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42368935)

Every day I work with MS developers who don't read about new things, or visit msdn etc. I would not consider any product a success or failure based on their level of knowledge about it.

Re:Yes it does mean failure. (1)

ranton (36917) | about 2 years ago | (#42369375)

While I agree that Microsoft did a very poor job of marketing Expression, a single customer not knowing about the product means nothing (which I think was the point of the parent poster).

If you have worked as a developer in any environment released in the last 5 years, you should definitely know what Expression Studio is. If you work in Visual Studio at all, you should know what Expression Studio. Not knowing this tells far more about a developer's ability to stay knowledgeable about his chosen technology stack than it does about Microsoft's marketing.

Re:Yes it does mean failure. (1)

msgmonkey (599753) | about 2 years ago | (#42370293)

I think that is unfair because Visual Studio can be used for a lot of different things. Why would anyone using VS to develop Windows Apps for example need to have knowledge of Expression Studio?

Re:Yes it does mean failure. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42370817)

From what I can tell, they weren't marketing it at all.

Re:Yes it does mean failure. (1)

bondsbw (888959) | about 2 years ago | (#42370129)

This is like saying OneNote is a massive failure because somebody who uses Excel doesn't know about it.

Re:Did n't even know (0)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about 2 years ago | (#42368883)

Indeed. Please tell me all tools of which you are aware. All tools not on your list will be unsuccessful. Your lack of knowledge will determine the fate of untold hundreds of tools!

If Microsoft design suite is unknown to 4 digit slashdotters, it is doomed indeed. So even if you had intended it to be a snark, it turned out to be insightful.

Re:Did n't even know (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42375285)

Indeed, and the fact that he got modded +4 Insightful, tells you all about the tools that subscribe to Slashdot!

Re:Did n't even know (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42379223)

You misunderstood the message you answered to, next time take your time to think it through. PCK was saying that the cause was that the suite wasn't that successful and the effect was that he never heard of it; not that the cause was that he didn't hear of it and the effect the failure of the suite, the way you pretended to be. Let me make a 'drawing'.

PCK: lack of success => PCK never heard of it
oodaloop: PCK never heard of it => lack of success

Clearer now? Who the hell voted your answer as "insightful"????

Re:Did n't even know (5, Informative)

cdrnet (1582149) | about 2 years ago | (#42368181)

It was about "design" as in "interactive user interface design", not as in Illustrator, Inkscape, Photoshop etc.

Re:Did n't even know (0)

PCK (4192) | about 2 years ago | (#42368245)

I get that my point is, I'm aware of flash, dreamweaver, etc even though I don't use them yet I've never heard of this product.

Re:Did n't even know (1)

way2trivial (601132) | about 2 years ago | (#42370989)

they used it, among other things, to replace frontpage.

that, I'm pretty sure you've heard of...

and it makes better sense now too that you hadn't, eh?

Re:Did n't even know (2)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about 2 years ago | (#42370569)

It was about "design" as in "interactive user interface design", not as in Illustrator, Inkscape, Photoshop etc.

Expression Web is a web design tool along the lines of Dreamweaver. It was the successor to Microsoft's FrontPage (actually it looked to me as if it was just FrontPage rebranded).

Most of this Expression suite was intended as general design software - the UI bits were just a subset.

Re:Did n't even know (0, Troll)

jonadab (583620) | about 2 years ago | (#42368271)

Indeed. I though Microsoft's offerings in this regard consisted of Paint (and maybe Visual Studio, for those special few who are not mentally blocking out all memory of its existence).

Not only have I never heard of this suite before, I've never heard of any of its component programs before, either. Also, from their names, I can't tell which one is supposed to compete with which of Adobe's components.

Not that it matters. People who can't afford Photoshop can just download Gimp. Gimp doesn't have as wide a range of commercial third-party plug-in modules available as Photoshop, but that only matters to people who are willing to spend a lot of money, and besides, I'd be highly surprised if Microsoft's offering had all that stuff either.

There used to be other competitors (Paint Shop Pro, and back in the nineties there was something called Correll Draw), but I haven't heard much about them lately.

Re:Did n't even know (1)

Richy_T (111409) | about 2 years ago | (#42369737)

Corel Draw is still around. But it is a vector-based program so is not in the same ball-park (it includes Corel Photo Paint (or did) which is more equivalent). If Gimp is the open source competitor to Photoshop, Inkscape is the open source competitor to Corel Draw.

Re:Did n't even know (0)

recoiledsnake (879048) | about 2 years ago | (#42368569)

that Microsoft even had a design suite. I guess that shows how successful it was.

That is because Slashdot usually does not cover launches of MS products, but makes a big deal of it when they're EOL'ed. If you get your news from sites like Slashdot, you automatically become ignorant like if you solely watch Fox News or even MSNBC.

Also look at the submitter's submitted stories. http://slashdot.org/~mikejuk [slashdot.org]

Hundreds of stories linking to i-programmer.info

This is nothing but pure blogspam.

Re:Did n't even know (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about 2 years ago | (#42368709)

that's becuase it isn't a design suite really. Its a developer tool that they thought - either through greed or naievety - that they could sell twice.

Once upon a time, all the developer tooling was inside visual Studio, so a dev could knock up a GUI and hook it into the code he'd written. Then Microsoft invented XAML and next thing you know visual studio's XAML editing capabilities were extremely poor (ie often would crash if you tried to do anything remotely complicated, couldn't review what the GUI looked like if you edited the underlying xaml code, and could barely design the gui without hand-edited bits anyway) but its was ok as they released a separate GUI design tool you could use alongside VS.

the idea was that your designer could write XAML and then give it to the coder who would write the code and tie the two together... shame that, in true Microsoft fashion, separation of concerns like this is always broken by the need to "integrate" everything, so pretty soon you had to write code ("code behind") in your XAML to make it do anything useful, like binding a variable to a GUI element [stackoverflow.com] - see, simples!

So all in all, I can see why they wanted to put this stuff back into Visual Studio - its easier for them, and it means your designer will have to buy a copy of VS instead.

Re:Did n't even know (1, Informative)

Spiked_Three (626260) | about 2 years ago | (#42368785)

No, it is an indication of what kind of developer you are.

Re:Did n't even know (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42370861)

Or that your a dumbass.

Ya so... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42368135)

Too little, to late to the game.

Wow (-1, Redundant)

symbolset (646467) | about 2 years ago | (#42368143)

Oopsl

Title of post was spot on (2)

bogaboga (793279) | about 2 years ago | (#42368153)

Microsoft Kills Expression Suite â" And Makes It Free, For Now

This is what will happen next:

Like earlier versions of MS Office, in the days when WordPerfect was king, Microsoft made these versions free.

Guess what! It worked.

There are free alternatives and better paid-for ones, but they're all grassing for attention.

We now have a situation whereby professional desktop document editing has become synonymous with MS Office.

A true, tried and proven modus operandi.

Re:Title of post was spot on (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42368189)

Much more likely it will go the way of Truespace, available for download until suddenly gone without a trace.

Re:Title of post was spot on (1)

gagol (583737) | about 2 years ago | (#42368485)

Good ole memories, Truespace was embarrassingly easy for a 3D editor. I used it extensively in display design and prototypes.

Re:Title of post was spot on (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42368307)

The rub therein lies in that few professional designers use Windows to start with, and that the growing population of iPad users is learning to do this stuff on tablets.

Re:Title of post was spot on (1)

Eirenarch (1099517) | about 2 years ago | (#42369017)

Bullshit. MS killed this product because everyone hated switching from Expression to VS and back. People just wanted the Expression features in VS. This is great news for everyone who ever used Expression. Also note that MS cannot just drop the features. After all there should be some way to develop pretty UI interfaces on MS platforms.

Re:Title of post was spot on (1)

Nethemas the Great (909900) | about a year ago | (#42398853)

Not quite. Software developers hated switching back and forth yes, but the suite wasn't originally nor primarily for software developers. It was for UX engineers/graphic artists. That was the part that failed to catch hold. In large part I think due to the MS' inability to abstract away enough of the technical complexities of the underlying technology. Now, having given up on the UX crowd I fear they're going to cheapen the tool with the VS roll up.

Free as in free beer. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42368163)

Free as in free beer.

It was unusable for one simple reason (5, Interesting)

grungeman (590547) | about 2 years ago | (#42368207)

When applying a gradient fill to an object it was not possible to adjust a gradient after applying. As a professional graphics designer I can say that a gradient never looks perfect the first time and always needs adjustment. Instead with Expression Design you had to apply the whole gradient again, hoping that this time it would look perfect (which never happened). This made the whole software the least productive tool ever for our job. We really tried, but Expression was simply unusable for us, I even suspect that the totally useless gradient tool is the reason why Microsoft developers decided to make the Windows 8 icons monochrome.

Re:It was unusable for one simple reason (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42368357)

Not only that, but it was also very easy to add effects like a gradient which when used in the application could use huge amounts of cpu time whenever an update required a refresh. Then you have to recreate the effect using a pixel shader in Visual Studio in order to get your performance back.

We also had various cases where the project could not be opened in Blend and worked with unless the current project settings were exactly right and the code behind it was perfect as well. That made handing off the project to let a non-programming designer fancify the UI a pain sometimes tracking down why Blend didn't like it after edits by a developer.

Badly named suite (5, Insightful)

Xoc-S (645831) | about 2 years ago | (#42368213)

This was a failure in marketing, not technology. When this came out, it took me a while to differentiate the products because of the first word in the name being the same. I finally figured out to just drop the word "Expression" and concentrate on the second word. I think it was a huge mistake trying to use the term to group a disparate set of products. They should have called them Microsoft Design, Microsoft Blend, etc. and then packaged them as "Microsoft Designer Suite". Blend is actually pretty cool.

Re:Badly named suite (1)

djscoumoune (1731422) | about 2 years ago | (#42368291)

It completely was a failure in marketing. When it got out I thought it was a Microsoft Spirograph, I remember it showed symmetry copy pasting features but that's it. I'm downloading the designer version anyways but I still doubt it's a Photoshop or The Gimp-like

Re:Badly named suite (1, Interesting)

jkrise (535370) | about 2 years ago | (#42368449)

They should have called them Microsoft Design, Microsoft Blend, etc

I call bullshit. It doesn't matter what Microsoft called it. Obviously after the success of eXPerience, they felt eXPression would be as successful as Windows XP. Vista was a good name, and many successful non-operating systems are branded by that name and do well. But in Microsoft's case, a more apt name would've been Shit-sta.

The newest OSes are named 7 and 8 - totally un-imaginative names. While 7 has got a 'harmless' reputation, slowly getting mindshare away from XP unlike Vista, 8 has been very polarising in the market - with extreme feedback in both directions coming from the customers. Names or brands mean very little in the eventual success and adoption of a product. What matters more is performance, quality and reputation.

Re:Badly named suite (4, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | about 2 years ago | (#42369055)

Names or brands mean very little in the eventual success and adoption of a product. What matters more is performance, quality and reputation.

My turn to call bullshit. Good branding can't make a terrible product into a highly successful one, but terrible branding and marketing can keep a good product from being recognized as such. If you make a great tool but nobody knows about it, it won't sell. If people are aware of it, but they can't figure out what the product is supposed to be, they won't buy it. If people don't believe that the tool works well, they often won't give it a chance.

And Microsoft's marketing isn't great. They tend to go through periods where they reuse the same name for disparate products and services. How many different things have been labelled ".Net" over the years? How many different products have had the "Live" moniker applied to them? There have been a couple very different products called "Surface". And look how inconsistent their product names are: 3, 95, 4, 98, 2000, XP, Vista, 7. And Windows 7 isn't even version 7, it's officially v6.1!

Now I briefly used the Expression Suite a few years ago, and I can't tell you what any of these products are. Blend? No clue. Is that the one that was trying to be like Photoshop? And what market were they going after? Business? Consumer? Design? I have no idea. I thought it had been discontinued years ago, since I haven't heard anything about it.

Re:Badly named suite (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42370897)

As Access is to SQL and VB for Applications is to VB so Blend is to Photoshop. It's a "gateway" platform.

Re:Badly named suite (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42373239)

Interesting. "7" is the eighth one in that list. And it's officially 6.1? For some reason, looking at Microsoft's sense of mathematics, the phrase "Drunkard's Walk" comes to mind...

Re:Badly named suite (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42403753)

The list of Windows products has 2 disparate lines. The 4 is from the NT line, which was roughly opposite Win95. NT was primarily for servers and high end developers, while Windows was for home and normal business desktop users. The two lines were finally combined in XP, although you still see some of the difference in the Pro vs. Home or equivalent typing on current versions of Windows

It was ok, but not great (5, Interesting)

thoughtspace (1444717) | about 2 years ago | (#42368333)

Used Expression suite to make a custom embedded system on a pretty large project. It was good to integrate photoshop files from the graphic designers and convert them to controls. The UI turns out looking really professional - none of those stock standard UI controls and all beautifully rendered.

The main problem with the suite was that, in practice, the design flow is really one-way. If there was a change to the UI, you pretty much had to re-import the graphics, re-select the graphic items and group them into controls again.

For the next product iteration, we went back to WPF mixed with Windows Forms for old or 3rd party controls.

Simple reason to drop the product (5, Funny)

qzzpjs (1224510) | about 2 years ago | (#42368453)

Creating fancy or professional graphical interfaces doesn't fit in with Microsoft's new future of big square blocks for everything.

Re:Simple reason to drop the product (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42369015)

Luckily you have more elegant environments available to you, like the new version of Enlightenment that came out after 12 years. I look forward to its next update in 2025.

Re:Simple reason to drop the product (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42369983)

I'm a round hole, aren't I :(

Blend (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42368487)

Blend is the only reason why .NET GUI programming is tolerable. Actually, scratch that, .NET GUI programming is sadomasochistic byzantine wizardry.

They bought a good app and killed it slowly (2, Insightful)

calyphus (646665) | about 2 years ago | (#42368507)

The original Expression app that MS bought years ago was a great start on a different style of drawing/painting app. The vectored brush shapes were innovative. MS bought it, gave it away for awhile, and that was the last I heard of it. MS really doesn't have any credibility with designers.

Re:They bought a good app and killed it slowly (1)

Eirenarch (1099517) | about 2 years ago | (#42368827)

Source? Wikipedia has nothing to say about this and it would be very strange if MS bought a tool from another company to be used with the language they just created (XAML).

Re:They bought a good app and killed it slowly (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42371815)

Sigh. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creature_House_Expression

Microsoft acquired a small vibrant company, with a fantastic product - then proceeded to gut it. They dropped the Mac version, (partially) ported the Windows version to .NET, and somewhere along the way, everything that was special about Expression turned to corporate blandness.

And don't even get me started about LivingCels - the animation system that COULD have revolutionized 2D cel animation.

Re:They bought a good app and killed it slowly (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42372247)

+1

Still using E3 on Mac OS and occasionally Windows.

Best structured drawing app I have ever used. And it's not too shabby with bitmaps either.

LC could've been amazing.

Slashdot's Primary Interest in this Story (5, Funny)

guttentag (313541) | about 2 years ago | (#42368721)

The real reason this is news is because it means some day, when Microsoft kills the now-free product, Slashdot can publish the headline "Microsoft Finally Kills Free Expression" without being a troll or libelous.

Re:Slashdot's Primary Interest in this Story (1)

Eirenarch (1099517) | about 2 years ago | (#42368839)

Also it is interesting how /. gives negative spin on this move that is considered positive by devs who use the tools. We're doing XAML development and using Blend and our team was quite happy to hear the news. None of us ever liked that Blend (or Expression Web for that matter) features were separate from VS UI designer.

Re:Slashdot's Primary Interest in this Story (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42369073)

It's completely consistent. /. gives negative spin on devs who use the MS tools.

Developers, developers, developers ! (1)

eulernet (1132389) | about 2 years ago | (#42368893)

It's because of this motto that Windows is perceived as a developer's platform.

On the opposite, Apple is perceived as a designer's platform, because all the focus is done on the design.

MS next move? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42369567)

In this age of the corporate pre-pack (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-packaged_insolvency) I suppose that when a rich corp's brand name has become synonymous with unfair business practices, or repeated customer disappointments, or market manipulation, or the strangling of innovation because it threatened the rich corp's business model, or other unacceptable behaviour, the logical thing to do is to jettison said brand name and start again. After all, as all cynical businesspersons know, the one thing you can rely on about consumers is the brevity of their memories.

Do slashdotters think it's likely that MS will fragment itself into smaller units--no doubt the 'agile', 'lean' and 'flexible' buzzwords would be invoked--in order to rid itself of its many self-administered taints?

Mod up for yes, down for no. Thanks.

d5

Another down (1)

Chewbacon (797801) | about 2 years ago | (#42369789)

Microsoft seems to have this habit of competing with professional products by releasing half-assed products of their own. A guy I'm doing web design for swears by Expression, simply because how seamless it was to edit his site. Click save and it quickly uploads changes, much faster than my preferred Dreamweaver. However, Expression sucks balls from a professional point of view.

Microsoft killed Expression when they started (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42369791)

Took a quick look at the product requirements only to find: .NET Framework 4.0
Silverlight 4.0
Support for Microsoft DirectX® 9.0 graphics with Windows Vista Display Driver Model (WDDM) Driver, 128 MB of graphics RAM or more, Pixel Shader 3.0 in hardware, 32-bits per pixel

Now we know why it failed. No support for OS X? Leading designers in this area swear by OS X. And why (the hell) do you design a software which is dependent on .NET instead of C++ or ... Wait a minute, I seem to remember something about MS wanting to kill Java so they reinvented the wheel only they really didn't kill Java and they got their buts sued off. Losers. So basically from the get go they designed this software NOT wot work on the leading platform for most leading developers - OS X. Genius! Epic Fail!

Not even worth a download. Plus isn't Silverlight dead yet? Another attempt to kill a competitors product by reinventing the wheel instead of working together with the rest of the community. This is why Microsoft will Fail.

Re:Microsoft killed Expression when they started (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42371477)

Silverlight runtime is still available through Windows Update--so if anything related to Silverlight is dead it may be the on the development side. No, I didn't install Silverlight but it's there and available for those who do want the runtime part of it.

Meanwhile I get "This page uses Java" warnings in IE9 because I won't infect my machine with the Sun/Oracle Java Runtime (nor the JDK). Anything having to do with OOP these days, I'll stick with C# or VB/C++ .NET thank you very much.

Oh, and .NET Framework version (whatever) is also available on a Windows system using Windows Update.

Go ahead and work harder for using FOSS and languages, while I work smarter with MS products. Even if they discontinue one of them, there is usually a replacement product with a smaller learning curve (F# and J++/J# being a couple of exceptions).

You do know c# is an OOP language right? (1)

clay_buster (521703) | about 2 years ago | (#42375225)

C# is an OOP language running on the Microsoft CLR. The CLR is a virtual machine with garbage collection similar to the Java run time. Microsoft is making use of the CLR to make it possible to create programs for Windows 8 and Windows 8 RT without recompilation , just like Java.

You keep working on your language set that runs on a continually shrinking percentage of running devices. I'm sure your obsolete Silverlight, F# and J# skills will make for great "in my day" slashdot posts some time in the future.

Wa wa (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#42370369)

> "Of course, knowing that you are using 'doomed' products, even
> for free, takes some of the icing off the cake."

I feel that way about Social Security! [instantrimshot.com]

Free as in shackled (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42374783)

The Micro$oft way.

Encoder 4? (1)

gravis777 (123605) | about 2 years ago | (#42375303)

Does this mean that the Windows Media format is finally going to die? I haven't used Encoder in years, and last time I went to go download it, it seemed like it was part of Expressions, so I gave up on the format.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?