Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Adobe Buys Macromedia for $3.4B

CmdrTaco posted more than 9 years ago | from the thats-a-whole-lotta-bread dept.

The Almighty Buck 937

Kobayashi Maru writes "A press release from Adobe announces that they will buy Macromedia for approximately $3.4 billion. The new company will be called Adobe Systems, Inc."

cancel ×

937 comments

Flash! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268754)

Woho! Saviour of the Universe

Re:Flash! (5, Insightful)

Rosyna (80334) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268930)

No, this deal could mean the end of the multiverse as we know. Much of what was driving these two companies was their never ending battle to do the other one better. Many conventions, documentation, "classes" compared one company's product to another and if one company was lacking a feature the other had, they'd try to outdo it by a large margin.

Now, what silly patent/legal battle do we have to watch that occurs between two behemoths that basically were the entire industry.

well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268755)

I guess you know the old saying...

1st (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268756)

1st post

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268761)

fp

Re:fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268809)

The f standing for "fourth", presumably.

Re:fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268838)

No, it stands for fthird

this is bad news! (-1, Redundant)

fribhey (731586) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268762)

this is bad news!

Re:this is bad news! (5, Interesting)

aicrules (819392) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268810)

Bad news?? We might actually see a standards compliant plug-in out of this that actually has a good development environment to go along with it. Adobe certainly will be inserting their SVG magic into the Macromedia environment. Plus think of all the integration possibilities with Adobe/Macromedia products.

I personally think this is at LEAST *promising* news!

Re:this is bad news! (4, Interesting)

Martz (861209) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268834)

Why? Because 2 big corps merge it's evil? Since Macromedia seemed to be Adobes Photoshops main competitor and Fireworks, I'd bet that they are basically buying out the competition. It can only mean good things if you are an advocate of FOSS applications like Gimp. If you are desperately waiting for Dreamweaver on Linux, then there is something seriously wrong with you! I'll be glad to see it slowly die when Adobe stiffles Macromedia products in favour of Photoshop.

Re:this is bad news! (1)

visually_extinct (773975) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268874)

This is horrible. I just bought $3,000 worth of software (Contribute). I bet Adobe gets rid of it.

Re:this is bad news! (5, Informative)

Makzu (868112) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268931)

From a we-can't-have-any-monopolies point of view, it is rather bad news. However, from a product suite POV, it's probably a good thing.

Look at it this way: Dreamweaver is considered to be about the best commercial HTML editor out there. And Flash is totally ubiquitous. However, Fireworks and Freehand are generally no-so-great (in comparison to Adobe's stuff). Photoshop and Illustrator are the de facto standards, and are great at what they do, yet Adobe's LiveMotion and GoLive are both pretty godawful.

Now that the two companies are one, you can be damn sure that you'll be able to get a package deal with Flash, Photoshop, Illustrator, and Dreamweaver all in one box, and they'll be as nicely integrated as Studio MX currently is. As someone who uses these on a regular basis, I'd consider that to be a pretty good thing.

Now, if only we could get Linux versions of these programs...

hmm... (1)

token25 (861720) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268763)

Seems like a bad idea to me!

Damn... (4, Funny)

TheWanderingHermit (513872) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268764)

Now we'll never see DreamWeaver on Linux.

Re:Damn... (4, Funny)

selectspec (74651) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268797)

What else is Wine for? The whole point of Wine was to run Dreamweaver on Linux.

Re:Damn... (2, Insightful)

XpirateX (691224) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268884)

The irony to that is, WINE is good code...while that made from Dreamweaver is not.

Re:Damn... (5, Informative)

ccharles (799761) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268854)

It's nowhere near as powerful (yet), but try out Nvu [nvu.com] . It's meant to be a Dreamweaver clone, and it's pretty decent.

I'm scared. :( (5, Funny)

drunkennewfiemidget (712572) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268766)

What does it mean when the two most instrusive web browser plugin makers merge?

Re:I'm scared. :( (5, Funny)

Walkiry (698192) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268800)

That we can ignore them both with a single block when they merge? :)

Re:I'm scared. :( (1)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268814)

Many people don't share your view about PDF files.

Re:I'm scared. :( (2, Insightful)

Bastian (66383) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268911)

PDF files are well and good.

But the Acrobat Reader browser-plugin? The only word I can think of to describe it is 'ACK!'

Re:I'm scared. :( (1)

GFPerez (683823) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268831)

"Intrusive"? How's that? I agree that Adobe Acrobat is a ass-heavy plugin and puts a lot of sh*tty bars in Office products, for example, but I didn't get your point about the Flash plug-in.

Re:I'm scared. :( (1)

jimmyCarter (56088) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268841)

What does it mean when the two most instrusive web browser plugin makers merge?

Acrobat now with more dancing bologna?

Re:I'm scared. :( (5, Funny)

pseudolus (790109) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268883)

It means that this guy [homestarrunner.com] will finally be able to send PDF attachments.

Adobe Flash .. ? (1)

pecko666 (684783) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268770)

Great, so now we can expect embedded flash in the PDF?

Re:Adobe Flash .. ? (5, Interesting)

BridgeBum (11413) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268817)

PDF is an evolution of Postscript. It's strength lies (IMHO) in being able to render to paper exactly what you see on the screen. How would 'movie' files be translated to paper?

Display PostScript and Display PDF (3, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268873)

PDF is also the imaging technology underlying Quartz, the display subsystem used on Mac OS X.

Re:Adobe Flash .. ? (5, Funny)

neil.pearce (53830) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268895)

They could do it as a flick book

Re:Adobe Flash .. ? (2, Funny)

Walkiry (698192) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268898)

>How would 'movie' files be translated to paper?

I take you haven't seen Minority Report yet? ;-)

PDF is already a strange mix (5, Interesting)

blueZ3 (744446) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268934)

I saw a demo where Jaguar had embedded a user-controlled VR of the inside of their latest model in a pdf. Even though the image looked like a picture in the PDF, there were buttons to pan and zoom the view so you could get a 360 view of the interior.

PDF (like HTML) has long strayed from its original purpose into uncharted territory. This is not (IMO) a Good Thing

Re:Adobe Flash .. ? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268936)

You've been able to embed Flash into PDFs since at least version 6.

Re:Adobe Flash .. ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268943)

Yes, flashy PDF" gets a new meaning ;-)

WOW! (1, Redundant)

DoubleDangerClub (855480) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268774)

This is quite an unexpected surprise for Monday morning. Woo!!! Now all the best graphics apps will be under one name!

Re:WOW! (1)

Horrortaxi (803536) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268875)

Woo!!! Now all the best graphics apps will be under one name!

Or, to look at it another way, all of the graphics applications that anybody actually uses are under one name.

Don't they call that a monopoly?

Sigh... (4, Funny)

mmaddox (155681) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268784)

Well, if any of you are irritated by Flash, this move should reduce the number of folks using it. It'll be too bloated to load within a release or two.

Too late buddy... (4, Interesting)

dopelogik (862715) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268788)

April fools is long over!

If this is not a joke, then we'll finally get good support for exporting Illustrator files to Flash!!

graphics products a good match (1)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268789)

Hopefully we'll see some integrated flash/illustrator products -- or at least, standardizing the commands/menus so that if you can operate one, it's easier to operate the other.

Re:graphics products a good match (1)

justforaday (560408) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268896)

Adobe did have their own Flash creation app for a while called LiveMotion.

IlluHand? (4, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268791)

Wouldn't this merger give Adobe a near monopoly on many software products in the visual design field?

Re:IlluHand? (1)

hool5400 (257022) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268857)

That's the point, no?

Antitrust. Coming in 2009 to USDOJ. (1, Offtopic)

tepples (727027) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268918)

If software companies are taking advantage of the current administration's neo-conservative leanings, then watch the next administration's Attorney General shake down the industry with antitrust prosecutions.

Re:IlluHand? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268891)

That's what I was thinking. The Adobe's product line is so similar to Macromedia's and the two are pretty much the only big players in their field... this gives Adobe complete control:\

Consolidation (5, Interesting)

nnnnnnnn (876913) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268792)

Flash will stick around for sure, but what will happen to Dreamweaver, Fireworks, and Freehand? Adobe may go with straight market share and keep Dreamweaver, Photoshop and Illustrator as the pro tools, and push GoLive, Fireworks and Freehand as the consumer versions, or they may drop them all together. I can't imagine many buyers interested in picking up the fight against the Adobe juggernaut.

maybe now (1)

Tuffsnake (767507) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268793)

macromedia's stuff won't be so waffely. Also this is great for acrobat b/c now they both sides of the media covered.

Acroweaver with new and improved Yahoo spybar!! (1, Funny)

blankoboy (719577) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268796)

Bring on the horrors...sigh.

Good news for Inkscape (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268799)

From an Inkscape [inkscape.org] developer:

I think it's good news for us. There will be people scared or disgusted by the forming monopoly and looking for alternatives. Also, it seems likely that Freehand will be either discontinued or at least downplayed so as to not hurt Illustrator, which means a lot of users will have to migrate. All this gives us a certain opportunity.

The Question Is (1)

jacen_sunstrider (797955) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268802)

Does this mean an end to Macromedia's product, or will they just slowly fall to the back, similar to what happened to Netscape? I'll admit, I'm definitely a fan of Dreamwaver. Adobe's editor isn't bad, but are they actually going to make it better by combining it and Dreamweaver, or is it just going to slowly move into a dominant position?

Re:The Question Is (1)

cbreaker (561297) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268933)

Who knows man.

I like Adobe software though, and I'd have to guess that they didn't just buy Macromedia to get rid of the competition. They'll probably keep on truckin' with Macromedia's software line-up for quite some time.

One word: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268804)

NOOOooooo!

No more lawsuits huh (5, Informative)

null etc. (524767) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268805)

A few years ago, Adobe sued Macromedia for infringing upon a patent by which Adobe displayed "GUI elements" in a certain dockable, palette-oriented fashion. Macromedia had to withdraw those features from its product to comply.

Now, we're sure to see Flash get an improved user interface. I guess this is a case where Adobe's patent really helped it innovate.

On the bright side... (1)

tehmorph (844326) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268806)

...we'll get better PDF support in Dreamweaver etc now!

Re:On the bright side... (1)

bcmm (768152) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268870)

Yes. Yes we will. The largely unused HTML support will be dropped shortly afterwards too. I mean, everyone has the PDF plugin, right?

Adobe will wants to have a monolopy in mulit-media (1)

00squirrel (772984) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268807)

It appears Adobe is moving to monopolize the multi-media software market. This purchase will allow Adobe to move to the front of the web multi-media software market, a place where they have been lacking. We all know the bad stuff that *could* happen should a monopoly occur.

One upshot of all of this may be better interoperability between products, such as easily working with images in Photoshop via Dreamweaver, etc. etc.

Should be interesting to watch, to say the least.

Freehand (2, Funny)

Cmdr TECO (579177) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268811)

Who gets Freehand this time?

huh!! (1)

akeid (458777) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268813)

Yes, it's bad news :(

I for one... (1)

IdJit (78604) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268815)

Am dismayed. Macromedia was really starting to shine as a rich media application innovator. Hopefully, Adobe will be able to lend enhancements and not hinderances.

really, really bad. Hello FTC? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268816)

so much for competition. Each company had things they did better, we use a combination of products from both companies, now Adobe is just going to kill Dreamweaver and Fireworks, two programs that we depend on (and prefer to the adobe equivalents).

Where the heck is the FTC while this is happenning?

Re:really, really bad. Hello FTC? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268866)

The FTC is currently sending all of their employees to a Billy Graham convention for "re-training" under the Bush administration. Please don't bother them.

Re:really, really bad. Hello FTC? (1)

OhPlz (168413) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268914)

If people depended on those products that much then surely there's an opportunity for another company to move in and set up shop. In a free economy, holes like this should be filled by new ventures.. not by government intervention and beauracracy.

No more competetion (1)

haskins_sam (653585) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268818)

Well, the media authoring market just got a lot smaller. No more Freehand/Illustrator competition, nor Livemotion/Flash. Adobe is ready to steamroll.

Competition Regulations (4, Interesting)

tezza (539307) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268819)

the 1st biggest print/press media company is merging with the 2nd.

There is no 3rd.

Would competition regulators look to block this merger??

If Ford wanted to merge with General Motors, there would be serious investigations. Oracle needed to show there was competition from SAP & JD Edwards before it was allowed to acquire Peoplesoft.

Quark (5, Interesting)

Henriok (6762) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268946)

You just forgot the largest prist/press media company: Quark.
However... they won't stay at no.1 for long.

Wonder what will happen to OS X? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268820)

This could lead to some interesting GUIs for an Apple OS soon. Considering OS X Aqua Extreme relies heavily on PDF for its textures. The only assumption is that they work on the performance of Flash so that it doesn't inhibit other processes.

Freehand (3, Interesting)

mmkkbb (816035) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268821)

I keep wondering what's going to happen to Freehand. Adobe bought the original marketers of Freehand (Aldus, also the guys who made PageMaker) back in the day. Now they're buying the makers of FreeHand AGAIN.

Get the fuck out!!! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268823)

This is horrible news.
I officially hate them more than Microsoft now.

I for one... (5, Insightful)

bcmm (768152) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268825)

I for one wellcome our new massive software giant overlords...

Are they going to keep the Macromedia branding and just not compete with each other, or will we see Adobe Dreameaver?

And will the flash plugin have that terrible update software like Acrobat reader?
This is probably not good for anyone except Adobe, including us.

Uh Oh (1)

skartel (839569) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268826)

I personally use photoshop but I only wonder what will happen to Fireworks And I think freehand will be gone too, since Illustrator is the direct competition for that. Also, they better not touch flash with any of their Live Motion Business.

This is good news... (2, Insightful)

Wonderkid (541329) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268829)

As most designers will hopefully agree, Adobe's software is stable, well designed, consistent in operation and relatively intuitive. However, their web offerings are limited. On the other hand, Macromedia's web centric software is unstable, (IMHO) appallingly designed, inconsistent and very hard to learn. So, now Adobe and Macromedia are one, hopefully they can combine the pluses of their cultures and products to the benefit of frustrated designers & developers everywhere.

great; hope they ditch Nellymoser (1)

js7a (579872) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268832)

Perhaps FCV audio will be accessable, someday.

This is great news! (1)

wondafucka (621502) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268835)

Now the user interface for flash authoring will go from one of the worst CAD interfaces I've ever seen to one of the best! Bravo! Tighter integration into Illustrator. Now I don't have to worry where my vectors have gone. Action script might actually start to be useful! Hooray!

Re:This is great news! (1)

argent (18001) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268925)

This means more flash on the net, I suppose.

I can't say I like that idea.

What will this mean for SVG? (5, Insightful)

bingo_tailspin (530764) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268837)

SVG is Flash's biggest rival, but Adobe has always supported it. I hope this means there will be more open standards in Macromedia Flash.

Re:What will this mean for SVG? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268900)

I thought Flash was an open standard?

PDF Good, Flash Bad (2, Insightful)

stlhawkeye (868951) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268839)

I'm kind of lukewarm on this. I like PDFs, it allows me to download my tax statement, bank statements, government forms, and all kinds of other stuff that I used to have to fork over $3 to some government agency to get ahold of.

The impact of Flash on the web, however, has been unforgivably negative, in my opinion. I boycott companies who require flash to view their web sites, there's no reason to ever need it for most web sites out there. I'm kind old school I guess, I think of the web as being primarily a form of information and knowledge distribution, and flash isn't necessary to present most types of information or knowledge.

Good (1)

Zenikase (622230) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268840)

It's one less proprietary format vendor to worry about.

Bad news (1)

the_unknown_soldier (675161) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268844)

For programs like freehand, fireworks and indesign! Such a same. All great programs, but they don't stand a chance now that they have merged with illustrator dreamweaver and such. Less choice is always bad!

Re:Bad news (1)

cipset (550887) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268941)

This is bad news for the users, as Adobe price scheme is tagged a little bit over Macromedia. It is bad also because the main source of progress on this market was the competition between these two software giants. And it is bad 'cause Adobe was delivering in the last years not that shiny, revolutionining stuff anymore (see acrobat and the lates bundling of Yahoo! toolbar and PHS Album as AN UPDATE for Reader ). Hopefully Adobe won't push Flash aside even if this is not the most beloved tool on Slashdot.

The good news is we might see some really good products if they manage to have a good connection between the two programming and product teams.

Good news (1)

mattdev121 (727783) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268850)

This is great news for linux users, with Adobe first showing support for linux with the adobe reader for linux and now that macromedia belongs to them, we may *crosses fingers* see a macromedia shockwave engine for linux!

Microso..I mean..Adobe acquires Macromedia (5, Funny)

Cjays (866936) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268855)

This will probably mean:

- Adobe will kill off Freehand, Dreamweaver, and Fireworks, and incorporate any good features from them into Illustrator, GoLive, and ImageReady, respectively.
- Photoshop and Flash will remain the same, since neither had competition from the other company.
- They'll probably maintain 'lite' versions of all of the above, giving consumers the illusion of choice.
- Corel will acquire the company that makes Preparation H, since their asses will hurt so much from shitting a few tons of bricks.

Good Thing They Aren't Calling The New Company (2, Funny)

dduardo (592868) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268858)

Adobedriva.

Anti-competition (4, Interesting)

Flywheels of Fire (836557) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268859)

This acquisition is major news [mithuro.com] for the software industry, although not altogether surprising. Macromedia has regularly been seen as a prime candidate for acquisition.

This makes good sense from both companies' perspective and this is clearly signalled in the fact that it comes with the blessing of both boards. Adobe has traditionally been strong in the offline graphical design business particularly with respect to desktop publishing in the newspaper and magazine publishing world. The company has also made its PDF reader ubiquitous in the desktop space and has a strong enterprise play.

Macromedia, on the other hand, has a much stronger presence in graphical user interfaces (GUIs) for the desktop with its Dreamweaver and Flash product set. Both companies have made plays into the wireless market with the promise of rich media applications and cross platform access.

Macromedia, however has made stronger inroads into this market with recent deals with key operators and device manufacturers that will see Flash expanding its reach from the desktop environment to wireless platforms.

The deal itself is not without issues from a competition standpoint since the resulting business will almost certainly hold a sizeable chunk of the GUI market that would make it difficult for some smaller vendors to play in. The companies have overlapping product sets and a product portfolio that goes in many different directions. That is both a positive and a negative and will need to be addressed, going forward.

Yahoo! (1)

Synkronos (789022) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268860)

Ah. The Yahoo toolbar link becomes apparent.
For those of you not sure what I'm talking about:
Here [slashdot.org] for the Macromedia angle
And for the Adobe angle, open up Adobe reader and look to the right of the toolbar. A little Yahoo icon.
Gah. It's like invasions of the... something nasty

I for one (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268861)

like to welcome our new invasive software overlords.

Bad news (1)

vraT (767544) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268862)

I and many others have had countless issues with Acrobat lately. Hopefully Flash won't go the way of Acrobat and become a burden rather than helpful.

SVG question (4, Interesting)

_LORAX_ (4790) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268878)

At this point, where will the commercial support for SVG go? Now that adobe has the defacto vector drawing platform for the web I fear that their support for the SVG format will go the way of the dodo.

Intrusion Alert (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12268879)

It is bad enough that Adobe thought it right to allow embedded javascript in PDF files and thus tracking via Internet of who is reading, writing in, or otherwise using a particular PDF file (without end-user notification). But Macromedia has allowed its vector drawing plugin software to be used for the evil of tracking web site visitors who have turned off cookies (formally indicating they don't want to be tracked) and spawning pop-ups when users have tried to turn that "feature" off as well. I don't like where this is going when these two companies get together as one.

Investors not liking it. (5, Interesting)

DanTilkin (129681) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268881)

So far, the market seems to think Adobe is paying too much. They were paying a 33% premium when the deal was announced. ADBE [bloomberg.com] is down over 11% so far today. MACR [bloomberg.com] is up slightly.

bad move (2, Interesting)

jwjcmw (552089) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268888)

I think this is a pretty bad move for users. Basically you are taking the two biggest players in the web design and display area, who have quite a few competing tools, and combining them which will reduce competition.

One can only hope that this will increase the viability of open souce design and display technologies (GIMP, etc).

It will also be interesting to see what they do with ColdFusion, which while it had floundered for the first couple of years under MACR, had recently come out with some pretty impressive capabilities.

flash v8 (1)

bvanderveen (863047) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268890)

I have to wonder what this means for the new version of Flash. I remember reading an article from Macromedia (linked off /.) not too long ago that discussed the Flash development team's big plans. I hope that still goes off well...

Funny (1)

digidave (259925) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268893)

After years of trying to out-do each other (LiveMotion vs Flash, GoLive vs Dreamweaver, Illustrator vs Freehand, etc) they just merge.

This is bad for everyone. Now there won't be competing products and there will be no reason for Adobe Systems Inc. to keep innovating since there is no one to try to stay ahead of.

It rubs me the wrong way when when one company buys another not to grow their product line with complementary products, but to simple vanquish the competition.

Hope they don't ditch Fireworks (2, Insightful)

Deacon Jones (572246) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268897)

while most seem to prefer photoshop, I can get something up and running for the web much more quickly with Fireworks than I can with any Adobe product.

This is bad... (0, Redundant)

bcmm (768152) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268901)

No, wait... This is good!

They will integrate the flash plugin with the Acrobay PDF plugin, and flash animations will take 30 seconds to load on a 3GHz SMP machine, and THE BASTARDS WILL STOP USING FLASH!

from Macromedia and Adobe... (1, Informative)

dAzED1 (33635) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268909)

hmm...I started to submit this story, but I guess taco beat me. So I'll just post the story I submitted ;)

As reported here [bbc.co.uk] and even on Adobe [adobe.com] and Macromedia [macromedia.com] , Adobe will be aquiring Macromedia for $3.4Billion. From the Macromedia site: "The two companies are developing integration plans that build on the cultural similarities and the best business and product development practices from each company. The companies will make additional details and information about the acquisition available at http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/invrelations/adobe andmacromedia.html." [adobe.com]
With Adobe recently putting out reader 7 [slashdot.org] for linux, what should our hopes be that linux apps will be kept reasonably up to date in the integration plans?

What happens to ColdFusion? (3, Interesting)

Manan Shah (808049) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268910)

ColdFusion is a great web technology thats usually underrated by web developers. I hope Adobe continues to develop it. I prefer it over other languages such as PHP, ASP, etc. With the MX version, you can actually write java code and call the methods directly from ColdFusion. It would be a shame if it ends.

The Warez Corral (1)

dkh2 (29130) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268913)

So that means the paddock now contains
  • Studio MX (Includes Dreamweaver, Flash, Fireworks, and Freehand)
  • Macromedia's 'Web Publishing System'
  • Contribute
  • Director>
  • Flex
  • The entire Acrobat line
  • the Photoshop line
  • Illustrator
  • InDesign
  • GoLive
  • FrameMaker
  • PageMaker

Oh great ! (1)

Digital Warfare (746982) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268915)

I have to say that I am not looking forward to this at all. It wouldn't have been so bad if they were keeping the same name.
But not its obvious they want to change it all around, I guess we'll see any improvement/un-improvements soon :(

Animated PDFs? (5, Funny)

amichalo (132545) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268924)

The calculation I keep running over in my mind is:

Adobe PDF + Macromedia Flash = Annimated PDFs

Somehow I think Bill Gates is behind all this

Expensive Bloatware (4, Insightful)

superflippy (442879) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268929)

Just great. Now all my reasonably-priced Macromedia products are going to be replaces with Adobe's expensive bloatware.

Macromedia has a generous upgrade policy and great educational discounts. Adobe charges out the yin-yang for their software ($1000 for CS, can only upgrade if you own the next most recent product.)

Macromedia's web design software was built expressly for web design: Fireworks and Dreamweaver. Adobe tacked a few tools onto Photoshop (which, by the way, does not deal well at ALL with vector art, not like Fireworks does). I don't know how well GoLive works - never used it. But I know that Dreamweaver has made great efforts to allow front-end developers to create standards-compliant XHTML.

If Adobe rolls Macromedia's great software into their own mediocre offerings, I may never upgrade again.

Introducing... (1)

Grounded0 (703575) | more than 9 years ago | (#12268935)

...Adobemedia Dreamlive.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...