f13.net

Article here (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204358004577027923205009352.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLETopStories).  

I am so fucking happy about this.  :awesome_for_real:  I'm not knowledgeable about all the ins and outs of whether it is actually a decent platform for mobile devices or not, but hopefully this will motivate people to go to something that will actually work on a tablet or phone.  

In other discussion, I think I would sell my Adobe stock if I owned any.  They seem like the dinosaur in the building.  

I can't get Fireworks through our non-profit software house and support for my old version ended with OSX 10.7. I've been done with Adobe for a couple months now. I guess I /could/ get it, if I put out $170 for the entire development bundle  :oh_i_see: (Which I imagine must sound good to for-profit folks, but I'm used to paying around $20 for software)

I miss Fireworks, but they weren't putting much into the development and between GIMP and Word (yeah...Word!) I can do everything I did in Fireworks, just more labor intense.

Adobe is in a really weird place IMO.

On one hand mobile platforms are bad for Flash. On the other hand basically every "social game" on something like Facebook is done in Flash.

You figure those are in many ways similar markets that would converge, but so far that isn't happening, it's not clear what they would converge on, and I'm not sure the markets are even that similar any more.

They also have a good chunk of their business wrapped up in other seemingly outdated stuff.  The creative suites are nice, but how long will it be until somebody comes up with something that is equally good yet web or subscription based?

I wouldn't mind if AIR worked better, so you could make mobile applications across all phone platforms without a lot of recoding.

It's not. Flash has gotten extremely bloated over the last few years. It used to be easy to develop for, then they added a shitload of layers for scripting that fucked it all up and the only thing it's been good for lately is video. With HTML5, there's not even a need for it to do that.

I can tell, none of you are in the digital art field.

Web design. Flash is a blight on my business and I've been telling clients for years not to add it to their site in any capacity other than video. It's time has fucking passed.

Photoshop, Dreamweaver and the Creative Suite, however, are still the bee's knees.

A long, long time.  

There would have to be a major shift in the creative enterprises to prompt a death of the creative suites.  We're talking something that hits Graphics Design, Photography, Architectural Design, Industrial Design and that's before you get to the web & tech side of things.

There's been people who have tried, but all I've ever seen is responses cached with "well it's ok if you want to save money but as a professional..." or "it's just not as good as <adobe product>".

It hasn't passed. lol. Also, i think you guys are selectively reading here. This is about one single use for it, that is not how is moving to be used in that space ANYWAY.


This is not "We will be depreciating flash", this is a "there are better options for the mobile space, flashing still being one of them when used with other frameworks". Something they have been moving to for years now.

To each his own though, also, who uses fireworks anymore?  :awesome_for_real:

Yes, I'm purely an internet end-user.  I have used Acrobat some, but not enough to really know what I'm doing.  I just cannot imagine that with all the changes we are seeing in the way people compute that there won't be some radical changes in the way the content is produced.  Adobe will certainly have to change their business model to keep up with the times or they'll end up like Eastman-Kodak with digital cameras.

:oh_i_see:

What else would I use? GIMP is ok but clunky, Photoshop is expensive, overkill, and clunky. Fireworks is easy to use, flexible and cheap.

Acrobat?

Heh, PDFs are becoming MORE prevelant, not less.  Microsoft, Autodesk and a few others have taken a swing and all missed or never caught on.  Folks like and understand PDFs, despite there being better options for certain applications.  No, for digital paper at the least they're going to be around for a while.

Maybe so.  I'm just postulating here.  It very well may be Adobe that comes out with something more usable.  I'm not terribly happy with the security on PDFs.  I would like to see something better come out for my office purposes. 

Illustrator?

 :facepalm:

What? Fireworks was always Macromedia's answer to Illustrator anyway. It depends on what you are doing anyway.

HTML5 is not ready for prime-time when it comes to games.

This is Adobe's Qwikster.


We've deployed millions of downloads to Android using AIR. It works great. If I cared about iOS devices we would have deployed them there as well.


HTML5's audio tag still doesn't work in Android's 2.2 web browser.

Fireworks was a play specifically for that web graphics market, that fit an odd niche of raster editor with some vector features that rendered to bitmap without being Photoshop's (at the time) clunky paths bullshit.

Adobe already has a sub-based option for their flagship applications.

I enjoy being able to comfortably use websites that contain Flash on my Samsung Galaxy S II (Android). I've never noticed a problem with Flash on it. Compared to constantly being pissed off that the Flash parts of websites don't work on my iPad. So as an end user I find this announcement weird (though I do agree Flash is a blight on the web and needs to die, I'm not sure why Adobe would kill it when it's working fine for me, at a time when more people are going to have phones like mine).

They do? (http://www.adobe.com/products/catalog/services.html)

I'm not able to find anything other than that on their main store or in the small business store (http://volumelicensing.adobe.com/DRHM/store?Action=DisplayCategoryProductListPage&SiteID=adbevlus&Locale=en_US&CallingPageID=CategoryProductListPage&Env=BASE&startIndex=0&categoryID=11612900). 

Unless you're talking about their "Cumulative Licensing Program", which doesn't really sound like a sub option.  I didn't look at it enough to know the details when I was considering purchasing a couple of Adobe products for the office, but it appears geared towards folks different than me. 

Huh?  This doesn't affect AIR, in fact they are doing this to focus more on AIR.  What they are abandoning is the attempts to keep development efforts on the mobile browser flash plugins, since it's inefficient and the current generation of flash plugins on Android and Blackberry are pretty craptacular.

Also,

Adobe Edge (http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/edge/)

You mentioned "I wouldn't mind if AIR worked better, so you could make mobile applications across all phone platforms without a lot of recoding.". And I was basically saying AIR already does that pretty well unless you're talking about some of the more device specific APIs.

The mobile browser flash plugins already work great for us.

Oh, I phrased it badly.  By "if AIR worked better" I meant more in regards that I've heard that AIR apps on iOS have performance issues, but I haven't been able yet to try it out for myself. 

Now if all these sites would also adopt the HTML5 video tag... It shouldn't be that hard. A fucking dumb script checking the user agent can inject it instead an object tag loading fucking Flash. But apparently, it is rocket science.

Last I saw, HTML5 video tag didn't really support DRM'ed video streams, so yeah it's a lot harder for a lot of sites then you make it out to be.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWFObject

HTML5 drm is being done but it is all custom.

HTML5 video is still if this browser do this, if that browser do that, etc.

HTML5 video tag is unique to each browser.  There is no standard at this time when one really does real work with it.

I will be so glad when the HTML 5 standard is done and the only issue we have to worry about is how Microsoft ignores it.

At the usual browser release rates, it'll be years before there's a common standard platform there.

Not like we've reached standards on HTML stuff released a decade ago, either...