# Adobe BOUGHT Macromedia! Holy Hell!



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/invrelations/adobeandmacromedia.html


----------



## NBiBooker (Apr 3, 2004)

That's one way to corner the web market.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

BOOM!

Man, who saw this coming... let's hope Adobe doesn't screw this up.


----------



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

I thought about the idea.. I just didn't think it would ever happen


----------



## jtmac (Apr 23, 2003)

This is HUGE news and right after they dissappointed GoLive users with CS2 having no dynamic content. Things are making a bit more sense now.
IMO, this is all about getting Flash.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

HOLY CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GoLive Dreamweaver? MacroLive? GoWeaver? DreamLive?


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

hope this isn't bad as my whole business is based on macromedia products.


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

Hmm.. not sure if I like this piece of news or not. Hopefully Adobe doesn't screw this up, as MannyP stated.


----------



## MacGenius (Nov 13, 2001)

Big news indeed. I just hope Adobe can improve the atrocious GUI in Dreamweaver. It's the main reason I use Golive. I can't stand Macromedia's UI design.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

I like Adobe's interfaces, moreso than Macromedia, however I hope they don't bastardize the apps into becoming a rehashed amalgamation of GoLive/LiveMotion (maybe call it GoDream/LiveFlash ha ha.) There's a reason why Flash and Dreamweaver are as popular as they are, and I hope Adobe doesn't screw it up.

I wonder if this means Adobe could close the .SWF format?


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

Woah...Talk about a News "Flash"


----------



## InsomniMac (Apr 1, 2005)

*MeSoo Not Like Dis -Jar Jar Stinks*

This is not good... now LiveMotion has no hope in hell at a resurection  

Butt really... I don't think I like this much.

Bad for the graphics world as these two companies have pushed each other to develop better products to compete with each other each and every upgrade for the benefit of us consumers.

Might not be good for the Mac universe either.... PC people are dominating the web these days and Adobe might in unwisdom not develop future Mac web sw  ala Premiere. Could happen.

Can you say Air Canada buys Canadian?

Oh well, at least MS didn't get them  (Adobe=The new MS?  )


InsomniMac

-"Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after me" -Phillip K. Dick


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

The good news is, for now, it still needs approval.


----------



## Ohenri (Nov 7, 2002)

MacGenius said:


> Big news indeed. I just hope Adobe can improve the atrocious GUI in Dreamweaver. It's the main reason I use Golive. I can't stand Macromedia's UI design.


No doubt. I am far from lazy, and can usually find my way around some new apps, but I had a headache running DreamWeaver/Flash. I know that they're both awesome apps, but they are not the easiest to master. And they ones who have, are the ones laughing (to the bank maybe )

Anyhow, this is wild! 

** edit: the Adobe stock was down almost $5, where as the Macromedia share price was up just over $4 as of 9.27 this AM as per CNBC. **

H!


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Yes Holy Hell...

Any time competition goes away it's a bad thing. 
If I remember correctly FCP came from an aborted Macromedia project...

Let's hope this gives room for some new software to compete against this new juggernaut.
Does not mean higher prices for creative suites?


----------



## capitalK (Oct 21, 2003)

Maybe Adobe will resurrect Fontographer and SoundEdit 16


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Adobe's and Macromedia's support for the Mac has been wavering and at times you feel that they don't really care about the Mac market. Wonder how that will play out long term... Will they put the programming effort into optimized code and parity between plateforms...


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

In my experiences with both firms, Adobe has been quite good and Macromedia essentially useless. Support and documentation are two areas Macromedia needed attention paid to, but it never seemed to happen.

My gut feeling is it will be good for Macromedia customers. I'm not sure what it means for the apps people depend on, which is probably the only areas where there is a potential downside.

On a positive note, since Macromedia was a relatively small company, with poor profits (when they were not losses) and on generally shaky ground financially, this adds some needed stability.

Once the smoke clears we should have a better idea what it means for those who depend on Macromedia products. We might see Adobe apps become much more interoperable with Macromedia formats, for example. Flash is here to stay, I would guess, and Dreamweaver/Contribute will probably survive, perhaps for the better. The rest I can't really say.


----------



## Pamela (Feb 20, 2003)

Ohenri said:


> No doubt. I am far from lazy, and can usually find my way around some new apps, but I had a headache running DreamWeaver/Flash. I know that they're both awesome apps, but they are not the easiest to master. And they ones who have, are the ones laughing (to the bank maybe )
> H!


LOL! oh yeah, and Photoshop is the eeeeasiest program to learn....not!

Maybe I'm a reverse genius, but I LOVE macromedia products. I find them WAY more intuitive than adobe products ANY day of the week...

This is nothing but bad news.

Why on earth would macromedia sell? Don't tell me they are losing money??


----------



## TroutMaskReplica (Feb 28, 2003)

my prediction: golive, fireworks, freehand - dead.


----------



## MacME (Mar 15, 2005)

TroutMaskReplica said:


> my prediction: golive, fireworks, freehand - dead.


i would concur with that prediction. i've always liked macromedia products. loved dreamweaver, and flash was always a lot like director.

as mentioned, at least it wasn't M$!


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

Pamela: I think it's the direction Macromedia is beginning to take: They're going against Microsoft's web publishing/online delivery tools. It looks like it's a friendly buyout in the sense Macromedia is selling out to Adobe in order for them to team up and compete against Gates & Co.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Doesn't make a heck of a lot of financial sense to can products upon merging. Some will be integrated but many people own both CS and the Macromedia suite. Half the revenue??? Expect to see more product differentiation instead (and collective milking). The CS improvements have been mediocre and the loss of competition is a bummer.

Apple is sitting on a pile of cash. Methinks they will be further tempted to splash out - but on what? They must be tracking their vulmerabilities to Adobe. I can see a pro version of iPhoto that is a PhotoShop competitor and Pages is essentially a crude page-layout app.

Interesting developments.....


----------



## TroutMaskReplica (Feb 28, 2003)

it makes sense to kill underperforming products when they're competing against products you already own.

pages is a word processor and iphoto is an underpowered image organiser, i don't see how they compete with adobe cs.


----------



## farfisa (Nov 5, 2003)

Holy hell? That's just a bizarre combination of words, dude.

Apple should have bought them--that would have been more interesting, especially considering their recent penchant to pissing off Adobe by creating their own products. 

Seriously though, Flash is my bread and butter and I've always been a little miffed that its content performs way faster on PC's. Flash MX was really buggy on the Mac too, making me think that Macromedia wasn't concentrating too much on Mac development (MX2004 is a lot better). And their documentation is always a bit lacking, and often full of mistakes. On the other hand, Adobe products have always been rock solid on Macs, so it could be a good thing for the Mac end.

Agree with TMR too--GoLive, Freehand and Fireworks are looking very redundant, clearly the underdogs in the market.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

I worry that the loss of competition might be a generally bad thing.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Whatever happened to Aldus products? Hmmm... Who's next? Quark?


----------



## Pamela (Feb 20, 2003)

farfisa said:


> Seriously though, Flash is my bread and butter and I've always been a little miffed that its content performs way faster on PC's. Flash MX was really buggy on the Mac too, making me think that Macromedia wasn't concentrating too much on Mac development (MX2004 is a lot better). And their documentation is always a bit lacking, and often full of mistakes.


Funny you say that farfisa because guess which program made me switch to the mac in the first place? You guessed it...flash. I was working on a project at school and Flash looked so $hitty on my pc. I saw the guy next to me using a mac and it all just looked so....clean, if I had to find a word. That's when I started researching and decided to make the switch. To this day I still have a fondness for using Flash on my mac....*sniff sniff* lol!

You're right though...Apple should have bought macromedia. That would have been kick ass.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

I hate to say this, but I'd rather adobe than Apple.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

TroutMaskReplica said:


> it makes sense to kill underperforming products when they're competing against products you already own.
> 
> pages is a word processor and iphoto is an underpowered image organiser, i don't see how they compete with adobe cs.


Pages is far more of a page layout app than a word processor (and its version 1). iPhoto is clearly an image organizer but with version 5 comes with more sophisticated image correction tools. It would not be difficult for Apple to develop a more sophisticated iPhoto Pro which had similar tools to PhotoShop (and charge a similar premium price). Neither directly compete with Adobe CS (Indesign/Photoshop respectively) as consumer apps but they could - just like Apple has "pro versions" of Garageband and iDVD.

As for underperforming products, the revenue of the combined company is bound to be less than the two independent companies if they stop selling products. The key to success will be in winning marketshare from other companies (e.g. Microsoft, etc.). I'm not at all sure this is a good move but I guess we'll see.

Apple couldn't have bought Macromedia without declaring outright war on Adobe. Why piss Adobe and the entire creative professional clientele off?


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

CNN is calling it a "merger", not a buyout. In fact, they're calling it a "3 billion dollar merger".

Must be counting the stock values or something, although 3 billion is roughly 10 times Macromedia's annual earnings, a fairly widely quoted ballpark to value a business.

There might be more to this as the day progresses.


----------



## farfisa (Nov 5, 2003)

Pamela--everything looks better on a Mac!
I'm thinking Macromedia didn't make the switch to X very well--their first carbonized version was MX (6) and it would crash all the time and freeze when you were trying to edit very long scripts. It also had very few updates. I think it was more reliable in OS9, but everything else rocked in X.

When I got my G5, I was impressed by the speed, but a lot of thrown-together PCs could view Fash content better. I still don't think the flash player plugin is optimized for Macs.

...and you're right groovetube--Apple would drive it into the ground, spending 90% of their research budget on developing new icons.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

let's remember the debacle that was flash 5 on OS 9.

*shudder*


----------



## farfisa (Nov 5, 2003)

I think Flash 3 was pretty solid...


----------



## TroutMaskReplica (Feb 28, 2003)

jwoodget, i guess we have to agree to disagree.

i second your comment regarding why apple could never buy macromedia. look what happened on the video side when apple got a little too ambitious - adobe pulled the plug on premiere: http://www.macobserver.com/article/2003/07/16.14.shtml


----------



## agent4321 (Jun 25, 2004)

TroutMaskReplica said:


> freehand - dead.


That would be a crying shame...If they merged Illustrator and Freehand into one kick a$$ app that would be cool. But if they outright ditch Freehand that would suck! But of course they will cause they will have the power to do so. All these companies merging into one giant empire is starting to get me a little worried can you say M-O-N-O-P-O-L-Y not good for the consumer.


----------



## TroutMaskReplica (Feb 28, 2003)

as an illustrator user i would go berserk if they tried to merge it with freehand. can't really see it happening though.


----------



## Ryankop (Apr 17, 2005)

Merging with Freehand?!

The horror!


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

The "Canadian" view:


ITbusiness.ca said:


> *Canadian developers shocked by Flash sale*
> 
> 4/18/2005 5:00:00 PM - Adobe's purchase of Macromedia caught several professionals off-guard and has them wondering what will happen to the popular Web tool. Executives chart a course and clear up some of the rumours.
> 
> ...


----------



## da_jonesy (Jun 26, 2003)

Well I would say it's a fair arguement that Freehand will be EOL'd


----------



## shoe (Apr 6, 2005)

im surprised only 1 person briefly touched on the "monopoly" issue

no competition hey we can jack up the price on the creative suite products now what ya gonna do? go to corel haha NO! you will pay more for our profesional products maybe.

makes ya kinda wonder whatthe next adobe cs3 pacage will look like after reading this news.

what i would do if i was an adobe guy sitting way up on the top floor is say ok keep both names.

Print products eg Photoshop illustrator are adobe

web products eg flash and dreamweaver are macromedia

everything else that fits inbetween eg web optimization eg imageready/fireworks or video products adobe name as well.

basically make macromedia the web specialists

but hey thats just me

shoe


----------



## sketch (Sep 10, 2004)

I'm just wondering though... I'm probably jumping the gun here but what if this spells the beginning of the end of Apple? I mean, if Adobe and Macromedia are trying to compete against Microsoft and they're neglecting Mac users (as I've read others claim), plus, I forsee Longhorn being pretty much an OS X clone with their own version of iLife. Since the world uses Windows, they'll gladly upgrade to Longhorn (I mean, they did upgrade up to XP all this time).

Will this mean that Mac will turn into Linux? I mean, more of a hobby/niche computer platform?

I know I'm missing something here. I assume Apple will come out with more innovations that will blow everybody's minds but I can't shake the feeling that Adobe is really trying to target windows users.

the iPod can only go so far and by the end of th eyear, I'm sure we'll see lots of Mac Mini clones for the PC. 

AND I JUST BOUGHT BOTH ADOBE AND MACROMEDIA STUDIO! ARG!


----------



## enaj (Aug 26, 2004)

sketch said:


> I'm just wondering though... I'm probably jumping the gun here but what if this spells the beginning of the end of Apple? I mean, if Adobe and Macromedia are trying to compete against Microsoft and they're neglecting Mac users (as I've read others claim), plus, I forsee Longhorn being pretty much an OS X clone with their own version of iLife. Since the world uses Windows, they'll gladly upgrade to Longhorn (I mean, they did upgrade up to XP all this time).
> 
> Will this mean that Mac will turn into Linux? I mean, more of a hobby/niche computer platform?
> 
> ...


Apple is an innovative company. By the time Longhorn comes out (2006), imagine what Apple will release then. Just think, while they have been developing Longhorn, Apple has released Tiger, iLife 4&5, Motion, FCPHD, iPod shuffle, mini, MacMini, etc. Yes, Longhorn will have it's legions of fans, but being a new Mac user myself, they just don't know what's better on the other side. All pc'ers hear is that mac is incompatible, etc...
I have faith is Steve Jobs. Is that blind faith? Only time will tell.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

sketch said:


> I know I'm missing something here. I assume Apple will come out with more innovations that will blow everybody's minds but I can't shake the feeling that Adobe is really trying to target windows users.


You don't have to shake that feeling - Adobe recommends PCs for best performance. 
And why would they not target windows users, after all , it's a bigger marketshare.


----------



## Vexel (Jan 30, 2005)

Adobe would be silly if they start weaning the Mac side of things.. they also know that about 90% of the companies in Design/Print work use Mac's. And Obviously, that 90% who already use the Mac... aren't about to switch up for Longhorn  ... The Mac will hold it's own.. as it always does.. Especially with Steve sitting in the Captains seat. Not many give him credit where the credit is due.


----------



## TroutMaskReplica (Feb 28, 2003)

> Adobe would be silly if they start weaning the Mac side of things.. they also know that about 90% of the companies in Design/Print work use Mac's.


hence adobe's broad strategy. appeal to non pro pc users by bloating up and then dumbing down. the machead's then become less important.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

I was reading about the CEOs of both Adobe and Macromedia both being Canadians and McMaster University grads. Isn't the CEO of Yahoo! a Canadian too? 

Makes me proud to be a Canadian (except for Bernie Ebbers).


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

Vexel said:


> Adobe would be silly if they start weaning the Mac side of things..


Premiere, ATM, Acrobat Pro not having parity with it's windows counterpart.
Where are the Mac version of Encore or Audion, or Acrobat Messenger?

Of course there iLife does a better job than Photoshop Elements andPremiere Elements but they are not available for the Mac....

As for the 90% of design firms using Mac, I'd like to see real numbers -


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

I don't know about Audion or the parity issues with Acrobat, but with regards to Encore and Premiere:

Adobe Encore: DVD Studio Pro undercuts the price, and is a much better product. iDVD is an even cheaper direct solution to the consumer market.
Adobe Premiere: Final Cut Express/iMovie also is cheaper, and are much better products.

I understand the idea of choice being the ideal situation, but Adobe would lose money for porting both products to Mac... Apple has a huge advantage in these instances.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

« MannyP Design » said:


> I don't know about Audion or the parity issues with Acrobat, but with regards to Encore and Premiere:
> 
> Adobe Encore: DVD Studio Pro undercuts the price, and is a much better product. iDVD is an even cheaper direct solution to the consumer market.
> Adobe Premiere: Final Cut Express/iMovie also is cheaper, and are much better products.
> ...


Manny,
Encore and DVD SP are fairly even. Encore has better integration with Adobe products (naturally...)
As for Premiere/FCE/iMovie I strongly disagree that these are better products.
iMovie is not even close to Premiere. 
As for Premiere/FCE, I'll take Premiere any time. Most will find them even.

Apple does have an advantage mostly because of the lack of viable choices.
FinalCut was at first a Macromedia product development.

I find that Apple branded software does take time to get up to par on the professional level. Losing competition such as Adobe/Macromedia is not good.
In the long run, it is software that is important, no matter how good the Mac OS is.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

I've not used the most recent versions of Premiere (for obvious reasons) however, from past experiences with the last versions before leaving the Mac OS, Premiere was the buggiest piece of ****e I had ever worked with. And I'm being nice when I say that.  Constant crashes, lack of consistency, preview/final output quality discrepencies... and the list goes on.

iMovie, for it's price and userbase, cuts very deeply into Premiere's core userbase (or at least it did before Adobe pulled the plug.) What functionality that iMovie initially lacks, compared to Premiere's tools, is offset with the growing 3rd party developers. It's easier to use, and yeilds _almost_ the same results -- in HD now, no less. 

Encore is a prosumer product that's still going through growing pains (slow transcoding, some susbtitle/stability issues. It's not quite as close to DVD Studio Pro as you believe (it's more of a step between iDVD and DVD SP that offers a little more than iDVD, but not enough to for high-end work that DVD SP can produce.) Obviosly, these are things that get addressed with each release, but DVD SP 4 has show a greater leap between the two packages. IMHO of course.


----------



## grafico (Mar 25, 2005)

I just got 15" Powerbook this past Friday (i am ecstactic, but i'll save that for another thread). I also ordered the new CS2. I have since cancelled my order , which i hope was the right thing to do. But this deal won't be finalized, pending approval of course, until the Fall or early next year. I am pretty anxious to see what will come of it. 

Who can guess as to what will come first?

Adobe Macromedia CS3??

or 

Powerbook G5*


----------



## MacME (Mar 15, 2005)

sketch said:


> Will this mean that Mac will turn into Linux? I mean, more of a hobby/niche computer platform?


sorry to say this, and i'm sure i'm gonna offend some ppl and receive some flack. but isn't that what it is now???


----------



## Ryankop (Apr 17, 2005)

grafico said:


> I just got 15" Powerbook this past Friday (i am ecstactic, but i'll save that for another thread). I also ordered the new CS2. I have since cancelled my order , which i hope was the right thing to do. But this deal won't be finalized, pending approval of course, until the Fall or early next year. I am pretty anxious to see what will come of it.
> 
> Who can guess as to what will come first?
> 
> ...


I think the PowerBook G5 series will come out first. They just need to get the overheating problem fixed.


----------



## grafico (Mar 25, 2005)

MacME said:


> sorry to say this, and i'm sure i'm gonna offend some ppl and receive some flack. but isn't that what it is now???


I tend to agree with you, but i hope that the Mac mini gets rid of that.


----------



## SpanishJoe (Jul 9, 2001)

> sorry to say this, and i'm sure i'm gonna offend some ppl and receive some flack. but isn't that what it is now???



OMG IM SO OFFENDED U R LIKE HITLER

LINUX AND APPLE R THE SAME 4 GIRLS AND GRANMAS HAH LOL



Just joking... not offended at all, BUT- the stats are ALWAYS skewed: the actual number of home-use computers (not counting office drones) is around 30% Mac. There are 25 MILLION mac users. There are roughly 102M households with a computer in the US. I have no idea what that works out to in Canada. Doesn't sound like a "niche" to me... source: http://www.lowendmac.com/musings/statistics.shtml


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

Don't know if you guys saw this or not, but take a gander:

Translation From PR-Speak to English of Selected Portions of Adobe’s ‘FAQ’ Regarding Their Acquisition of Macromedia

It's actually quite funny.


----------



## SpanishJoe (Jul 9, 2001)

*More opportunity here*

I just wanted to say that there might be a bright side to all of this. When there is reduced competition, it allows newer, more interesting products to thrive - sort of like taking old-growth out of a forest so that the smaller trees can get more light.

The smaller trees are:

-Canvas
-Stone Studio
-Freeway Pro
-OpenOffice
-Built-in acrobat-free PDF creation function (Quartz)
-Other animation software OTHER than flash

In my experience, the absorption of a program into the Borg cube that is Adobe only strengthens the rebels. When FrameMaker dissappeared (RIP, my friend), Pages, QuarkExpress, Nisus Writer - they all got far more attractive.

-SJ.


----------



## Nyxks (Apr 18, 2005)

Well now they can give microsoft a run for their money, since well Adobe support both platforms (well to a degree). Who knows maybe Apple and Microsoft will merge (shutters at the idea of it).

Umm better yet, lets keep mac safe, drop the idea of merging with Windows .. more like windows merge with Apple .. lol


----------



## agent4321 (Jun 25, 2004)

PosterBoy said:


> Don't know if you guys saw this or not, but take a gander:
> 
> Translation From PR-Speak to English of Selected Portions of Adobe’s ‘FAQ’ Regarding Their Acquisition of Macromedia
> 
> It's actually quite funny.



It's funny but you know what, most of it is likely the truth.


----------

