[G twenty-nine]

Here is the link. What do you think?

[Samutz]

Couldn't really care less. Both make good media software, so good for them.

It's not like it's a merger that would piss me off, such as G4-TechTV.

[PresidentKiller]

QUOTE (Samutz @ Apr 18 2005, 18:18)

Couldn't really care less. Both make good media software, so good for them.

Yeah, and equally expensive...

Good for them, it would be weird to call it "Adobe Flash" now though...

[Johnno]

I was going to post this just last night.

But I didn't because I thought it was irrelevant to WD&P.

We'll see how it goes

[Andy]

I'm shocked, quite frankly. Both were industry leaders, and I really didn't think Adobe would ever buy them out.

I'm interested to see where the products will go now, since both companies had industry-leading technology (of course, Adobe was for image and Macromedia was for internet technology.)

[Dalpura]

Can't wait to see the next line of products from then. Two great software companies merging must mean products that are twice as awesome as the previous, right? Doesn't bother me as long as I can keep getting the new version of Photoshop and Dreamweaver.

[PSXtreme]

Photoshop CS2 is coming out in May.
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/main.html

The Adobe/Macromedia merger doesn't sound bad, I mean, we'll get some great new products probably

[Luke]

I've always been a bigger fan of Abode than I have of Macromedia to be honest, I'm not too sure if it's going to be good or not. I remember when Adobe went and bought Cool Edit the audio thingy, didn't make much in terms of changes at first.

[Chalkstar]

QUOTE (Smithers @ Apr 20 2005, 03:01)

I've always been a bigger fan of Abode than I have of Macromedia to be honest, I'm not too sure if it's going to be good or not. I remember when Adobe went and bought Cool Edit the audio thingy, didn't make much in terms of changes at first.

I've been a bigger fan of adobe but I usually Macromedia for animation and webpages. I think it may bring them a bit more, but I think the main thing will be that now they get most of the "customers" getting their software, as they have most of the most widely used products for computer technology.

[Tank]

Rumors of PDF and Flash support in one plugin are floating about. I doubt it's true - PDF would die, at least in the business world, as businesses don't want Flash enabled on their computers.

I've never been a fan of PDF's personally. Most PDF's contain nothing more than what a HTML page could. The viewer takes too long to load.

Sure, some people abuse Flash, and give it a bad name, but Flash has good uses. Flash video is a good universal video streaming format although the codec could be much more flexible. Will Adobe undo everything Macromedia has worked towards with Flash and Flash video? This year will be interesting for Flash...

[Svip]

Tank.

Tank, you're wrong.

PDF > Flash, flash is horrible, not only because of the people who is giving it a bad name, but mainly because flash on websites is quite annoying. I want strict XHTML to view.

I mean if you had flash on your site, do you still think I would be here?

Hell no!

However, I agree with PDF in away, but PDF is better at layout and easier, plus it also have better deals when saving it for a comic or something that should be printed out, where HTML can be too large sometimes.

So PDF will live, but remember, that PDF with Flash support doesn't mean that all PDF's will have Flash.

And maybe businesses would turn over.

[Tank]

QUOTE (Svip @ Apr 22 2005, 14:54)

PDF > Flash, flash is horrible, not only because of the people who is giving it a bad name, but mainly because flash on websites is quite annoying. I want strict XHTML to view.

Personally, if something could be better explained using animation, I'd prefer to see a Flash presentation rather than countless HTML pages of static images

I only find Flash anoying on sites where I'm trying to read something - such as GTAF, Google, a news site, etc. Some sites have pretty cool implementation of Flash, such as sites built for a brand or product like movies, games, technology, etc. It just brings the subject to life. I'd hate to see Flash die, it just needs longer to mature.

[Svip]

QUOTE (Tank @ Apr 22 2005, 19:12)

QUOTE (Svip @ Apr 22 2005, 14:54) PDF > Flash, flash is horrible, not only because of the people who is giving it a bad name, but mainly because flash on websites is quite annoying. I want strict XHTML to view. Personally, if something could be better explained using animation, I'd prefer to see a Flash presentation rather than countless HTML pages of static images I only find Flash anoying on sites where I'm trying to read something - such as GTAF, Google, a news site, etc. Some sites have pretty cool implementation of Flash, such as sites built for a brand or product like movies, games, technology, etc. It just brings the subject to life. I'd hate to see Flash die, it just needs longer to mature.

True that some sites have good flash, but most sites around the web has missunderstood the idea of flash.

I agree that some stuff could be better explained in flash than in PDF.

But I like PDF because I can read stuff from there while I take my time.

And it's also easier for me, since I am not native English, and therefore speech can tend to be a bit hard at times.

While in PDF or HTML document it makes it's a lot easier.

But you can make some good stuff too in .gif format.

[Luke]

I'm no massive fan of PDF nor Flash, both of them take time to load, PDF is used for the wrong things, as is Flash. It's not like they're the only misused programs in the world though, I hate people who put together PowerPoint presentations and then just read off them, shouldn't the powerpoint be simple bullet points and the speech be detailed?

Anyway, that's besides the point. Flash is good as long as it's used properly, whole websites made in it irriate me more than anything. Dreamweaver's a good tool though, covers a broad range of abilities and languages.

[Johnno]

QUOTE

Most PDF's contain nothing more than what a HTML page could.

Quite true, but for printing, PDF has a myriad of advantages over XHTML, since few people know how to properly use print in CSS.
Plus PDF is better for business.

ie: You want to email a client some documents, with a few images.
With XHTML, you'd need to upload it to a server, or send all the pages plus all this images.
With PDF, you'd just send the one file.

[Andy]

< Adobe has a plethora of multimedia development tools. Macromedia has Flash and Dreamweaver.

The biggest thing I'm expecting (and it's about time!) is full support for .psd-format images in Flash.
/>