Microsoft buying Adobe would fix both companies' Apple problem

[Lordbob75]

Microsoft buying Adobe would fix both companies' Apple problem

The New York Times is reporting that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer has recently been at a secret meeting with Adobe CEO Shantanu Narayen to discuss topics including the two companies' mutual competitor, Apple.
The Times says that the companies were investigating ways to partner in order to do battle with Apple. One option was for Microsoft to acquire Adobe, a claim that has seen Adobe's stock price surge by more than 10 percent.
Microsoft is thought to have investigated buying Adobe some years ago, but abandoned the idea with the expectation of running into new antitrust problems. With Apple and Google now such strong competitors, such a purchase may now be a viable option. Regardless of the legal difficulties, a partnership—and, indeed, a Microsoft purchase—makes sense.

Source: Microsoft buying Adobe would fix both companies' Apple problem

~Lordbob

 

[Everlong]

Interesting.

 

[madtownidiot]

I avoid adobe products at every opportunity. Most of the system load when you run any of their software is due to Adobe's ridiculous antipiracy measures. If you also have an effective firewall and antimalware setup, Adobe software won't load unless you create exceptions for hundreds of files, & even the built in windows security doesn't like Adobe's intrusive measures. Most of the effort that went into the development of their products probably went into creating the "it doesn't work when it can't phone home" feature, which checks the license key about 5 times a minute, and therefore accounts for most of the price of the software.. an open source version of the CS5 master suite could probably run on a northwood celeron if the RAM, GPU and HDD were adequate for the task

 

[HammerHead]

Ditto

The idiot is correct in my opinon. I got rid of the Adobe reader but had to reload it because two sites I use would not present a pdf for viewing or download unless you had Adobe loaded. Sad but true.

 

[madtownidiot]

They would probably sell a lot more of their software and make a lot more money in the process if they stopped trying so hard to protect it and instead offered something that would run well on nearly any machine and gave it a reasonable price

 

[Lordbob75]

The idiot is correct in my opinon.

This is an awesome sentence.

Anyways, I do agree. The Anti-Piracy thing is getting ridiculous.

~Lordbob

 

[madtownidiot]

When it costs $2500 to install software that uses the same kind of coding that malicious software uses.. it's not worth it

 

[HammerHead]

Idiotic Software

The idiot is correct in my opinon.

This is an awesome sentence.

Anyways, I do agree. The Anti-Piracy thing is getting ridiculous.

~Lordbob

It's BLOATED, doesn't play well with a lot of OS's and hardware and severely overpriced. Maybe MS could put it on more friendly ground. But until that happens I will continue to avoid it.

 

[Lordbob75]

The idiot is correct in my opinon.

This is an awesome sentence.

Anyways, I do agree. The Anti-Piracy thing is getting ridiculous.

~Lordbob

It's BLOATED, doesn't play well with a lot of OS's and hardware and severely overpriced. Maybe MS could put it on more friendly ground. But until that happens I will continue to avoid it.

I doubt that they would.

~Lordbob

 

[madtownidiot]

Maybe MS could put it on more friendly ground.

I wouldn't count on it.
Anyone care to speculate on the percentage of system resources Windows 7 and all other microsoft products wasted in processes that don't directly benefit the end user and/or delay the use of features people paid for? Don't get me wrong, I think windows 7 is by far the the best proprietary operating system ever, but if it were open source, the minimum requirements would be about the same as for 64 bit kubuntu or maybe even a little lower, as windows uses a simpler and less secure file system.

 

[Layback Bear]

If Microsoft Windows was open source then almost all computers would running Windows; wait a minute most computers are running a Microsoft Windows now.

 

[madtownidiot]

Hmm.. why is that?? oh wait... it's because you can't buy most computers unless you pay for windows too.

 

[Dinesh]

If I find a proper free alternative of Adobe's Photoshop application, I will quit using Adobe.

Edit: With the arrival of HTML5, adobe has already lost their market for flash.

 

[Lordbob75]

Hmm.. why is that?? oh wait... it's because you can't buy most computers unless you pay for windows too.

I bought my laptop with a blank HDD. Saved $200 too, I was quite pleased.

If I find a proper free alternative of Adobe's Photoshop application, I will quit using Adobe.

Edit: With the arrival of HTML5, adobe has already lost their market for flash.

Paint.NET?

~Lordbob

 

[CarlTR6]

I avoid adobe products at every opportunity. Most of the system load when you run any of their software is due to Adobe's ridiculous antipiracy measures. If you also have an effective firewall and antimalware setup, Adobe software won't load unless you create exceptions for hundreds of files, & even the built in windows security doesn't like Adobe's intrusive measures. Most of the effort that went into the development of their products probably went into creating the "it doesn't work when it can't phone home" feature, which checks the license key about 5 times a minute, and therefore accounts for most of the price of the software.. an open source version of the CS5 master suite could probably run on a northwood celeron if the RAM, GPU and HDD were adequate for the task

I am another who avoids Adobe at every opportunity.

 

[Dinesh]

Hmm.. why is that?? oh wait... it's because you can't buy most computers unless you pay for windows too.

I bought my laptop with a blank HDD. Saved $200 too, I was quite pleased.

If I find a proper free alternative of Adobe's Photoshop application, I will quit using Adobe.

Edit: With the arrival of HTML5, adobe has already lost their market for flash.

Paint.NET?

~Lordbob

Nope. Things like Paint.NET and GIMP cant beat photoshop.

 

[xarden]

The Adobe Suite is the bee's knees. Its for the hardcore pro's.
I personally never liked Gimp from the get go, but Paint.Net IMO is the next best thing to Photoshop. It will do anything you want it to do, if all you want to do edit/layer/mutate photos and make them look fantastic. Its what MSPaint should be.

As for Illustrator, I'm yet to find a good alternative for the Windows platform.

Everything else in the Adobe Suite is hardcore. And if you're hardcore enough to use it, you really should be looking at the professional gear instead. (Soundbooth vs Hardware based mixing/recording gear, Premier vs hardware based video editing gear, as examples)

IF MS do go and aquire Adobe, then Windows 8 or 9 could probably see some interesting features, including a 25GB base install.
(Guestimate based on the fact the full install of Master Collection Suite is 30GB)

 

[Skulblaka]

Yay... Adobe Flash Player... ... Adobe Photoshop... :huh: ...

 

[windows7user]

I wouldn't mind having Adobe Photoshop (or Photoshop Elements) and Flash bundled in with Windows (replacing Microsoft Paint and Silverlight respectively).

 

[Dinesh]

I wouldn't mind having Adobe Photoshop (or Photoshop Elements) and Flash bundled in with Windows (replacing Microsoft Paint and Silverlight respectively).

Then the cost of windows will be in thousands.