Naughty Adobe

Rhisiart

Rhisiart

Registered
I own Indesign 2, Acrobat 5, Photoshop 7 and GoLive CS1. Recently, I decided to upgrade all four.

Upgrading to InDesign CS3 and Photoshop CS3 has been a good investment.

Adobe UK store only allowed me to upgrade from Acrobat 5 to Acrobat Professional 8 at a cost of £163 / $320. A bit steep for extra functions I don't need.

The upgrade to GoLive 9 (note: not GoLive CS3) has been a disaster. Another $320 and a total waste of money. I have now uninstalled it and reinstalled CS1 (thankfully my new Intel Mac Mini copes with the earlier version OK).

Adobe 9 seems to have more bugs in than a stale kebab left in an open garbage bag. Its configured so much to work like Photoshop CS3 that it has become almost unworkable (what works for image editing isn't necessarily good for a WYSIWYG editor).

Adobe's website doesn't inform you that they intend to drop GoLIve. Dreamweaver is obviously their main html editor now (and is CS).

Adobe is not playing fair here. Groan.
 
Hm. So you think they should, after going the distance to update GoLive to a version that fits the Creative Suite 3 very well, tell potential upgraders to stay away from it, because you "might feel it sucks"? Do you _really_ expect them to?

That Adobe was going with Dreamweaver instead of GoLive was talked about since the Adobe/Macromedia takeover/merger. It was clear about 8-12 months before the release of GoLive 9. The inclusion of Dreamweaver in Adobe's Creative Suite 3 should have been more than a hint, it should have made it _abundantly_ clear.

Adobe offers you a downloadable demo version you could've used for 30 days. EXACTLY what you did with the version you bought.

I'm not sure, but personally, I feel that Adobe played fair alright here. They haven't been naughty, you've acted without thinking things over clearly.

That said, I have my own gripes with Adobe nowadays, and I also don't feel like GoLive 9 is what it should've been. Then again I don't need it much nowadays (in any version).
 
fryke said:
Hm. So you think they should, after going the distance to update GoLive to a version that fits the Creative Suite 3 very well, tell potential upgraders to stay away from it, because you "might feel it sucks"? Do you _really_ expect them to?
Click to expand...
If it does not fit the Creative Suite to 'CS' standards, then it is not fit for purpose. I accept of course that this is my own opinion, but what are forums for if not to express the same?

fryke said:
That Adobe was going with Dreamweaver instead of GoLive was talked about since the Adobe/Macromedia takeover/merger. It was clear about 8-12 months before the release of GoLive 9. The inclusion of Dreamweaver in Adobe's Creative Suite 3 should have been more than a hint, it should have made it _abundantly_ clear.
Click to expand...
What would have been better would have been for Adobe to show a little more probity by making a clear statement a year ago of their intentions. Of course, if they were undecided then it would be fine to go ahead with an upgrade, if - as I say above - it was fit for purpose. I doubt they were though.

fryke said:
Adobe offers you a downloadable demo version you could've used for 30 days. EXACTLY what you did with the version you bought.
Click to expand...
It takes some time to test these things out properly (e.g. Leopard). The alternative was to pay for a full version of DW (which would take some time to familiarise with) at a cost of $800 or stick with CS1. I trusted Adobe and I feel a little let down.

fryke said:
...you've acted without thinking things over clearly...
Click to expand...
That's a little unfair.

fryke said:
That said, I have my own gripes with Adobe nowadays, and I also don't feel like GoLive 9 is what it should've been.
Click to expand...
Well that's my point.
 
Last edited:
I realize this is a little off-topic, but I came across a bit of information regarding CS3 which also seemed to fit the "Naughty Adobe" title. Admittedly this might be old news to those who already know, but I thought I should still mention it for those who might not be aware. From Adobe's own Support section of their web site:

http://www.adobe.com/go/kb402033

Adobe said:
During the installation, the Adobe installer sets up controlled access to the Version Cue CS3 Server through specific ports in the personal firewall. To be granted access to these ports, the installer first turns off the personal firewall. After the installation is complete, the Adobe installer does not automatically re-activate the firewall.
Click to expand...

There's also a brief discussion at Ars Technica.

So... the installer switches off your firewall and does not switch it back on again? I find that rather appalling, to be honest.
 
The GoLive page on the Adobe UK web site does suggest you consider purchasing DW instead of GoLive 9 (I saw it when I bought the latter). Basically it was a choice between upgrading to version 9 for £170 or buying DW CS3 for £400. I simply made the wrong choice.

Fryke's comment about testing the demo first was a tad harsh. I did find some quirks initially, but it has only been over time that the really irritating faults have appeared (such as changes not being saved properly when files are closed). I have had really good experiences with Adobe in the past and I trusted that GoLive 9 would be better than it is.

I think it would have been fairer for Adobe to stop GoLive at CS2(8) and inform its loyal customers that the next version would be Dreamweaver CS3, which they can upgrade to as if they were upgrading from DW CS2.

Perhaps Adobe will issue an update to GoLive 9 that might iron out some of the problems I have encountered.
 
Hm. I find 30 days to be adequate for testing quite a few things. You've used the words "harsh" twice, so I guess you're expecting an apology. I know that I can come across quite biased and direct, but I felt, from what you wrote, that your decision wasn't based on experience with the demo. I guess I was wrong. For that I apologise. :)
 
fryke said:
You've used the words "harsh" twice, so I guess you're expecting an apology.
Click to expand...
Actually, rhisiart only used the word "harsh" once. ;) :)



I'm wondering if people are talking cross-purposes a bit. To torture an analogy, to me it sounds like someone goes to buy a car. There's an expensive model that looks to be the future and a cheaper model that should do the job just fine. The consumer looks over the cheaper model (and perhaps has a quick test drive) and finds it is a little "quirky," but it should work, at the end of the day. The consumer buys the cheaper model, gets it home, does not drive a huge amount each day, but notices with time that the car really is a lemon.

Some of their friends tell them they should have bought the more expensive car, as it will have more development on it and the cheaper line will be phased out. But perhaps the consumer feels ripped off that, regardless of which car is the future, the one they were sold should at least work... How quickly one finds out whether the car is fit for purpose depends on how much driving the owner does each day, and that depends on the individual.

There, tortured analogy over. :)
 
Your analogy makes sense if you add in the fact that the cheap car maker bought the expensive one and was trying to hide the fact that their existing model (GoLive) wasn't quite as good or as popular as the expensive maker's cars (Dreamweaver).
 
Hehehe

Actually, back in the mists of time, didn't Adobe buy "GoLive," which was then "GoLive Cyberstudio?" It looks like Adobe bought both of their web design apps off other companies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top