Microsoft / Adobe Competition Heating Up

MicroAdobe writes "Microsoft has noticed that some of the coolest sites on the Web, YouTube and MySpace included, get much of their flash from Flash and other design programs sold by Adobe. But as Microsoft gets ready to ship its own line of tools for designers and Web developers, the company is finding it must also defend against Adobe on its home turf, the desktop. At the same time, the line between Internet and desktop programs is blurring, and both companies see an opportunity to capture new business." The article focuses on the competition and doesn't even mention that Adobe's CEO called Microsoft a $50 billion monopolist.

Ack!

[Penguinisto]

Great... just great. Now there's TWO variants of flashing crap that I have to filter out of my browser.

On the plus side, if the MSFT version is Windows-only, I suspect we'll all have a brand new reason to persuade folks to abandon the OS for Linux/OSX/(and yes)*BSD after this little battle gets done...

/P

So what is .net?

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

"Microsoft can afford to think in a 10-year timeframe," said Rob Helm, research director at Directions on Microsoft, an independent research group. "When you've got a business like Windows that has 80 percent margins and 90-plus percent market share, even a 10-year threat to shave 10 percent off the business is enough to do something about now."

Did not MSFT claim that it is going to make web app building the main thing? Its MS Visual Studio was morphed into something called MS .NET framework or something? C# and managed C, and ASP server working seamlessly with IE to deliver web applications or some such claim was made?

How many Web Enabling technologies MSFT has peddled so far? DotNetFramework? ActiveX? some dhtml thingie? The new one is going to replace them? Complement them?

Monopolist, that's rich

[dedazo]

Coming from the guy who destroyed the graphics design market first by gobbling up Aldus and all the rest, and then bottled up the active content delivery space with Macromedia and proceeded to kill of his "complimentary product lines", that's rich.

He might be a smaller "monopolist" than Microsoft, but he still has his own little monopoly and all the great things [daringfireball.net] that come from that.

Re:The Epic Battle begins!

[$RANDOMLUSER]

More like Wolf-359.

Interested...

[Drew McKinney]

Great, it's $600 cheaper, but nobody will buy it if it doesn't bring anything new to the table.

As someone who has worked with Flash since version 4 (in both a graphical and RIA capacity), the biggest stumbling blocks for Flash were/are:
1- Adobe Photoshop integration [*check!*]

2- Usefulness as a RIA application [remember the disaster that was Flash Googlemaps?]
3- Horribly broken scripting language [still an issue]


If Microsoft can compete on those points and bring something radically new to the table (say, easy 3D graphical development, quality OO scripting, etc) then they'll have an adoptable product. Otherwise, developers used to using Adobe & Flash products will look the other way.

Dreamweaver getting as bad as Expression

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been doing a little work in Expression, and it really got a lot closer dreamweaver like. Looks like it will be a good product if ASP.Net 2.0 is your target backend.

Dreamweaver supports asp, cf, php, and jsp backend and makes a decent dev platform with a 3rd-party like InterAKT's tools. Adobe aqquired InterAKT and some wonder if they just did it to shitcan them. In many ways, Dreamweaver has been treading water. They have added new support for web standards like css, etc, but most of the improvements have come in flash, contribute, and cold fusion. Now we hear the next Dreamweaver will add support for their new spry Ajax platform (proprietary?) and photoshop. Who knows what will happen with all that InterAKT open goodness.

From my perspective, both of these "open" products seem designed to drive you preferentially towards each companies proprietary products. Dreamweaver is clearly more open, but I don't think adobe wants me using php or asp, any more than MS wants me using cf.

Re:Compatability

[fyngyrz]

I've heard estimates that as many as 1/3 of users don't have flash installed.

And of those of us who do have it installed, some have it disabled 99% of the time. Flash (and most uses of every other active page technology, frankly) = really, really annoying.

The good news is that the really high quality browsers - like OmniWeb - allow you to globally filter out all such crapola, making exceptions on a per-site basis as you feel appropriate, or vice-versa. So you never have to be stuck looking at some menu-infested, roll-over ridden, animated advertising nightmare.

And as for scripting - I'll be the one who determines if a website is allowed to use my CPU.

Re:Ack!

[CastrTroy]

No, it gives whiners another reason to say, Linux can't do X, so I'm not switching. It can be added to the list with Photoshop,Games, and a thousand other things. There will be some funny cartoon, or some video website that uses this, so they can say that it's a deficiency in Linux, not an advantage.

Competition is good.

[MaWeiTao]

I find it funny that Adobe's CEO has the gall to call Microsoft monopolistic considering that Adobe essentially has a complete monopoly over the design industry. Microsoft's control over the PC market pales in comparison to Adobe's control of the design industry, the obvious distinction being that Microsoft's market is much larger.

I welcome the competition and although I'm not optimistic I would like to see Microsoft become a serious competitor in this market. I'd prefer it were someone else entering this market, I can't say I'm looking forward to bloated applications with cumbersome interfaces. Nevertheless it's been long overdo that something take Adobe down a few notches.

I'm sure Adobe's CEO is only upset that Adobe's purchase of Macromedia didn't ensure a complete lack of competition for a longer period of time.

Re:Web developer speaking here

[Richard_at_work]

Im also a web developer, and I *always* wait to experience a product, any product, by any developer, regardless of their prior history before I form any opinion on the product - sometimes its best to put the rhetoric away and join the adult world, especially when it comes to earning money.

The real question is...

[Eric Damron]

How does Microsoft leverage their monopolies to take control of the situation? Should they incorporate it directly into their operating system and browser or as a free addon to their office product?

Maybe they could tweak IIS so that it slows Flash down while optimizing the speed of their products?

So many dirty tricks and so little time...

Re:Cant take risks here

[Richard_at_work]

Yes, this most certainly is a matter of business, and if the Microsoft product does it better after I personally assess it to my clients criteria then Im going to use that to earn my money - Im not going to pass up on the chance to earn money because I dont like the company.

All business is risk, every moment of it for both you and your client, regardless of the product you use to construct their solution. To automatically dismiss a product on any grounds is stupid, but to dismiss a product after you have done your assessment is good business, and every product gets to the assessment stage with me, regardless.

Re:Web developer speaking here

[Sciros]

I've been using Photoshop since 1997, and I'm glad there's a possibility that a new graphics tool will push Adobe to improve their product further rather than just add marginally useful functionality every couple of years. Competition can be a good thing.

It will take an awful lot to get designers to leave Adobe in favor of Microsoft. Hardly any will, as they don't personally have to pay for it and if they can state a business case to their employers to keep paying for Adobe (which will be easy) then the price difference won't matter.

Though, if I'm wrong, all it means is Adobe might lower their prices a bit. :-)

Plus, and this is a different topic, Adobe doesn't get on kids' cases about having pirated copies of their software, since it's only affordable by industry (who pays for it) anyway. I expect Microsoft to go the other route, as they have with Windows (and all of their software). Which is in my opinion a mistake.

Re:Ack!

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh, yeah, that's the way it's been happening for what? a decade now? Great job Linux! Lead the way!

oh wait...

I guess it's still a problem in comprehension going on with the Linux crowd. Just what I want to do with my spare time; go crawling over the mess called SourceForge looking for plug-ins and such.

Isn't this part of what makes Vista drivers suck according to you penguins? You're all lined up in a row saying how bad Vista blows because someone by some random chance has to hunt down a driver. You all nod like a bunch of stodgy bobbleheads and out of the other side of your face proclaim that Linux is a valid solution even if you do have to scrape around 14 websites that are ripe with Linux snobbery to find some obscure, unsupported "solution".

Fantastic. Tell me why I'm not running Linux again?

Re:Cant take risks here

[spamking]

Fortunately or unfortunately I think most folks use past experiences with people and products to determine their stance on one side or the other. Some folks probably immediately think of Frontpage when they hear Microsoft and web development in the same conversation.

Re:Web developer speaking here

[aztracker1]

I feel the same way.. as much as I absolutely hate the crap that MS is doing politically (re ODF, and Vista), but bust say a lot of their web development tools are really nice. The MS Expression Web Developer, or whatever it is called, is IMHO nicer, and easier to use than Dreamweaver is... though, to be honest, I don't use either, but when making recommendations lately, I usually suggest that people try both out, and decide for themselves.

I am really hopeful that within the next year, someone creates a Linux based server install that is as easy to use/deploy as Windows Server Web Edition... with mono, mod_mono, jsp/jakarta, ruby+rails, etc, as simple checkbox/wizard options... I know some people hate simplicity, let alone GUI interfaces, but hey, even a webmin-style setup extended to include a few more options would be nice, with an out of the box deployment. As to the desktop, eliminating software patents would go a *LONG* way to improving what is offered as a default in most linux distros... but that won't happen.

Sorry to veer off topic, but I honestly think there are some things MS has released that are better.. and others that are dramatically worse.

Re:nay

[jericsmith]

I've read this thread, and it is obvious to me that unity is simply on an anti-MS rant. MS has the most attacked platform/products on the market because they are easy to hate. A monkey could realize what that means in terms of perceived reliability. The fact remains Microsoft has great products and well documented support compared to most other alternatives. MS certainly doesn't hold the monopoly on bad business ethics. Please, stop following your open source idols and go make some money.

Re:I love Linux. I hate M$.

[welsh git]

And many of us who use other opensource operating systems can't use ActionScript/Flash from Adobe *either* because they have a very limited platform portfolio.

Just because they happen to do a Linux version, it doesn't make them any less evil trying to push a 'standard' that is closed and proprietry.

I'm not a 'everything open source' zealot - I happily run the Nvidia Binary driver blob for my video card on FreeBSD, but media formats -- ESPECIALLY WEB FORMATS -- SHOULD BE OPEN!