Actually Richard...
On 19/07/13 8:41 AM, Combs, Richard wrote:
> John Posada wrote:
>
>> Off list. Aside from it is interesting to a small subset, its just plain
>> boring now.
> You think that's boring? The logical next topic is: Should the debate about
> whether the CC discussion belongs
Bandwidth is measured also by the number of emails one can reasonably read (and
respond to) in a given length of time.
I can't be the only person who is tired of reading about reactions to the CS
licensing model on this FrameMaker forum…
I don't know anything about Adobe's plans.
Everyone's
And on the other side of the fence...
I find it an interesting discussion. And I prefer to have it on this list since
I don't participate in many other lists.
Sorry, Matt, my vote is for keep it online.
Nadine
Bandwidth is measured also by the number of emails one can reasonably read
(and
Off list. Aside from it is interesting to a small subset, its just plain
boring now.
On Jul 18, 2013 4:18 PM, Writer generic...@yahoo.ca wrote:
And on the other side of the fence...
I find it an interesting discussion. And I prefer to have it on this list
since I don't participate in many
having to fork out a kilobuck or more
up-front.
-Fred Ridder
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 13:14:40 -0700
From: generic...@yahoo.ca
Subject: Re: OT!!!: Adobe 'Creative Cloud' (again)
To: m...@mattrsullivan.com; syed.hos...@aeris.net;
framers@lists.frameusers.com
And on the other
Thx!(and grateful for not starting a flame war on the topic!)
-MattMatt R. Sullivanco-authorPublishing Fundamentals: Unstructured FrameMaker 11P:714.798.7596 |C:714.585.2335 |m...@mattrsullivan.com@mattrsullivanLinkedInfacebookmattrsullivan.com
On Jul 18, 2013, at 1:32 PM, "Syed Zaeem Hosain
John Posada wrote:
Off list. Aside from it is interesting to a small subset, its just plain
boring now.
You think that's boring? The logical next topic is: Should the debate about
whether the CC discussion belongs off-list or on-list be off-list or on-list?
;-)
Richard G. Combs
Senior
: Thursday, July 18, 2013 1:15 PM
To: m...@mattrsullivan.com; Syed Zaeem Hosain (syed.hos...@aeris.net);
framers@lists.frameusers.com List
Subject: Re: OT!!!: Adobe 'Creative Cloud' (again)
And on the other side of the fence...
I find it an interesting discussion. And I prefer
Bandwidth is measured also by the number of emails one can reasonably read (and
respond to) in a given length of time.
I can't be the only person who is tired of reading about reactions to the CS
licensing model on this FrameMaker forum?
I don't know anything about Adobe's plans.
Everyone's
And on the other side of the fence...
I find it an interesting discussion. And I prefer to have it on this list since
I don't participate in many other lists.
Sorry, Matt, my vote is for keep it online.
Nadine
>
>Bandwidth is measured also by the number of emails one can reasonably read
Off list. Aside from it is interesting to a small subset, its just plain
boring now.
On Jul 18, 2013 4:18 PM, "Writer" wrote:
> And on the other side of the fence...
>
> I find it an interesting discussion. And I prefer to have it on this list
> since I don't participate in many other lists.
>
>
Hi, all.
I'll respect the requests and keep my comments off-line (other than this last
one)
But only until after my belief/speculation/prediction comes true: when - not if
- FrameMaker upgrades/licensing is foisted on us as subscription model, it will
be fair game again. This will be
having to fork out a kilobuck or more
up-front.
-Fred Ridder
> Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 13:14:40 -0700
> From: generic668 at yahoo.ca
> Subject: Re: OT!!!: Adobe 'Creative Cloud' (again)
> To: matt at mattrsullivan.com; Syed.Hosain at aeris.net; framers at
> lists
Thx!
(and grateful for not starting a flame war on the topic!)
-Matt
Matt R. Sullivan
co-author Publishing Fundamentals: Unstructured FrameMaker 11
P: 714.798.7596 | C: 714.585.2335 | matt at mattrsullivan.com
@mattrsullivan LinkedIn facebook mattrsullivan.com
On Jul 18, 2013, at 1:32 PM,
John Posada wrote:
> Off list. Aside from it is interesting to a small subset, its just plain
> boring now.
You think that's boring? The logical next topic is: Should the debate about
whether the CC discussion belongs off-list or on-list be off-list or on-list?
;-)
Richard G. Combs
Senior
Alan Litchfield wrote:
> Actually Richard...
> On 19/07/13 8:41 AM, Combs, Richard wrote:
> John Posada wrote:
>
> Off list. Aside from it is interesting to a small subset, its just plain
> boring now.
>
> You think that's boring? The logical next topic is: Should the debate about
> whether the
nt: Thursday, July 18, 2013 1:15 PM
> To: matt at mattrsullivan.com; Syed Zaeem Hosain (Syed.Hosain at aeris.net);
> framers at lists.frameusers.com List
> Subject: Re: OT!!!!!!!: Adobe 'Creative Cloud' (again)
>
> And on the other side of the fence...
>
> I
If you already own a perpetual license version, you don't have to stop
using it. But if you start out as a renter, you do. And if you own a
perpetual license, such as CS6, and then rent CC as your new upgrade
path, when you stop paying, there's a good chance that your current
files will
If you already own a perpetual license version, you don't have to stop
using it. But if you start out as a renter, you do. And if you own a
perpetual license, such as CS6, and then rent CC as your new upgrade
path, when you stop paying, there's a good chance that your current
files will
Read my note again. I didn't say CS6 would stop working. I said that
files created in the CC version may not always be backward compatible
with CS6. Right now, I don't know if CC has introduced any features that
create files that aren't backward compatible, but each new edition of
Photoshop
David, it seems logical to me:
if the CC licence is for version 6, and your CS version is 6, flies
created with the cloud version won't be able to be opened with your
local version. Just like you cannot open FM version 10 files in FM
version 9.
Grant
On 7/17/2013 4:52 AM, David Creamer
> If you already own a perpetual license version, you don't have to stop
> using it. But if you start out as a renter, you do. And if you own a
> perpetual license, such as CS6, and then rent CC as your new upgrade
> path, when you stop paying, there's a good chance that your current
> files
> If you already own a perpetual license version, you don't have to stop
> using it. But if you start out as a renter, you do. And if you own a
> perpetual license, such as CS6, and then rent CC as your new upgrade
> path, when you stop paying, there's a good chance that your current
> files
Read my note again. I didn't say CS6 would stop working. I said that
files created in the CC version may not always be backward compatible
with CS6. Right now, I don't know if CC has introduced any features that
create files that aren't backward compatible, but each new edition of
Photoshop
David, it seems logical to me:
if the CC licence is for version >6, and your CS version is 6, flies
created with the cloud version won't be able to be opened with your
local version. Just like you cannot open FM version 10 files in FM
version 9.
Grant
On 7/17/2013 4:52 AM, David Creamer
I really don't understand this reasoning that if you can't update your
software every year or whatever you have to stop using it.
I never upgrade my tools unless there's a compelling reason to do so.
FrameMaker upgrades in particular have been one step forward, two
steps back, since version 8.
If you already own a perpetual license version, you don't have to stop
using it. But if you start out as a renter, you do. And if you own a
perpetual license, such as CS6, and then rent CC as your new upgrade
path, when you stop paying, there's a good chance that your current
files will no
I really don't understand this reasoning that if you can't update your
software every year or whatever you have to stop using it.
I never upgrade my tools unless there's a compelling reason to do so.
FrameMaker upgrades in particular have been one step forward, two
steps back, since version 8.
If you already own a perpetual license version, you don't have to stop
using it. But if you start out as a renter, you do. And if you own a
perpetual license, such as CS6, and then rent CC as your new upgrade
path, when you stop paying, there's a good chance that your current
files will no
I have just had a software vendor ring me to enquire about my future software
needs, and to extol the virtues of Adobe's 'creative cloud', which she had just
finished training up on.
Boy did she get more than she was bargaining for ;-)
I pointed out that I had been planning to upgrade (with
Steve, I'm with you. I used to be a huge Adobe fan. I have loved and
praised Adobe software far and wide. It's not cheap, but it is very
capable and works very well. Now, I find myself hating Adobe. I'm not
just disappointed with the CC subscription model, I'm fuming. I complain
about it every
, July 12, 2013 8:31 AM
To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
Subject: Re: OT: Adobe 'Creative Cloud' (again)
Steve, I'm with you. I used to be a huge Adobe fan. I have loved and praised
Adobe software far and wide. It's not cheap, but it is very capable and works
very well. Now, I find myself hating
I apologize for helping this topic spill into the FrameMaker arena where, so
far, the subscription model has not been forced on us.
Hopefully, Adobe won't also make that bad decision or they will find that
they have lost the last bit of their revenue stream from me.
Given the fact that I
Hi Steve
You may know this already, but Xara is a credible alternative to
Illustrator, and a lot cheaper. Dunno about any of the others though...
Regards,
Roger
On 12/07/2013 11:46 AM, Steve Rickaby wrote:
I have just had a software vendor ring me to enquire about my future software
needs,
I have just had a software vendor ring me to enquire about my future software
needs, and to extol the virtues of Adobe's 'creative cloud', which she had just
finished training up on.
Boy did she get more than she was bargaining for ;-)
I pointed out that I had been planning to upgrade (with
Steve, I'm with you. I used to be a huge Adobe fan. I have loved and
praised Adobe software far and wide. It's not cheap, but it is very
capable and works very well. Now, I find myself hating Adobe. I'm not
just disappointed with the CC subscription model, I'm fuming. I complain
about it every
ke Wickham
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 8:31 AM
To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
Subject: Re: OT: Adobe 'Creative Cloud' (again)
Steve, I'm with you. I used to be a huge Adobe fan. I have loved and praised
Adobe software far and wide. It's not cheap, but it is very capable and works
very well. Now
> I apologize for helping this topic spill into the FrameMaker arena where, so
> far, the subscription model has not been forced on us.
> Hopefully, Adobe won't also make that bad decision or they will find that
> they have lost the last bit of their revenue stream from me.
Given the fact that
Hi Steve
You may know this already, but Xara is a credible alternative to
Illustrator, and a lot cheaper. Dunno about any of the others though...
Regards,
Roger
On 12/07/2013 11:46 AM, Steve Rickaby wrote:
> I have just had a software vendor ring me to enquire about my future software
>
39 matches
Mail list logo
