Look for Adobe to break the PSD format so that Acrylic — or no other program — can open it. They're not above it.

And by the way... The pro's only using Adobe apps because they are to ashamed to tell that they are using any other app...
Tell a pro that your working on a PC instead of a Apple and they will laugh at you, because of quality reasons? No way because they want to keep up in the hype and trend.

Adobe Photoshop is exactly the same on the PC as it is on a Mac.

Adobe Photoshop shouldn't be worth the hype, as many other apps from Adobe like Premier. The guys have no idea how to make software more user friendly and besides, in this case Photoshop and Premier I can find much better software doing the jobs in half the time.
However I don't think Microsoft (THe Butterfly Guys) will do anything to this market as long as they keep going on with their childrens playground mentality or approach to customers and software. They better keep stuck in improving their OS.

Many feedbacks in the Acrylic newsgroup show that users want a simpler, user-friendly interface. Adobe PS lacks this feature and that is why it is called a graphics tool for pros.
MS has made no improvements over the 2nd beta in this sense and we don't know if it will do so in the final release.

2 questions:

Yes, MS bought Acrylic, etc (aka expressions).

1.) Would the other company, without the funding MS has at it's disposal, be able to expand/develop and deliver the product the way MS will be able to?

2.) Is fierce competition with Adobe a BAD THING(tm)?

Seriously... The answer to both questions is no. I fail to see the down-side here...and I'm usually the one to start the MS Bash-fest.

There are also tools like Mobiform Software's Aurora (XAML Designer for WinFX) that builds UI's for web pages and applications. The tool is free for download at www.mobiform.com

I don't think it's necessarily growing its monopoly, but Microsoft is definately starting to spread itself thin. How many more markets can Microsoft grow into before they fall on their face? The recent announcement of Acrylic, Expression, start.com, Microsoft Accounting (to rival QuickBooks), Anti-Spyware, Anti-Virus and existing CRM and Point Of Sale, and I'm sure there are more projects out there that I'm either forgetting or no one knows about yet.

How is it possible that one company can produce so many varied software packages in all veins of business and home use and still maintain a high quality product? Throwing more money at developers isn't the answer when the top brass don't really care about their bread and butter Windows. Removing from Vista all the features that originally excited people and was driving their marketing just to meet their deadline. And now the recent announcement that MIE7 won't pass the acid test for CSS. Does this mean that Microsoft doesn't care about standards? How can a company not fully comply with a standard, yet go off and create the own standards (Office's open file format) and expect the world to jump at it just because they have the largest market share?

Don't get me wrong, I like most Microsoft products, I use them and I sell them to my clients, but this is starting to get rediculous. They really should fix all that's wrong before they open a new can of worms.

"How is it possible that one company can produce so many varied software packages in all veins of business and home use and still maintain a high quality product?"

Because they have unbelievably large amounts of cash to spend. =/

"How is it possible that one company can produce so many varied software packages in all veins of business and home use and still maintain a high quality product?"

Easy. They bought them. Acrylic was Expression bought from whoever (it says in the article). Anti-Spyware was bought from GIANT, etc.

This isn't a new thing for them either. Do any Google Search and you'll find that Microsoft didn't originally develop MS-DOS, they bought it.

Although this is probably a good release, I feel the latest update of Paint.net is far much is easier and faster. If the user does not have the latest download of .NET a quick download is installed to use the vast products.

Here's me:

*reads comment by tigger4046*

"Paint.net? What is that?"

*searches FileForum*

"Hmmm... interesting... Uses .NET"

"Good reviews"

*downloads*

"SWEET!!"

Thanks for the info =)

I think Microsoft's trying to diversify themselves as much as possible, but maybe it will be too much? Look at the X-Box. Microsoft's been losing money since day 1. With any luck this will provide an alternate choice and drive down some of Adobe's prices a little bit.
I don't think Microsoft will monopolize this area. Graphics users tend to know what they need to get the job done and won't buy substandard products whereas in the case of the OS you may not really have a choice.

I don't mean to imply that this product is substandard, just that graphics user's won't buy it if it is.

Oh c'mon. You should know from the trade rags that XBox has a 6 year P&L plan to profitability and they're scheduled to go permanently in the black ahead of schedule by 6 months. Even your blanket statement that "MS has been losing money since day 1" is wrong: XBox WAS profitable for the quarter immediately after the release of Halo 2.

Now as for the viability of Acrylic - I'm not gonna make any predictions about it's success or failure - but it seems clear that with Windows Vista's impending attack on Adobe/Macromedia Flash, and Adobe Acrobat format with the Metro platform, it seems that a graphics tool to compliment these other two products makes a heck of a lot of sense... regardless of whether or not they're going to be successful or not. Acrobat & Flash are relatively expense for what they do. (and what competitive products cost like cheap PDF producers for example) If Metro provides a free Acrobat & Flash platform for Windows that's more performant and has a low cost, MS licensable graphics tool along with it... you can see where this is going.

I agree that professional graphics artists aren't likely going to switch boats midstream but theres a massive number of people that simply don't/can't/won't learn Photoshop - particularly in the corporate space where money is plentiful, Adobe's exposure is limited, and artistic skill is wont. This is the market I'm betting Acrylic will play to.

he's talking about how they started selling XBoxes at a loss when they were first released. I think I remember someone said they lost $200 on the sale of each XBox? That might not be right...

This is one of those annoucements that kind of scares me. Before, with Windows, WMP, Internet Explorer, and MSN Messenger, Microsoft was staying in a closed ring. But now, they're challenging Adobe, and this is really starting to show their monopolistic tendancies. Adobe really hasn't done anything to take away from Microsoft's user base, because Adobe doesn't make anything that really poses a threat to Microsoft. But with Acrylic and "Expression Studio", Microsoft is trying to steal Adobe's thunder. Apparently Microsoft's billions of dollars of profit just hasn't been enough. There might be one good thing about this: lower prices. Photoshop CS2 is $600! But if Microsoft undercuts Adobe by too much of a margin, say, offering the Acrylic for around $150-$200, then people who flock to Microsoft products will end up putting Adobe out of business.

Provided, of course, that this "Acrylic" and "Expression Studio" stuff is easy to use, yet powerful at the same time.

And despite what you might be expecting from me, I'm not gonna say "OMG USE LINUX M$ IS CRAP!" Rather, I do use Windows XP Pro, as well as Linux. Both have their pros/cons, and I use both to have the best of both worlds. So I'm by no means a Microsoft fanboy, nor am I a Microsoft hater. I'm just worried that they'll become TOO almighty and powerful.

I don't think MS releasing a graphics program makes them any more of a monopoly.

I'm glad MS is working on this software. Otherwise there would be NO competition whatsoever in the graphics program field after the Macromedia/Adobe merger. Then we would TRULY have a monopoly.

You should really get your economics right Dude, you keep contradicting yourself:

"But now, they're challenging Adobe, and this is really starting to show their monopolistic tendancies."

No, this is called "competition in a free-market economy". We (as customers) benefit a lot from that.

"But with Acrylic and "Expression Studio", Microsoft is trying to steal Adobe's thunder."

That's because you fall for the fixed quantity of wealth fallacy. It was debunked long ago.

http://www.moneyweb.co.u...s/politecon/wealth.html

"Apparently Microsoft's billions of dollars of profit just hasn't been enough."

Why should it be? Who are you to decide what amount of wealth is enough or not for your fellow human beings?

"There might be one good thing about this: lower prices."

Oh. So capitalism (AKA free market, competition and choice) is good, after all?

"But if Microsoft undercuts Adobe by too much of a margin, say, offering the Acrylic for around $150-$200, then people who flock to Microsoft products will end up putting Adobe out of business."

Fixed quantity of wealth fallacy again. I know, I know, despite all real world evidences, it's always difficult to avoid the constant barrage of anti-capitalist propaganda. Try harder little Jedi, and you may find the light.

http://www.mises.org/sto...the-Present-P182C0.aspx

I do not know what economic theories they teach in England ,however what Microsoft is doing smells like oligopaly

DO I Agree with what Microsoft is doing?

Yes and No.

I looked at the acrylic beta about ten minutes ago and boy don't Microsoft have a thing or do to learn about graphic design. Personally I like the interface on Photoshop alot better than acrylic. As far as im concerned Acrylic would be a nice update to Microsofts Paint Program.

Cost in products especially Microsoft's and Adobes products arn't cheap. I used to work at staples and at that time photoshop costed about almost a thousand canadian. Who in their right mind would go out and buy such a product. Im not letting microsoft off the hook neither, Spending about 500 canadian for Microsoft Windows XP Pro is stupid. Especially when windows 98 had pretty much the same support for domains. Now i realize XP is more secure with its Kerberos Authenication as well as the introduction of Active Directory. But come on when is enough enough.

Am I totally against what microsoft is doing. no im not. As one gentlemen said here is free market. But the thing is that they are branching out too quickly. Lets take OSX for example, that os was pretty much dead from the start, microsoft Didn't help it grow neither. That went pretty much dead. Free market is free market but i do not agree with undercutting another company and driving them out of business. I know its competition but there is going too far with things. Its almost like Microsoft is trying to take over the World of Information Technology. What happens if they drive everybody else out of business, what you think they drive up their prices even more becuase there is no competition.

I know im rambling on here but I just wish microsoft would slow down just a little and fix their problems before they go out and make new ones.

Thanks
MoRpHeUs2003