« Stupid lpadmin tricks with Apple Remote Desktop | Main | Deploying Acrobat 9 »

Now, with fewer features than the previous version, but at that same great too-high price!

Wait John, did you say fewer features?

Why yes Reader, yes I did!

But how can that be?

Well, it's simple. See, Acrobat's previous utter shit "Some of Office to PDF" Macros are gone, because they relied on VBA, and without VBA in Office 2008, then they won't work!

But that makes sense, right? I mean without VBA, how could they have done those Macros?

Oh simple, Naive Reader! They could have used AppleScript, which, since Office 2004 had been released, had been improved past what that creaky nigh-broken version of VBA offered. Prior to Office 2004, Adobe was indeed limited to VBA, but for the last 4 years? Not so much.

So you mean that Acrobat could have added more and better features in the Macros starting with Office 2004? Even supported Entourage?

Indeed Intrepid Reader. In fact, I showed this was possible with a rather inelgant, but functional AppleScript for Entourage: Structured PDF from Entourage, now at version 1.0.2!

So when the Acrobat team says they can't do proper PDF output from Microsoft Office on the Mac, and that they can't do it at all from Entourage, or really, any non-Adobe application, they're...full of shit?

Ah, the joy of knowledge sweeping out crap! Yes, that's right my Disillusioned Friend! When the Acrobat team says they can't do this, they mean they don't want to do it in any way that's not VBA and identical to how they do it on Windows!

But why?

Because Perplexed Reader, the Acrobat team has been bullshitting their Mac users for so long, they can't stop. Here's the deal: Acrobat is actually a really good application. It does some neat things that are hard to do in other applications. But, because Bruce Chizen et al decided that Adobe needed to be the next Microsoft, and suck Fortune 100 cock, they'd stop actively marketing Acrobat on the Mac other than occasional spasms of OMG, IF YOU DON'T USE ACROBAT, YOUR PDFs WILL BE UNUUUUUUUSABLE!!!!.

So what happens when you stop trying to sell a product to a market segment? Big shock, the sales drop. So by the time Acrobat 5 came out, 90% of Acrobat's sales were on Windows. Ever since, the only marketing done on the Mac for Acrobat is whatever the CS team feels like doing, and as you can see, that's limited to "Includes Adobe Acrobat Pro".

Thanks to this self-fulfilling prophecy, Acrobat sales on the Mac tanked so bad, you can't get Acrobat Standard on the Mac anymore. What did this do to companies who had bought many Standard licenses when Acrobat 8 came out? Well, let's ask one of them what their reaction was:

OWWWWW! MY ASS! IT BURNS! IT BURNS SO BAD!

Basically, it's like this: The Acrobat Team Leadership decided that only designers use Macs. Not programmers, no one in IT. Macs only are used for the making of pretty pictures. So on the Mac, Acrobat is really viewed solely as a better PDF engine for CS. Anything else it does is pretty much luck.

But John, that's completely stupid, and really, is a 1997 viewpoint.

I agree my Disenchanted Reader, but when you are actively ignoring a market segment, and devoting as few resources as possible to them, why do you care about facts? Hell, there are reasonably accurate reports of Acrobat Evangelists presenting in front of a Mac audience with the Windows version of Acrobat, as their MacBook sits forlorn and ignored, because they don't know enough about the Mac to use their own product on the Mac.

John...that's the stupidest thing I've ever seen. How can you be so deliberately ignorant of reality?

Ah my Innocent Reader: That's the Acrobat team for you. If you want to use their product, you'll do it in the way they tell you to, and you'll like it. Oh, it's not just the Mac segment that hates them. Read some of the SMB market comments on Acrobat and dealing with that team. You'll quickly realize that as far as the Acrobat team is concerned, if you aren't buying 50K seats, you don't matter, and you should be happy that the Acrobat team even allows you to buy Acrobat.

But I'm the customer, don't my needs matter even a little?

BAAAAAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA...one of the biggest customer requests for Acrobat is to bring their new XML-based forms designer to Acrobat on the Mac. Adobe's answer?

Use WINE

But John, that's unsupported by anyone.

Yep.

So they are just blowing off customer requests unless it's something they were going to do anyway.

Yep.

That fucking sucks.

Yep, even more so because Acrobat is, when it's not giving you the finger, a really nice application that does some neat stuff with PDF that no one else does.

That's even worse!

Yep.

What's the answer then?

For some other party to write an inexpensive Acrobat knockoff for Linux and the Mac that takes care of things like standards - compliant structured PDF output from a variety of applications, doesn't cost $500 bucks, by a team that doesn't treat you like shit because you're not an F100 company. Were someone to do that, I, and a lot of other IT types on many platforms would evangelize the shit out of them.

The money is waiting, all that's needed is product. The scale of the Acrobat team hate by the SMB market in general and the entire Mac user base cannot be overstated, and we all have money. Give us the ability to kick that fucking team off our networks, and we'll send Adobe the videos of the burning product.

<Oh, and to any from Adobe or the Acrobat team who want to argue about this...until your actions reflect your rather weak protestations, and you change the facts of the situation, spare me and the rest of the Mac market the bullshit. You want to prove me wrong with real product that I can buy, I will happily change my opinion, in large type on this site, and any where else I can, but until then? You're all just bullshitting people, and you can't even come close to denying it.>

Technorati Tags:
Adobe Acrobat Team = Annoying, Adobe Can Kiss My Ass, Bullshit

Comments

I am sure you've posted something on Adobe before, and I've made a comment agreeing before. But it deserves to be said again:

I really don't understand why Adobe has got such a free ride in the past. Look at Microsoft. Their Mac products are bad, but compared to Adobe's products? They smell like roses. Yet the Mac community heaps criticism on Microsoft, while continuing to pleasure Adobe. It's almost the very definition of an abusive relationship, the same relationship Microsoft Windows users have with Microsoft.

Am I saying people should be nicer to Microsoft? NO! But I think Adobe deserves AT LEAST the same level of contempt.

Posted by: sdf | June 2, 2008 10:42 AM

A colleague just said "They haven't even fixed the bugs in Acrobat 8 and they're releasing 9?". I replied "No, they probably have fixed the bugs in Acrobat 8 and they're just labelling it 9".

They're also re-doing the stupid packaging trick of calling CS3 with Acrobat 9 "CS3.3", as they did with CS2 and Acrobat 8. What, don't the Acrobat team synchronize their product cycle with the rest of Adobe? Say it isn't so!

BTW, I didn't know that there wasn't an Acrobat 8 Standard for Mac. There's also no Acrobat 9 Standard for Mac on Adobe's site, just Pro. Bastards.

I hope that Apple continues to improve Preview.app. Shame it doesn't help Linux nor SMB Windows customers.

Posted by: Wrinkle_In_Time | June 2, 2008 12:20 PM

Are any small developers out there even *close* to the standards-compliant pdf goal? I'd be happy to support one.

Posted by: Moeskido | June 2, 2008 12:45 PM

C'mon John - tell us what you really think?!?!

I'm going to rain a bit of your tirade by introducing some reality and fact to this discussion - hopefully you won't mind.

* Yes, the PDFMaker macros are no longer present on the Mac. HOWEVER, the reason has NOTHING to do with VBA. As you point out, we could have continued to offer a LIMITED (compared to the Windows product) set of Macros using AppleScript/WebCapture, etc. However, we decided that we would rather "get it right" and spend the time to develop functionally equivalent solutions on the Mac instead of giving our users a "half-assed" product. Unfortunately, we weren't able to complete that work in the Acrobat 9 time frame. When it's complete - you'll get it.

* Concerning Acrobat Standard for the Mac. You and I have chatted about this in the past, and I have an email (and possibly a blog comment up here somewhere too) in which I challenged you to produce a list of actual/potential customers for Acrobat Standard for the Mac. And I'll make it again now...If you can demonstrate that there is a (real, not imagined) market for Acrobat Standard on the Mac - then I will go to bat for you (and them) to re-establish the product in our line. Ball remains in your court!

* While the need for LiveCycle Designer on the Mac may have been an issue in the past, we believe that the new "Forms Editing" mode of Acrobat 9 (yes, on the Mac!) combined with our new forms marketing/positioning will remove that requirement. If you feel otherwise, please let me know why you believe Designer is still a necessity on the Mac.

As always...

Leonard Rosenthol
PDF Standards Evangelist
Adobe Systems

Posted by: leonardr | June 2, 2008 12:57 PM

Oh, let the fun begin...Leonard, you don't have the power to give straight answers to the issues, so the chances of you successfully raining on my parade? Small, even though I'd love for Acrobat to change reality:

Yes, the PDFMaker macros are no longer present on the Mac. HOWEVER, the reason has NOTHING to do with VBA. As you point out, we could have continued to offer a LIMITED (compared to the Windows product) set of Macros using AppleScript/WebCapture, etc. However, we decided that we would rather "get it right" and spend the time to develop functionally equivalent solutions on the Mac instead of giving our users a "half-assed" product. Unfortunately, we weren't able to complete that work in the Acrobat 9 time frame. When it's complete - you'll get it.

Ah, the old "Since we can't do it perfectly, we won't do it at all" scam. My 14 year old tries that to get out of chorse he doesn't like. Doesn't work there either.

Leonard, here's the entire list of improvements that i've been able to find in the Office integration between Acrobat *5* and Acrobat *8*:

Live Internet Hyperlinks

That's it. I've never, ever, *EVER* said that AppleScript could give 100% feature parity with VBA. Ever.

HOWEVER...it could have brought a lot of improvements, like live TOCs, Figure tables, index links etc. What did y'all do in the time between THREE MAJOR VERSIONS of Acrobat?

Live

Internet

Links.

Those didn't show up until Acrobat 8, and InDesign *2* had them. So what kept y'all from releasing updated scripts for Office:Mac 2004? What, you can't give us diamonds, so we go hungry?

As well, don't give me that line of shit about "functionally equivalent solutions on the Mac", because if the Acrobat leadership gave a dead dog's dick about that, where's the "Entourage to Acrobat PDF" macro/script?

Oh wait, that's right...I WROTE THAT. What's the answer for Mail.app, or Entourage Leonard? There never was, nor will there ever be VBA for them. What, pray tell do users of those applications do? At least the E'rage people have SOMETHING. What about Mail? What, they get told "Sorry, next time use a real email application on a real OS?"

So basically either I'm smarter than a lot of people on the Acrobat team, or you guys decided long ago that you will only ever use VBA for external application integration, and since you can't get that on the Mac for anything but old or future versions, well, you pulled the Cartman solution, namely, "Screw you guys, I'm going home". Good job. Way to go. All or nothing. There's so much historical validity to that solution. Since I know I'm not smarter than the actual Acrobat developers, I think the only logical option is door number 2, the Cartman solution.

oncerning Acrobat Standard for the Mac. You and I have chatted about this in the past, and I have an email (and possibly a blog comment up here somewhere too) in which I challenged you to produce a list of actual/potential customers for Acrobat Standard for the Mac. And I'll make it again now...If you can demonstrate that there is a (real, not imagined) market for Acrobat Standard on the Mac - then I will go to bat for you (and them) to re-establish the product in our line. Ball remains in your court!

Sigh..."I don't know who our Mac customers really are, because my group doesn't do any marketing or even talk to our customers as they are, instead of pretending they're what we want them to be, so you have to prove they exist, because we haven't tried actually marketing to them in the current century."

Hey Pooser, or anyone else really, if you happen to read this, could you chime in on the Standard issue? I've already done all the free Acrobat market research I'm going to do.

But here's my take on "Show us numbers" Leonard. When Acrobat 5 shipped, I showed Rick Armstrong, with about a week of waiting for replies to an email on the Mac-Mgrs list, that were the Office:Mac macros on par with the Office:Windows ones, that there were around 50K new sales that would be generated from that one feature alone. I sent ONE email to a mailing list and waited a week or so, and I got 50K probable sales. Imagine if I'd actually put some effort into it!

Look at ALL THE IMPROVEMENTS that came about because of that. See, I have no faith that any numbers I show you will make a difference:

1) There's no number I can come up with that will change the people in charge of that decision's minds. I have no faith whatsoever in that, because I did this dance once, and it went nowhere. Why should I be stupid enough to think "Oh THIS TIME they'll kiss me first", when you guys can't even improve a fucking macro?

2) You don't make that decision. Tell you what, you get the people with actual power to talk to people at the WWDC, at Dave's, and I'll take that offer seriously. Note, I tried to set up a chat with the MacEnterprise people and the Acrobat team last year or the year before. The MacE folks were psyched, they said "HELL YEAH we want to talk to them". We were all ready, but of course, the Acrobat team blew it off.

You guys have no credibility in the Mac market, yet *I* have to prove something to you?

Does that actually work in AcrobatLand? Because in the really real world when you don't have any credibility anymore, You have to do the work.

While the need for LiveCycle Designer on the Mac may have been an issue in the past, we believe that the new "Forms Editing" mode of Acrobat 9 (yes, on the Mac!) combined with our new forms marketing/positioning will remove that requirement. If you feel otherwise, please let me know why you believe Designer is still a necessity on the Mac.

Hmm...let's just take a look at ye olde site under "Easily create forms and collect data", for this new "forms mode" shall we?

"Easily create and manage electronic forms New
Use the new Form Wizard to convert Microsoft Word and Excel documents or scanned paper to fillable PDF forms."

Nope.

"Optimize form distribution
Easily distribute forms, combine collected forms in a single document or view for easy filtering and analysis, and export collected data to a spreadsheet†."

Nope.

"Easily track forms and participation
Use the Form Tracker to see when forms have been completed and by whom and to send reminders.

Get started with form templates
Take advantage of an existing library of common form templates, such as human resources forms, invoices, and expense reports."

Um...nope and nope.

"Create dynamic forms Enhanced
Use Adobe LiveCycle Designer, a professional form design tool included with Acrobat 9 Pro, to further customize and automate dynamic XML forms."

OBVIOUSLY not.

"Include Adobe Reader users
Enable users of free Adobe Reader software (version 8 or later) to fill in and save forms locally†. By extending Acrobat functionality to Reader users, you can enable virtually anyone to participate in the workflows you initiate."

Still not seeing this "Forms Mode" Leonard.

If I go to the Forms URL for Acrobat: http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/solutions/detail/create_form.html, I see:

"Easily create electronic forms all by yourself — no need for assistance from IT or a designer

Make your electronic forms look just like existing paper forms, but better

Make static forms interactive by adding text fields, check boxes, and drop-down menus

Create a customized experience with interactive forms that change with user input

Allow virtually anyone to fill in and save PDF forms using free Adobe® Reader® software*"

Nothing new there. I could do all of that with a lot of work and JavaScript.

Still no "Forms Mode". Hmm. Let's take a look at http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobatpro/pdfs/acrobatpro_datasheet.pdf, maybe "Forms Mode" is in there.

Well, here's the section on forms:

Create and manage forms Simplify the creation and completion of forms to efficiently analyze and use data. Convert Word and Excel documents or scanned paper to PDF forms with automatic recognition of fillable fields. Or use Adobe LiveCycle® Designer ES software, a professional form design tool included with Acrobat 9 Pro software,* to further customize and automate dynamic XML forms. Extend Acrobat functionality to Reader users so virtually anyone can participate in the workflows you initiate. Use the Form Tracker to see when forms have been completed and who has completed them. And easily export data to a spreadsheet for analysis and reporting.

* Windows® only.
†
For ad-hoc form distribution and data collection for up to
500 people.

No mention of "Forms Mode" Leonard. Care to provide a link so that those of us stuck on the Mac can actually read up on the details of this new feature? I mean, it may actually provide a better answer for Mac users, in an area that a lot of people have wanted, so a link to the details would be of use here. I can hardly evaluate a feature that I can't find, now can I.

Posted by: John C. Welch | June 2, 2008 2:52 PM

No one is arguing the fact that Mac users did get crap from Acrobat in the past - but that's the past, and the current team is trying to change that as best we can. Acrobat 9 takes advantage of a variety of Mac-centric technologies including Spotlight, QuickLook and more. We can't change the world in a single product cycle - but we'll get there...

You may not like the answer concerning the PDFMakers (for any/all Mac products), but it's the truth/reality - and it was a decision that I was involved in making.

Concering "Forms Mode", there isn't a web page on it, as it's not one of the "key features" of the product that we are calling out. However, there is a great movie demonstrating a variety of form functionality at . While the movie was recorded on Windows, EVERYTHING you see there (except the Create PDF in Word) works EXACTLY the same on the Mac.

Leonard

Posted by: leonardr | June 2, 2008 3:22 PM

Leonard:

If "forms mode" starts by converting a Word or Excel file to PDF with the PDFMaker macros, and those macros are not included in Acrobat 9, then how does version 9 make anything easier? Without the PDFMaker, don't we still have to start with a PDF document or blank sheet and draw all the form rectangles by hand?

Posted by: Matt | June 2, 2008 3:55 PM

No one is arguing the fact that Mac users did get crap from Acrobat in the past - but that's the past, and the current team is trying to change that as best we can. Acrobat 9 takes advantage of a variety of Mac-centric technologies including Spotlight, QuickLook and more. We can't change the world in a single product cycle - but we'll get there...

Wait, you count stuff you get from the OS for FREE as "new features"? Are you SERIOUS? Adobe did nothing for PDF compatibility with Spotlight and QuickLook, that's all Apple, unless you are specifically counting compatibility with new file formats introduced in Acrobat 9. Even then, that's not some great new features, that's you not *breaking* stuff.

You may not like the answer concerning the PDFMakers (for any/all Mac products), but it's the truth/reality - and it was a decision that I was involved in making.

So you thought that your customers would prefer the COMPLETE REMOVAL of the macros rather than steady incremental improvement to the feature? Really? That's what people want in your world? All or nothing? Do you do that in the rest of your life? "If I can't have it all, I want nothing"? I bet I know which one you get more often.

Concering "Forms Mode", there isn't a web page on it, as it's not one of the "key features" of the product that we are calling out. However, there is a great movie demonstrating a variety of form functionality at . While the movie was recorded on Windows, EVERYTHING you see there (except the Create PDF in Word) works EXACTLY the same on the Mac.

So in other words, it's buried in something else, yet I'm supposed to figure it out? Does anyone at the Acrobat team even TRY to market anymore, or is it all "You have no choice, so just buy it already", because "You have to read our minds" tends to suck as a marketing strategy.

What about people who have better things to do than watch Flash movies and hope that they may see something that looks useful? Is it THAT hard to just type up a couple of paragraphs, and put them in the "NEW FORMS STUFF" sections on the Acrobat site? What, Flash is the only approved communications mechanism for Adobe now?

Christ..."We buried it in something else, so it's all your fault for not instantly discovering it"...does that REALLY seem rational to you?

Posted by: John C. Welch | June 2, 2008 4:00 PM

sdf:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=active&client=safari&rls=en-us&q=bynkii+Acrobat&start=20&sa=N

Posted by: John C. Welch | June 2, 2008 4:09 PM

Hey, I could have found it too. I'm just pointing out that nothing's changed and nothing ever will change. That shouldn't stop you from pointing out the stupidity, though. I always welcome a chance to bitch about Adobe products. :)

Posted by: sdf | June 2, 2008 4:31 PM

I'm a bit surprised that Leonard from Adobe is trying to sell up features that haven't been released as a reason to buy their current product.

To me, it sounds like "don't buy it until we release feature X," which is refreshing. That may not be what he meant, but it's what I heard.

Adobe really doesn't 'get' Mac users these days. I see it in Acrobat, I see it in Photoshop Elements, I see it in Premiere Elements.

These days my needs are few, and I'd prefer to buy a copy of Pixelmator that pay Adobe money for yet another late version of Elements (feature parity is a basic thing, not an extra we should have to wait for). Pixelmator, iMovie, Apple's export-to-PDF and other products have pretty much removed the need for Adobe in most people's lives.

Posted by: GaryPatterson | June 3, 2008 4:45 AM

The thing that burns my craw about this Gary, is that Acrobat is, once you get into it, a damned handy application, and it has some really solid features that are of great use to me.

But the team behind it is full of What The Fuck? Great sparkling WTF?, with trails.

For example...Acrobat Presenter Mode is WIndows Only?

WTF?

Posted by: John Welch | June 3, 2008 8:03 AM

Hey Pooser, or anyone else really, if you happen to read this, could you chime in on the Standard issue?

We've decided not to upgrade our Acrobat past version 8 (which we got thanks to our software maintenance agreement) and instead pursue alternatives. Frankly, Acrobat Standard is overkill for us (Acrobat Elements would be perfect, but there's no Mac version because it contradicts the core Adobe philosophy:"Mac users pay more") and Acrobat Pro is ridiculous. Earth to Adobe: Your software is not worth 50% more than Microsoft Freaking Office in our business environment. Our graphic designer/marketing wonk? Has Acrobat Pro. The rest of my users? Don't want it, don't need it, ain't gonna pay for it. In my small office (as in under 100 people) that's 62 seats of Standard you could sell us-- I can (barely) justify that price tag-- but you won't. And somehow I kinda doubt I'm the *only* one who feels that way.

Posted by: Dave Pooser | June 3, 2008 10:26 PM

You know, I started to get angry at Leonard Rosenthol's posts on this thread, then I re-read his job title: "PDF Standards Evangelist".

Evangelists (by definition) don't listen, they proselytize. They are merely a vector for a meme. It doesn't really matter whether they are zombie zealots or cynical shills. Getting angry at them is like getting angry at the rats who were infested with plague-carrying fleas in 17th century England.

However, if Adobe choses to respond to the valid customer criticism outlined here by acting like Willard and siccing rats on us, then their management deserves every brickbat available.

Posted by: Wrinkle_In_Time | June 4, 2008 11:40 PM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: