The bolts helps publishers distinguish where in the process their folios are sitting. Its especially helpful when you have multiple versions created and want to know exactly which version is residing on an acrobat.com workspace and which has been published to the distribution server. As i recall the "visual icon" was a well received feature request-- previously it was just an asterisk next the the folio and many people were confused about whether or not it was some kind of missing metadata tag. The visual thumbnail bolt eliminates the confusion and really does help publishers know what's still in "preview" and what's actually published to the server.
I'm with you landrvr1, I think it's far too intrusive, especially for those of us who have to use the Acrobat.com workflow to publish to small groups.
If the function is as David says, "to help publishers distinguish where in the process their folios are sitting. Its especially helpful when you have multiple versions created and want to know exactly which version is residing on an acrobat.com workspace and which has been published to the distribution server." Then I presume he's talking about those publisher who login in via digitalpublishing.acrobat.
So why not have the following scenarios:
1. Login via Acrobat.com - drop it completely for those of us who only use the standard Acrobat.com workflow as our distrubution method, we know our folios are only on Acrobat.com.
2. Login via Digitalpublishing.acrobat - leave it as is. They need to see what's on the Distribution server and what's not.
See my previous post on this subject http://forums.adobe.com/thread/863881?tstart=0
Folios sit on an Acrobat.com workspace before making their way to the distribution server-- that applies to users with DPS dashboard access as well. The need was for some clear visual indicator that the folio is sitting in a workspace rather than the distribution server-- so a publisher doesn't have to login to the Dashboard... try matching up version numbers and know what's live and what's not live. I can seehow it may cause a visual sore to those who use the Content viewer as their distribution method but its a helpful aide for those who use it as a previewing tool. Lets a publisher know what's live on the distribution server and what is still being produced on a acrobat.com workspace.
I'm pleased to hear that Pro and Enterprise users are happy with the arrangement and that the Blue Lightning Bolt is so helpful.
It's just rather stunning that someone with the intelligence to create a document using InDesign and DPS gets confused over the addition of a little asterisk in the folio title to denote IN PROGRESS or UNPUBLISHED.
Even a little lightning bold or red A or whatever - BELOW the folio title - would have sufficed.
Seriously. Totally lame. Non-Pro/Enterprise account holders getting the shaft. That's all this is, really.
I can't wait to see what else is implemented by Pro/Enterprise account holders at the expense of the rest of us...
Maybe a GIANT BLUE LIGHTNING BOLT ON EVERY PAGE IN THE FOLIO!!!!!
You asked for someone to shed some light on why the bolt was implemented. There is no need to degrade a person's intelligence just because someone doesn't understand one part of a workflow. I have to agree that the asterisk was just too obscure and both new and seasoned users were being confused on its meaning. Even in this forum there were several questions regarding the "mysterious asterisk" and based off customer feedback-- they wanted something a little more visual to distinguish where the folio was residing.
Although your certainly entitled to your opinions and feedback... with comments like " can't wait to see what else is implemented by Pro/Enterprise account holders at the expense of the rest of us...Maybe a GIANT BLUE LIGHTNING BOLT ON EVERY PAGE IN THE FOLIO!!!!!"
And claiming Adobe is giving you "the shaft" ~ both seem rather counter productive.
David Ben wrote:
Folios sit on an Acrobat.com workspace before making their way to the distribution server-- that applies to users with DPS dashboard access as well.
Fair enough, so then why not give us a preference option to show or hide the Blue Lightning Bolt. Acrobat.com obviously recoginises who logs in and what sort of account they have; I log in it knows I have a paid account that gives me 20 workspaces, co-workers login they have one workspace, users with the paid up DPS accounts see other things.
So I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to;
a. either recognise the level of login and respond with or without the Bolt or
b. have the option for those of us with paid Basic accounts to switch it off in preferences.
Because quite honestly (and lets cut right through the crap shall we?) Adobe doesn't give a damn about anyone other than the Enterprise/Pro users. They pay a large sum of money to use the service, and that's what matters most.
Large publishing companies don't want Adobe to allow these DTP tools to be given to small companies and independent publishers. Period. They don't want the competition.
From the hundreds of posts made on this forum one can see there is a need for a less expensive solution than Adobe has provided to
"optimize publications for tablet devices".
One can't fault Adobe's need for revenue. Their Digital Publishing Suite helps them do that.
But a less expensive solution needed by many others must be satified.
I hope it comes from Adobe and soon.
If not it will come from others such as Quark and their Digital Publishing Solutions. Such as their App Studio.
Their approach seems less expensive but is not yet available until the end of this month.
I am looking forward to an announcement from Adobe to address this issue.
The app studio is the Aquafadas plugin pre-distributed. Aquafadas has had its prices for both quark and indesign posted for a good month now --(you can get the app studio solution for indesign too) --the solution is still in pre-release and is why it hasn't been distributed with Quark as of yet-- but based on the released pricing the solution is great for people producing one or two applications -- at $500 per application and around $5500 for a 12 issue multi-issue application. + you must renew the licenses for any applications you produce every year @350 per issue.
It's totally obnoxious for those of us who aren't producing stand-alone apps but are using acrobat.com and the Content Viewer to distribute material.
I'm happy you've got what you want. Now, for the rest of us...
My question in the last post still stands and is still relevant in this forum:
Has it been changed/addressed in the new Content Viewer. Bob B or someone else from Adobe mentioned awhile back they were looking into options.