And if they re-engineer it and make it better? If the makers of the PathToolkit no longer had interest in developing and distributing it (and dealing with pesky users/ customers)? There's always 2 sides to a story. I have no problem with that, especially considering how small the AI plug-in market is compared to other apps. In the end, a more focused effort based on a unified development strategy could be much more beneficial than hundreds of tiny garage shops just muddling through. Sure, it's bad in that it gives one vendor a lot of power to control pricing and take users on a leash as well, but well, nobody is forcing you to use those tools. It's up to everybody himself to weigh the benefits of purchasing a plug-in vs. doing work without it the hard way...
You mean another, "Please buy me!" don't you?
On the basis of what facts would you portray the sellers of Path Toolkit as victims? When you use the terms "takeover" and "gobbled up," are you suggesting this was in some way hostile or unwelcome?
If you don't know the details of the business transaction, what purpose is served by this post? Exactly who are you trying to stir up? If you do know the particulars, why not come clean with the motivations of both buyer and seller and the consequences for each so the forum can make a rational assessment of the pros and cons?
It is not possible to make a hostile takeover of a private company. Only publicly traded companies can be acquired by a hostile takeover by purchasing more than 50% of their publicly traded shares. So, it was an agreement and the owners of Pathtollkit got paid what they wanted. So the blame for any negative consequences should be directed at the owners of Pathtollkit.
Nobody is sitting on a high horse, but you are seeing a conspiracy where none exists. As Doug said, the buyout was mutually agreed upon and while it may suck that you have to buy VectorScribe or Phantasm to get the PathToolkit plug-ins, I see nothing but a normal business operation going on here.
You called your motives into question by the insinuating tones in which you wrote your remark. Words like "gobbled" and "smells" and sarcastic phrases like "Such a deal."
If you consider PathToolkit a "fine" plug-in, then you must already own a copy. In which case I assume it will continue to work for you, so what's the problem?
If your intent was to give a heads-up to other users that PathToolkit was no longer available for sale (but instead could be obtained for free by purchasing another one of Astute's products), you could have just said so plainly.
dan o41 wrote:
No conspiracy. No hostile anything.
Just a USER's perspective. Let it go.
I'm sorry I posted to THIS environment. Not ever again.
Well, this I understand, but from user's perspective you have to understand that these things happen often with companies and especially these with a small niche group of customers who can't provide enough revenue to sustain operating business and they either have to raise the price of the products or look for a buyer to acquire them. In both cases users end up loosing and it could have been much worse if they were to go out of business. So there is nothing we can do about it but face gracefully the reality. No one is doing this with ill intentions to anyone - it is simply a struggle for survival.
No they weren't, John. Don't reduce it to a matter of semantics. Entirely different, less inflammatory words would not have changed the fact that the OP's post alleges a greedy, monopolistic business dynamic based on no knowledge of the facts.
But you must have a unique and greater insight than the "they" you refer to in the post who "miss the point." So perhaps rather than being oblique and conspiratorial about it, you could actually say what that point is and exactly who is to benefit from it. I for one would be eager to hear that.
Yes, Doug, they were.
While it's true Dan should have been more careful with his selection of words, it's still quite clear what he's really saying. A plugin he's come to rely on has been purchased by another company. That alone would make me worry. If I relied on the plugin; if it was an important part of making Illustrator work better for me (because god knows Illustrator needs a lot of crutches) then I would be concerned. Next I would be annoyed that I would have to purchase it as part of a larger, more expensive package. Especially if the rest of the package didn't interest me. (As Dan said.) Now, when Dan used the word "gobbled" that was just probably the first thing to come to mind to use. Especially if he was a victim of the Freehand attrocity. Myself I never used Freehand, but from what I hear it may have "made a lot more sense" than Illustrator does. I don't know. Before AI I used Corel DRAW (which, btw, also makes a lot more sense than AI). If Adobe had bought out Corel while I was still using it and then let it die I would furious. At the time I used Corel it was my main program, everything I worked on started in Corel. It was a huge part of my work, and if you consider self actualization, then a huge part of my life too. Sounds like Adobe snatched Freehand away from Dan. Forgive him if it's too easy to use a word like "gobbled" when something else of his changes hands.
Next up was Mylenium. He didn't seem to miss the point. In fact he offered his opinion on it and brought up ways to look on the bright side and hope for possible improvements in the plugin. (Although his last sentence was, IMO, belittling, but that probably wasn't intentional.)
Then there was Doug. Looks to me like Doug started all this. You asked him on which basis he portrayed the sellers of the plugin as victims. He didn't, Doug. He portrayed himself as a victim. You went on about this and that and then you said, "what purpose is served by this post? Exactly who are you trying to stir up?" Wow. Doug, the purpose of the post was to show Dan's unease about the future of the plugin, especially if he relies on it as part of his workflow.
Then Dan popped in again and said "Get off your high horses. It's just a USER'S perspective. Maybe other users appreciate the heads up. Surprises are not fun when you're on deadline." Seems Dan got a tad annoyed. I would have too. But he expressed it in only one sentence. The other 3 were polite and trying to get back on track with the soul of his first post. (And if I were a user of that plugin, yes, I would very much appreciate the heads up.
And then Mylenium came back suggesting that Dan saw a conspiracy. At this point if I were Dan I would have felt like the kid whose friend hit a baseball through a store window, then gave me the bat and ran off.
Dan returned and again insisted that you all were missing his point. He said "No conspiracy. No hostile anything. Just a User's perspective." Well, Dan shot himself in the foot again. He should have tried to be more clear in persuading all of you about what we really meant in his first post.
DayForce: what happens if his purchased plugin doesn't function properly after Illustrator upgrades? He has to purchase it again, doesn't he?
emil emil then seemed to have no problem understanding the intent of the original post.
Don't reduce it to a matter of semantics? Don't nitpick, Doug.
You said, "Entirely different, less inflammatory words would not have changed the fact that the OP's post alleges a greedy, monopolistic business dynamic based on no knowledge of the facts."
Is "gobbled" really that inflammatory? The same kind of inflammatory as the 3rd post in this thread? Is the OP really alleging a greedy, monopolistic business dynamic? I thought he was expressing concern over the future of his plugin and what he has to do to keep using it. (And, though he probably has no knowledge of the facts, nor is he likely to care, you "allege" he doesn't. Just saying.)
I'm being "oblique and conspiratorial"? It seems to me that you are the blowing things out of proportion.
You have a nice vocabulary. I think it's being wasted though.
As you are eager, the point of Dan's original post is that he's worried about the plugin changing hands. Obviously he cares about it. And he's annoyed that he must now buy a bigger package when the time comes to upgrade.
(By the way, sorry for being so blunt, but I wanted to make sure you didn't have to resort to semantics to get what I was saying.)
Hmm. I got tired. Couldn't finish. I tried. Guess the words got in the way. But I'm sure somewhere buried deep within them is a simple explanation of the OP's intentions. Oh well.
I will say this though: suddenly I feel like a misunderstood victim. And I kinda like it! It's actually liberating!
So maybe I do understand after all. Thanks, John.
Scott, far too harsh a judgment.
You really ought to try on a victim's costume before you get up on that high horse of yours. Really. It's inexpensive, readily available, and the moment you put it on, you get to express all your grievances about the world's imperfections.
In a flourish of freedom, you'll begin to ignore the impact of your words on others and fully enjoy the pure relief of "expressing yourself." The facts will no longer hold dominion over your thinking. All that will matter is your "perspective." Suddenly you'll be quite sure your sanctimonious positions are in every case correct! I'm telling you it's a wonderful life as a misunderstood, ill-treated victim. You really need to try it.