FH, alas, is in a 'mature market.'

[David Maurand]

Such is the case that in mature markets growth slows, and so inevitably does
the cash flow that fuels innovation. It's a natural curve, and the companies
that mature but remain innovative are the true success stories (IBM, GE,
Verizon, maybe MicroSoft). The only thing that would restore Macromedia's
interest in FH to something like full-bore attention would be some ideas to
make FH a high-growth, high-cashflow, high-margin product. (It doesn't help
that MM bought out some other companies it has no business owning,
especially in light of the .com contraction - but there's a signal to you
right there: they're focused on a newer market [the internet] which is 10
years younger than digitized graphic workflow, i.e. 'print.'.)

My suggestion? Let's toss around some ideas that would make FH attractive to
new classes of users - the company wouldn't live very long on 'free' updates
to FHMX no matter how flawed. They need to make this product exciting to new
users.

First suggestion: FH can be accessed within Quark maybe as an Xtension (much
in the same way AI features can be invoked within InDesign). Better yet: buy
Quark, a company whose customer service is indisputably worse than anyone
else in the graphic/visual industry. And then elevate Fireworks to handle
the the size and scope of work now done by Photoshop.

Second suggestion: go *seriously* into plug-ins, for example, advanced
pagination with automatic page numbers, text-flow, text linking. This would
generate additional revenue to help finance continuing R&D on FH. (I'd
happily pay for this plug-in.) They've already created the socket. Let's get
plug-ins for web designers AND print designers....FreeHand doesn't have to
be an all-or-nothing proposition, does it?

Third suggestion: create and integrate templates for use with digital
cameras, the next wave in home computer usage. Great opportunity to leverage
FireWorks or a kind of PhotoWorks plug-in that would create easy contact
sheets, CD labels, photo prints, etc.

[Linda Rathgeber]

On 8/5/2003 10:13 AM, David Maurand wrote:

> And then elevate Fireworks to handle
> the the size and scope of work now done by Photoshop.

No thanks. I want Fireworks to remain dedicated to Web graphic production.



Best regards,
Linda Rathgeber
----------------
Victoriana | [url]http://www.projectseven.com/dpacks/vic/index.htm[/url]
Theme Pack 03 - Club | [url]www.projectseven.com[/url] |mm2| themes
Contributor *PVII Foundations* [url]www.projectseven.com[/url]
Co-author *Playing with Fire* [url]www.playingwithfire.com[/url]
Team MM Fireworks Volunteer | [url]www.macromedia.com/go/team[/url]
-----------------

[darrel]

> My suggestion? Let's toss around some ideas that would make FH attractive
to

> new classes of users

No...that would be bad. It is an illustration application. Don't make it
something else.

It had a chance in the past to be a good page layout app, but they never
improved upon the base set of page layout features and I think InDesign has
clearly taken over that realm.

> First suggestion: FH can be accessed within Quark maybe as an Xtension

XPress users are a dying breed as well...no point targetting them.

> in the same way AI features can be invoked within InDesign). Better yet:

buy

> Quark, a company whose customer service is indisputably worse than anyone

XPress is a dead product. There is really no point building upon it's
current code base.

> Second suggestion: go *seriously* into plug-ins, for example, advanced
> pagination with automatic page numbers, text-flow, text linking. This

would

> generate additional revenue to help finance continuing R&D on FH.

People don't want plug-ins. They want built-in functionality.

> Third suggestion: create and integrate templates for use with digital
> cameras, the next wave in home computer usage. Great opportunity to

leverage

> FireWorks or a kind of PhotoWorks plug-in that would create easy contact
> sheets, CD labels, photo prints, etc.

Most computers come with such software already. No need to market a
professional illustration package to home photographers.

If Macromedia really wants a boost in FH sales, how about fixing the bugs?

-Darrel

[darrel]

> I think you miss the point. If they DON'T find a way to appeal to new

> classes of users then they won't support Freehand because they won't be

able

> to afford to spend serious time on it anymore.

So be it. Maybe MM will then sell it to someone that will take care of it
properly.

> Flash and Dreamweaver sites?) Let's help them out with some ideas, and set

a

> new tone for this forum.

I still stand behind my statement that if they want to sell more FH, then
fix the bugs.

Like you say, FH is a pretty mature product. Don't *add* anything to it.
Just fix the current problems and then simply maintain it. We don't need new
features anymore. They've had 11 tries to give it all of the functionality
it needs. Just fix the bugs ;o)

-Darrel

[Brian Pylant]

> So be it. Maybe MM will then sell it to someone that will take care of it

> properly.

Doubtfull, should it come to that (which I honestly hope it will not).
Look at Fontographer...

[wrand@mac.com]

David Maurand wrote:

>I think you miss the point. If they DON'T find a way to appeal to new
>classes of users then they won't support Freehand because they won't be able
>to afford to spend serious time on it anymore. (Seen all the traffic at the
>Flash and Dreamweaver sites?) Let's help them out with some ideas, and set a
>new tone for this forum.

It is a sticky dilemma. Freehand is an illustration program focusing on print reproduction. Pushing it to enter new markets (like the Web) pulls resources away from refining the core functions and fixing bugs. But is the illustration for print market enough to keep the program viable? Is there a market that is close enough to its current market that it wouldn't be too much of a stretch for the program to enter?

I think that if they focused on illustration tools and squashing bugs they would win a lot of customers over. The extrude tool is a great idea and could be extremely useful with some more attention. And I'd like to see more done with the brush tool. Perhaps something along the lines of the program Expression. And there seems to be a lot of call for tables. Improving the chart tool and addding a table tool could help win some new customers in combination with the flow chart tool.

[Tom Unger]

David Maurand;
Are you sure? There does seem to be a need for reliability in this
market now.
Perhaps a "kick butt" dependable vector illustration tool is something
many developers need for all types of work. Along with postscript output, it
is used to export to many other applications--flash, 3d, image editing for
print, screen and video etc... If Freehand had some of the additional
illustration features described by James Talmage (I'd have flown _him_ in to
speak with the engineers) Judy Arndt and other long time Freehand users the
past few years, and _if_ they could clean up the bugs and long standing
workarounds--Freehand could easily become the vector tool of choice.
I think the page layout features are good for MM's web designer clients
who may not do enough of this work to justify having QE or ID, so these can
also be improved upon...
I'm don't really "get" the value of raster features, although I have
not yet tried fhdmx--do they offer anything that Fireworks, Photoshop etc do
not already provide? -Tom Unger

[darrel]

> Freehand is an illustration program focusing on print reproduction.

> Pushing it to enter new markets (like the Web) pulls resources away
> from refining the core functions and fixing bugs.

I'm also confused about attempting to make FH a web product. I am a web
designer myself and have always used FH. Draw in freehand, cut and paste
into my web apps...done! What other integration do I really need? All of the
web-format export tools...none of them are as good as PS or FW...why did MM
bother developing them?

> But is the illustration for print market enough to keep the program

viable?

It's a vector drawing tool...not just for print illustrators. Nearly every
designer (graphic, web, industrial, etc) needs to have a vector-based
illustration tool. Not just for traditional illustration, either. I've used
FH for logos, maps, illustrations, charts, brochures, magazines, invoices
and even rudimentary CAD drawings.

> Is there a market that is close enough to its current market that it

wouldn't

> be too much of a stretch for the program to enter?

Why can't it stay where it is? Why does software need infinite upgrades? I
can't imagine they'd need any more than one or two part time developers to
fix the bugs and just keep MM in maintenance mode.

> And there seems to be a lot of call for tables. Improving the chart tool

and addding a table tool

> could help win some new customers in combination with the flow chart tool.

I think if MM had focuses on page layout tools a bit more a few years ago,
they could have easily solidified themselves as a decent page layout
application. That's the one item really missing from the MX Suite. If FH
added a few features like:

- Better page navigator
- Automatic Page numbering
- More robust word-wrapping settings

....it would be a very appealing way to improve the MX Suite. People now
still need to buy XPress or Indesign for large document layout, so while
improving page layout in FH may not increase FH sales alone, it may help
sell the MX Suite overall. Things like hanging punctuation and table support
would be huge improvements for a LOT of XPress users. Granted, the
XPress-user market is a rather difficult market to get to accept change.

[darrel]

> don't care a fig for the webtools.

> Just an idea.

As I mentioned in my other post, most web developers don't care a fig for
the webtools in FH either. ;o)

-Darrel

[Danny Whitehead]

in article BB5D4E3C.8D05%david@maurand.com, David Maurand at
[email]david@maurand.com[/email] wrote on 11/8/03 5:44 pm:

> need a new market to prime the revenue pump.

How about existing Illustrator users, or those new to graphics (print pr
web), who need a powerful vector drawing application?

Speaking of AI, why isn't Adobe having these 'mature market' problems you
describe?


Danny

[joeldberry webforumsuser@macromedia.com]

The difference is, Adobe releases updates (3 so far for version 10) for Illustrator...

[Danny Whitehead]

in article BB5EF6C1.8D86%david@maurand.com, David Maurand at
[email]david@maurand.com[/email] wrote on 12/8/03 11:55 pm:

> They rejuvenated their product with v9/10 which added a lot of creative
> tools, such as photoshop filters, soft shadows, etc.

New features that give more creative power to the existing user base,
convincing them to upgrade, and those new to vector graphics creation to
choose Illustrator. Not to mention the revenue they are getting from
Freehand refugees making the switch. I'm not against adding such features to
Freehand (providing they are well-implemented), once they've fixed the
existing tools, but I feel your idea of transforming FH into something it
isn't, in a vain attempt to create a new market, is a bad one.

> But have you visited
> their forum lately? You read the same complaints there as here. Plenty of
> bugs, including a serious type bug that's plaguing large publishers.

Yep, I read the Adobe forums, and the AI users, while not without their
complaints, are generally a happier bunch than we are. This is partly
because they know that when they do complain, it won't be in vain, and Adobe
will likely admit problems with their software, and fix them.


Danny

[David Maurand]

> Freehand (providing they are well-implemented), once they've fixed the

> existing tools, but I feel your idea of transforming FH into something it
> isn't, in a vain attempt to create a new market, is a bad one.
>

But better than having MM ditch FH altogether - a fate that's inevitable if
they can't find a way to make money. That's the way free markets work. With
luck, they'll sell it. But to whom? Extensis?