Alternatives to the Creative Cloud

[davedunlap1]

With Adobe's decisions to force users to go to subscribe to the creative cloud, I thought it might be a good idea to get a list going of some alternative programs. I'm a designer working mostly in print with some web - anyone know of some good alternatives for these?

Photoshop -> Gimp

Illustrator -> ?

Indesign - Quark

Dreamweaver - ?

Flash - been moving away from that anyway

What programs are you going to look into to replace the creative cloud?

[Biggles_Lamb]

Your comments clearly demonstrate that you have absolutely no idea of how anything works in the creative field.

Mobile devices are toys, they are temporary handy little things to make some other task easier.

You cannot use a tablet for serious Photoshop, Premiere or After Effects work

ergo, you know nothing

Get a life and only comment when you have something serious to contribute

[D Sam Hartman]

Professional pirate, you add nothing but weak attempt to derail. Go back to your cubicle.

For the rest of us, to reiterate, this poll is only at 36,000 signatrures so far. Spread it.

[God_I_hate_Adon_tbe]

ygt42876 wrote:

Professional pirate, you add nothing but weak attempt to derail. Go back to your cubicle.

For the rest of us, to reiterate, this poll is only at 36,000 signatrures so far. Spread it.

Rather than just filling in some poll that most likely has less influence than a North Atlantic prawn, just vote with your feet.

[D Sam Hartman]

While I suspect that's partly true, there's always strength in numbers, especially for the genius accountants that jumped the gun on clouding. I certainly havn't given Adobe a dime since this debacle.

[cswyatt]

There are a number of good photo and vector illustration apps for OS X. If you search Graphics.com, Creative Cow, and other sites, you can find plenty of lists of alternatives, ranging in price from free to the same range as Adobe's apps. From Acorn to Pixelmator (http://www.pixelmator.com), you can find some pretty amazing apps.

The Autodesk apps for OS X, like SketchBook Pro and Inventor Fusion, are amazing. Corel's Painter is also a great app for bitmap and limited vector work. You don't need a tablet to enjoy Painter or SketchBook -- I use them for editing Web images on my MacBook Pro. GraphicConverter is handy, too, in case you can't open an image format in the apps you prefer.

We are testing Quark, but InDesign 5.5 still meets our needs. Updating to CS6 was a thought, but a few extra features... blah.

Dreamweaver is behind Coda 2, in my view, and there are plenty of other options, too. At least a dozen, from too simple (RapidWeaver) to extremely powerful (Espresso).

I do use VirtualBox (free) to run Windows because I must test websites and images on Windows. I could use BootCamp for speed, but I don't need performance to test images and pages.

[AtonMusic]

Unfortunately nothing really replaces Photoshop !

The rest - you can ditch !

[ReactionAtWork]

"Unfortunately nothing really replaces Photoshop".

Wrong. This is what many people believe, when the only files they ever receive or create are TIFFs or JPGs! Endless companies think that if you want to edit bitmaps then you must have Photoshop - which is 95% overkill and bloat. Corel PhotoPaint easily covers the ground that most Photoshop users need, and the entire Corel Suite costs much less than Photoshop. And if you still love Adobe or need to open RAW files, but Lightroom instead!

And why bother with Illustrator?  As a former Corel Draw user for many years, I was astonished at how clunky, crude, and downright awkward Illustrator is to use. Corel will still output the PDF, SVG or EPS vector files that people actually place in their documents / webpages.

[dawidowicz]

Well, Aton's phrase should be like: unfortunately nothing really replaces Photoshop/Adobe in the industry-based work.

As long as you work directly for the end client you might export your files in any format you like. The printing-shops are using all variety of software, including some ancient digits, but that's a different story. It's the result that counts in general. But if you are cooperating with other companies or individuals within our industry it's more likely you'll receive .psd or .ai drafts and source files. If you work on Corel then you're puting yourself in disadvantage since it's not reading Adobe's layers, blending modes or effects so well. And flattening every single change is counter-productive.

As for the workflow - it's simply a matter of a habit and preference. I find Corel "clunky and crude" and most plaussible reason is that I don't have as many workhours in it. On the other hand Adobe's soft were easier for me to learn in the first place. Now Illustrator/PS combo became intuitive enough that I don't think how to get to the option I want, I simply press the customed hotkeys subconsciously.

[wkjeiwoi]

ReactionAtWork wrote:

"Unfortunately nothing really replaces Photoshop".

Wrong. This is what many people believe, when the only files they ever receive or create are TIFFs or JPGs! Endless companies think that if you want to edit bitmaps then you must have Photoshop - which is 95% overkill and bloat. Corel PhotoPaint easily covers the ground that most Photoshop users need, and the entire Corel Suite costs much less than Photoshop. And if you still love Adobe or need to open RAW files, but Lightroom instead!

And why bother with Illustrator?  As a former Corel Draw user for many years, I was astonished at how clunky, crude, and downright awkward Illustrator is to use. Corel will still output the PDF, SVG or EPS vector files that people actually place in their documents / webpages.

Nicely stated...it illustrates a couple of things..that people have grown to believe that nothing can replace their beloved tools, and that often perception trumps reality.

The reality is that you actually could do your Photoshop work without Photoshop, right up to the point where features imposed by Photoshop onto a file are needed to edit. But that is true of nearly any software, even word processors.

I've spent countless hours in Photoshop as many of you have. I've also done my own trials in Gimp and Pixelmator and you know what?

I got the job done.

The seas didn't part, the sun did not explode, and pink elephants did not drop from the heavens, splatting all about.

[Sara_Reese]

Hi, just thought I would add a programme to the list. My studio also wont be paying for a subscription, so i have been looking at alternative programmes, coral, avid etc.

I found FREE design and web design programmes from Microsoft, and no one seems to have mentioned them anywhere, so thought I would share! They look pretty good:

Design: expressions 4

http://www.microsoft.com/en-GB/download/details.aspx?id=36180 (DESIGN)

http://www.microsoft.com/en-GB/download/details.aspx?id=36179 (WEB)

[Phillip_M_Jones]

Not available for Mac.

[wkjeiwoi]

Just as well...jeepers, what an interface!

[Adobe_Hacker]

Phillip Jones wrote:

Not available for Mac.

Are you really surprised by this?  I always thought that everybody knew that Microsoft is primarily a Windows based Software distributor but it seems not many people seem to know this.  I guess the mistake it made is to make Office for Mac and this has confused many people out there.

Which particular software are you after?  Your CS6 desktop version will continue forever, did you know this?  You don't need anything else for quite a few years.  Adobe realized this and that is why it brought out CC to make sure revenue keeps coming in.

We in the hackers community are disappointed like you because we have no products to hack and to distribute key generator and cracks.

Its a really sad day on this once a wonderful planet!!!!!!!!!

[billhdz]

Phillip Jones wrote:

Not available for Mac.

I tried in on my Mac with Parallels Desktop 8 and it runs fantastic!

[frankgrimes]

@sara -- Not sure if it was this tread or another, but someone did mention Web Expressions and I also suggested at that time not to use it. Every single MS product produces the most ridiculous code. As a professional web developer, I charge more to clean up after someone using any MS product to create HTML.

Seriously, HTML is not hard. You open a tag, you close a tag. Keep it all neat and indented so anyone else can read and follow it. Not that hard. You don't need anything more than a text editor to write html/css/php.

All that Dreamweaver did for me (and not very well, which is why I haven't it used it such a long time) is give you a way to edit with a WYSIWYG editor. The problem with that is DW needs to mimic a browser and it can't do that very well, especially when you use PHP or any server-side language. The best way to code for the web is with a text editor and browser. Change the code, save it, reload the page in the browser. After 20 years or so, this is still the best way to code.

Right now, I use UltraEdit to write my code. It can be set up to FTP files your server when saving. Easy as that. The syntax highlighting is a bit hinky, but I don't really care. $30 and it comes in Windows, Mac and Linux flavors.

[Adobe_Hacker]

Not sure if it was this tread or another, but someone did mention Web Expressions and I also suggested at that time not to use it. Every single MS product produces the most ridiculous code. As a professional web developer, I charge more to clean up after someone using any MS product to create HTML.

This is not quite correct.  IMO EW4 is the best HTML editor around;  better than DW CS6.  I actually bought it when it first came out and now, as you may know, Microsoft has decided to not develop it further and it has agreed with Adobe to continue with its CC product.  When CC is established then M$ will enter the market once again and market its product aggressively.

EW4 is now free and people should download it ASAP because it won't remain there forever.

As to other program posted by Sara, I have no knowledge of it because I don't do graphics as much.  Whatever I want to do is done in Fireworks (this too is now abandoned by Adobe) and so I have started using Photoshop Elements 11.

EW4 generates very clean code that you can understand if you have to read it on the screen.  Since you are a professional Web Developer, it would be the best software to use IMO.

[frankgrimes]

Adobe.Hacker wrote:

Not sure if it was this tread or another, but someone did mention Web Expressions and I also suggested at that time not to use it. Every single MS product produces the most ridiculous code. As a professional web developer, I charge more to clean up after someone using any MS product to create HTML.

This is not quite correct.  IMO EW4 is the best HTML editor around;  better than DW CS6.  I actually bought it when it first came out and now, as you may know, Microsoft has decided to not develop it further and it has agreed with Adobe to continue with its CC product.  When CC is established then M$ will enter the market once again and market its product aggressively.

EW4 is now free and people should download it ASAP because it won't remain there forever.

As to other program posted by Sara, I have no knowledge of it because I don't do graphics as much.  Whatever I want to do is done in Fireworks (this too is now abandoned by Adobe) and so I have started using Photoshop Elements 11.

EW4 generates very clean code that you can understand if you have to read it on the screen.  Since you are a professional Web Developer, it would be the best software to use IMO.

Maybe we're seeing different products then because the version I've seen is a disaster. It may be better than frontpage, but everything is.

And because this is a MS product, expect it to change with the next version.

Please, just use anything else. NetObjection Fusion. Xstandard. Anything except MS.

[wkjeiwoi]

I don't believe that frankgrimes' earlier comments that all you need is a text editor can be over-emphasized.

I don't know a professional developer who actually uses DW full time. Many hobbyists do, some firms whose focus is just now the web have been using it but it's falling out of favor.

as frank points out, coding by hand is not difficult. Even hairy, thick snarky coding isn't hard to do by hand, and if you're using DW to hand-code anyway, what's the real benefit?

BBEdit and Text wrangler for Mac, Crimson for PC, all alert you to most problems as you're coding by changing that text's color.

The hope for some great WYSIWYG code app is just that...a hope.

Real coders type their code; hobbyists and tourists don't

[Phillip_M_Jones]

You mention Front Page. Dw has a Built in feature  Called Called "Fix Microsoft HTML" And it works well.

[frankgrimes]

No it doesn't. It's not accurate enough and leaves more work. It only works for simple things like bold and paragraph tags but not much else.

[billhdz]

Sara.Reese wrote:

Hi, just thought I would add a programme to the list. My studio also wont be paying for a subscription, so i have been looking at alternative programmes, coral, avid etc.

I found FREE design and web design programmes from Microsoft, and no one seems to have mentioned them anywhere, so thought I would share! They look pretty good:

Design: expressions 4

http://www.microsoft.com/en-GB/download/details.aspx?id=36180 (DESIGN)

http://www.microsoft.com/en-GB/download/details.aspx?id=36179 (WEB)

Nice find. Thanks!

[God_I_hate_Adon_tbe]

Sara.Reese wrote:

I found FREE design and web design programmes from Microsoft, and no one seems to have mentioned them anywhere, so thought I would share!

Be careful - usually Microsoft don't give free software for anything other than personal use.  You may want to check the licence agreement before you publish anything other than HTML files, and even then you may want to check the file details to make sure it's not stamped somehow by M$.

[dawidowicz]

I got the job done.

You know, but it's not about getting the job done. That depends more on personal skills than the brand of hammer that you use to nail the problem. It's about how do you get the job done, does the hammer of your choice grant you possibility of making it as effort-less and smooth as possible. If the Gimp, Corel or any other brand gives you that possibility - great, keep using it. Nothing will part or explode, that's certain. But I cannot agree that Adobe's software popularity is only a product of the hype - belive it or not, like it or not, but this industry in majority considers it as the best. And as far as I can tell with my humble expierence, it's true - Adobe's soft was always esiest to learn, and smoothless to work on.

[wkjeiwoi]

Adobe's software is good, at times, very good. I think that's why we're all here. However, it's also pretty much the only choice there is anymore. Since there is no healthy Quark or Freehand, we don't know what "best" might be. In a one-horse race, it's empty to say the winner was the best.

Even we who boost for the alternatives readily acknowledge that those titles don't hold much more than a blip of market share.

I can't agree that Adobe is where it is because it's tools are great. I know I'm out on a limb with this one, and that's ok. I recall when adobes products were great..effective, good set of features, nimble.

Then the apps got bloated and buggy, and I can attest that normal chores began to take longer than they should have. I've spent many frustrating hours trying to get adobes "best" tools to simply work properly. It's no slam-dunk, for my money.

Some have argued, "that's the price you pay for all the features," or "If you don't like it, use something else."

I guess some will pay the price, others will use something else.

[frankgrimes]

wkjeiwoi wrote:

Adobe's software is good, at times, very good. I think that's why we're all here. However, it's also pretty much the only choice there is anymore. Since there is no healthy Quark or Freehand, we don't know what "best" might be. In a one-horse race, it's empty to say the winner was the best.

Even we who boost for the alternatives readily acknowledge that those titles don't hold much more than a blip of market share.

I can't agree that Adobe is where it is because it's tools are great. I know I'm out on a limb with this one, and that's ok. I recall when adobes products were great..effective, good set of features, nimble.

Then the apps got bloated and buggy, and I can attest that normal chores began to take longer than they should have. I've spent many frustrating hours trying to get adobes "best" tools to simply work properly. It's no slam-dunk, for my money.

Some have argued, "that's the price you pay for all the features," or "If you don't like it, use something else."

I guess some will pay the price, others will use something else.

The thing about adobe products for me is they have everything I need in one package. Each product is not exactly the best in its field, but convenient to buy and integerated well enough to use together.

There are plenty of other tools out there that do what adobe's products do -- some even better -- so it's a really a matter of exploring these options and finding what works best for me.

Photoshop? check out OnOne software, Topaz Labs, ArcSoft, anything from Corel.

Illustrator? CorelDraw all the way.

I can't find an alternative to After Effects so I live with CS6 as long as possible.

Dreamweaver? Any text editor.