Why did you get rid of fireworks?

Discontinued apps are only there for paid Creative Cloud members with an ALL Apps plan and a supporting computer OS that can run legacy 32-bit apps.  

By @Nancy OShea

yes, Fw is still available... but I can't find Fl, Fr, Di, Edge... to name but a few, but which goes to show just how special Fw is. 😉

yes, it's true that Fw isn't young, but how effective is he? .... he's a rare commodity.

@B i r n o uI used to be an avid FireWorks user back in the day. Nowadays I could not imagine using it, because (at least for me) it is missing core essential functionality.

And I dislike working in either Photoshop or Illustrator. Affinity doesn't cut it for me either due to a clunky workflow and missing core functionality.

But this discusses the shortcomings of Fireworks. You may think that I dislike FireWorks after reading this list, but I really do not. I loved working in it when it was relevant.

To name but a few core issues:

[1] Anti-aliasing control. Yes: text includes good options. Otherwise it lacks control over (placed) bitmap graphics and how those are rendered. Also see (3). And the quality of the anti-aliasing leaves a lot to be desired. This is important to get right.

[2] Lack of a real-time workflow. Most visual controls have to be confirmed in FireWorks before the view is updated. In modern workflows visual changes are applied in real-time when the user edits visual properties. In FW it leads to more trial and error and time lost. I find this really frustrating in FireWorks. It's clunky and counter-intuitive. UX has moved on.

[3] Lack of image interpolation/resampling methods. At the very least offer CatmullRom and a few others. No such luck - worse than Photoshop and Illustrator (which are not that great either...). Yes, it matters for final image quality. I may be a nitpicker, but it does matter.

[4] Old-fashioned outdated set of vector tools. Things have moved on. Compare modern updated vector illustration tools (have you seen the latest Inkscape?) and you will find that FireWorks is far FAR behind in this regard.

It wouldn't be such an issue if a round-tripping workflow could be set up with other vector apps (see [8] ) via the use SVG but the lack of proper SVG support and difficulties of integrating FW in an existing pipeline do require a focus on the limited vector tools that are on offer.

[5] quite a few (all?) of the Filters are outdated and lack finesse and/or control. For example, bevel does not offer a custom curve. And the render quality is questionable and (to me) unusable in production. Again, times have moved on in this regard.

And the number of filters available is quite limited compared to current bitmap editing tools.

[6] extremely clunky and limited bitmap editing tools. Severe lack of functionality in regard to channel editing or masking in general. It is laughably simplistic in its approach to bitmap editing and lacks a non-destructive work paradigm. Compare the workflow in PhotoLine (also combines bitmap with vector tools in one program) and it is easy to see where FireWorks fails. Or Affinity. The fact that FireWorks is a 2-in-1 tool is no excuse for its limitations (even at the time when it was released in my opinion - it forced me to move away from FW at the time).

[7] As mentioned already, FireWorks cannot accommodate a modern file format workflow. WebP, Avif, Animated PNG, Animated WebP... Not possible without external tools or more complex pipelines. But thereal  issue is the core workflow which is still based on slicing. A much simpler workflow is the one where each page/group/layer/object is assigned export properties. (Figma, PhotoLine, etc.)
Nor is it possible to easily export multiple versions at different resolutions and/or using varying file formats in one step. 

Control over optimization is relatively limited as well compared to other tools. FireWorks used to be top dog here, but those times are long gone. Dithering options, anyone?

[8] It is not easy to integrate FireWorks in a pipeline where it works seamlessly together with other software. For example, in PhotoLine it takes a few seconds to set up a live round-trip connection with Inkscape or other export tools.

I can send a vector layer/group to Inkscape with one shortcut key, edit the objects in InkScape, save, and switch back to PhotoLine where the layers are updated. and the connection remains live, so I can switch back and forth without having to worry about saving/exporting and loading files.

Same with Krita when I require more "out-there" filters or bitmap effects.

Super convenient and it saves a lot of time.

It can be argued that software such as Photoshop and Illustrator do not offer such functionality either, but the industry caters for that via plugins.

[9] other missing things such as a dark mode, full screen mode, missing CSS conversion support, and so on. The list is long.

BUT! I do still love:

[1] the share layer options. I wish I had those in other software. Xara has it, but I do not use that software in my work. I am amazed that particular feature hasn't made it in other software. It would save me quite a bit of time.

[2] the simple master page system.

It was easy to love FireWorks at its heyday. But those days are long gone, and I personally would miss too many things and core workflow bits. I fired up FW (see what I did there? 😉 ) the other day, and it just felt as if I stepped back in the previous century. I could not imagine using it in my work.

Nostalgy is a good thing, yet it shouldn't get in the way of getting things done efficiently and at a high standard. My time is precious to me 🙂

All that said: use whichever software works for you for your job. If FireWorks remains good enough for what you need: more power to you!