That was a really good read. The comments are fairly decent too.
IMO the wired app is a big fat pile of fail. A 500 MB collection of images? are they kidding?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Adobe Announces iPad-Focused Digital Publishing Platform
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That was a really good read. The comments are fairly decent too.
IMO the wired app is a big fat pile of fail. A 500 MB collection of images? are they kidding?
No. It's Adobe putting together a program that can be used by designers to make magazines for tablets and handhelds. And trust me. Adobe is fully in bed with Google. I can guarantee you Conde Naste will also have the ability to make a magazine and incorporate Flash into it that will make it look much better than the iPad version.
I'm still amiss as to why Apple themselves haven't made an iMagazine Development Tool for turning paper magazines into interactive iPad magazines. Anybody?
Maybe Apple will show one off at WWDC.
Adobe is taking baby steps
Most of CS5 is still carbon, I think only Photoshop is Cocoa. Indesign is a poor tool for making interactive content. They need to build a new Cocoa version incorporating Dreamweaver type stuff. Actually they need to build a new Dreamweaver that supports open standards and make working with it easy and progressive so that both new users and power users can effectively use it.
They have achieved this in with Photoshop - you can use it with little experience but the more you use it the more power you can get out of it.
It is a good step for Adobe and Apple to have the main print publishing tool support output for iPhone OS content. Adobe should be working with Apple on to make a real tool for interactive publishing.
The funny thing is if you buy Adobe's web / interactive bundle you don't even get Indesign - shows how much direction Adobe has put into making it for interactive content. Illustrator does not even support embedded URL's in PDF output!
CS6 needs a unified interface and simpler tools for web / interactive content!!!!
Most of CS5 is still carbon, I think only Photoshop is Cocoa. Indesign is a poor tool for making interactive content. They need to build a new Cocoa version incorporating Dreamweaver type stuff. Actually they need to build a new Dreamweaver that supports open standards and make working with it easy and progressive so that both new users and power users can effectively use it.
They have achieved this in with Photoshop - you can use it with little experience but the more you use it the more power you can get out of it.
It is a good step for Adobe and Apple to have the main print publishing tool support output for iPhone OS content. Adobe should be working with Apple on to make a real tool for interactive publishing.
The funny thing is if you buy Adobe's web / interactive bundle you don't even get Indesign - shows how much direction Adobe has put into making it for interactive content. Illustrator does not even support embedded URL's in PDF output!
CS6 needs a unified interface and simpler tools for web / interactive content!!!!
It will save publishers so much time and money now that they can export for both print and interactive from the same application.
Hope Apple doesn't find some obscure reason to reject it
Hope Apple doesn't find some obscure reason to reject it
Finally, Adobe is starting to think straight.
A few weeks ago I wrote an article regarding how Digital Magazine Publishing and HTML5 could be a great opportunity for Adobe. I also talked about how they could establish a standard grammar for digital magazine navigation (this could also be customizable, though). Full Article here.
Though I don't think they're supporting HTML5 the way I'd find best (which would be as the structure of a digital magazine issue, supported by javascript and CSS3), I think they're starting to evaluate new ways past the Flash-Flash-Flash thinking (although this new platform also allows Flash technology).
The Size of the "Wired magazine for iPad" app is not good indeed.
HTML5 would be a better fit for it.
A few weeks ago I wrote an article regarding how Digital Magazine Publishing and HTML5 could be a great opportunity for Adobe. I also talked about how they could establish a standard grammar for digital magazine navigation (this could also be customizable, though). Full Article here.
Though I don't think they're supporting HTML5 the way I'd find best (which would be as the structure of a digital magazine issue, supported by javascript and CSS3), I think they're starting to evaluate new ways past the Flash-Flash-Flash thinking (although this new platform also allows Flash technology).
The Size of the "Wired magazine for iPad" app is not good indeed.
HTML5 would be a better fit for it.
Just wrong. Basically, any third party development app that isn't objective C/Apple's is prohibited.
Apple's banning of Adobe flash products (and other third party environments) from the iphone are two and distinctive things.
1. Flash content (video, vectors, web stuff) running in a browser or other other app that pulls in separate content.
2. Apps that aren't "flash" but happened to be developed using Adobe's Flash software. In fact, these apps may have have none of the traditional flash content.
THESE ARE TWO VERY DIFFERENT THINGS PEOPLE. Steve Jobs cites different reasons for each situation.
80%? I doubt that. IIRC, the number that Adobe uses is 50% of their CS sales is on OS X.
Is this because everything is loaded at one go, and then you don't need connectivity to browse through the photos and videos? I like the idea that you get all the digital assets to pay for whether you are going to consume now or not, but I guess it will be important for them to give an option to load page by page smartly as you navigate.
However saying that, those books do not have the graphics etc that are associated with the wired mag. If the wired magazine was just a magazine that turned pages and had nothing but static images, the size would be right about 30-50megs, which is what my magazines are coming in at. However they are just that, basic magazines. They are not anywhere close to what the wired magazine is.
Maybe an option to download a static mag without the functionality of the dynamic one? That might be an option.
A good opportunity for Adobe
That's right.
However, would this idea be possible a Cocoa Touch wrapper reading HTML5 / CSS3 / Javascript content / structure ?
If so this could happen, right? or is it a long shot ?
That's right.
However, would this idea be possible a Cocoa Touch wrapper reading HTML5 / CSS3 / Javascript content / structure ?
If so this could happen, right? or is it a long shot ?
I'm fascinated by your theories and I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter. Based on what I saw of the Wired magazine app on the iPad, I cannot fathom how inclusion of flash would make it look better. The lack of embedded video is a problem with the tool Adobe used since other apps like the NYTimes one can play video inline.
Besides the video issue, they had what you would expect from flash like buttons to show different panel graphics/photos and interactive 360 view models.
It was done and shown last year.
This is a concept using Flash. Before Adobe/Conde Nast knew it couldn't use Flash.
I realize this is a concept. I'm still looking for the official Adobe Air demo they showed at Computex.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5CzQyjw1Gw
I don't have an iPad yet (will very shortly, I hope) but how come nobody is comparing this to the Popular Science Magazine app? I thought people said that it too was pretty slick and you download the entire magazine to the iPad so you can be offline to read it, yet it was only 20mb download. So what is the difference between the Wired app and the Popular Science app for those who have actually used both? Just curious if there is more interactivity or something in the Wired app that causes it to be so bloated?
hmmm
I didn't want to upgrade to CS5 but I may have to (if I want to access layered photoshop files that Pixelmator won't open). This Digital Design Reader is still heavily reliant on Flash but in the future HTML5 will be supported.
Watch and wait. I think Adobe should have unveiled this without the negative ads regarding Apple. But it's kind of funny that Adobe is frantically trying to save face with Apple after such a blowout.
We'll see.
I didn't want to upgrade to CS5 but I may have to (if I want to access layered photoshop files that Pixelmator won't open). This Digital Design Reader is still heavily reliant on Flash but in the future HTML5 will be supported.
Watch and wait. I think Adobe should have unveiled this without the negative ads regarding Apple. But it's kind of funny that Adobe is frantically trying to save face with Apple after such a blowout.
We'll see.
Ya. It is a native app, but I want to know how this platform works. How does it not violate the TOS in not cross compiling or using 3rd party development tools???
I guess it codes it natively but I want more info on how the programming and the platform actually work within Apple's TOS. Anybody know?
Adobe's Market Positioning
Forget what people are saying about Flash being dead... Even without Flash, Adobe is positioning itself perfectly. Digital distribution of magazine and content is going to continue, and now more than ever - there needs to be a leader in the production of that content for multiple platforms. Soon there will be HP/Palm OS, Android, Microsoft tablets... nobody wants to produce the same content over and over.
As newspapers and other print media die out... there is no other clear cut leader in digital prodcution besides Adobe. They need to execute well, and they will be bigger than they were with just Flash & the internet.
Forget what people are saying about Flash being dead... Even without Flash, Adobe is positioning itself perfectly. Digital distribution of magazine and content is going to continue, and now more than ever - there needs to be a leader in the production of that content for multiple platforms. Soon there will be HP/Palm OS, Android, Microsoft tablets... nobody wants to produce the same content over and over.
As newspapers and other print media die out... there is no other clear cut leader in digital prodcution besides Adobe. They need to execute well, and they will be bigger than they were with just Flash & the internet.
I don't see how they are trying to save face with this move... it's just a smart business move now and for the future (when there are mutliple tablet platforms).
Finally Adobe makes the right move. This is what they should be doing, not trying to repurpose Flash to this task.
Why, specifically?
Are you aware that Apple didn't bother updating its own Finder - the most commonly used app in OS X - until Snow Leopard? And that Final Cut Pro still isn't Cocoa?
This stuff matters to end users only to the degree that Steve says it does.
I agree. This is the way you deal with a paradigm shift in your market, not fighting to maintain your status quo without regard for innovation.
It starts with a page turn...
...and then the ability to hide and show page elements, with transition effects, and animations, and then arbitrary clickable regions with behaviors, and version by version a new Flash-like tool is born.
I wonder how many minutes it'll be before Apple turns out another SDK license....
...and then the ability to hide and show page elements, with transition effects, and animations, and then arbitrary clickable regions with behaviors, and version by version a new Flash-like tool is born.
I wonder how many minutes it'll be before Apple turns out another SDK license....
Apple could offer a cloud service ala issuu.com with more advanced capabilities to build online publications.
Issuu has free publications and a subscription based model.
Issuu has free publications and a subscription based model.