Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
On 5/18/07, Ann Zdunczyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices for years but have yet to see one. On the news last night there was a story about one of the Baltic states (Estonia or Latvia, IIRC) complaining that Russia was attacking their computer systems (which, of course Russia denies!). This state is probably the only one in the world (or at least the first one) that went for the paperless office in their government offices. The CEO of F-Prot (www.fprot.com) commented that sadly it is very easy to attack and force to a standstill such systems, and that [some of] the former USSR nations were using this as a political weapon. I am not going to elaborate about it here, but such attacks can be very difficult to track, and more so as the attackers usually use thousands of sleepers all over the world for these attacks. There is, I understand, no solution to the problem in sight. I do not see a paperless office in the near future. There would have to be a major change in the Internet system for that to happen -- which might just as well end in doing away with the Internet as such. Bodvar Bjorgvinsson -- never pessimistic, even on a Monday. OK my two cents for a Friday. Have a GREAT weekend everyone. Z ** Ann Zdunczyk President a2z Publishing, Inc. Language Layout Translation Consulting Phone: (336)922-1271 Fax: (336)922-4980 Cell: (336)456-4493 http://www.a2z-pub.com ** ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview (Marcus Carr)
This is all really good reading. From: Marcus Carr [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: To: Framers List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 10:15:01 +1000 Subject: Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview Hi Dan, Daniel Emory wrote: Its estimated that 40% of the US adult population is non-literate, which means they dont read books or newspapers. This has been accompanied by a rapid decline in the ability of college students to write a half-way decent paragraph in English. The California State College system, the largest in the nation, takes almost any applicant who got through high-school degree with half-way decent grades. But about 40% of its first year students are not capable of doing college-level work, and thus their first year is dominated by remedial classes in English, Math and other subjects they should have mastered in high school. These declines all coincide with the growth of the internet, and the shift from obtaining knowledge from paper books to learning from feeble snippets of on-line text. The blogosphere, dominated by those who are at least competent in the English language, consists mainly of opinions unsupported by any factual basis. Although I feel that what you are saying may well have merit, I'm reluctant to jump to any conclusions too quickly. A favourite example of misdirected causality is the inexplicable reduction in crime for young males in New York city. Politicians claimed for years that it was due to their tough on crime policy, yet the drop surpassed that of cities with similar policies. Eventually someone figured out that it coincided with abortion being made more freely available - less children being born into poor homes where they weren't wanted translated into fewer boys thinking crime was the way up and girls thinking pregnancy was. Of course it's not conclusive, but it's as plausible as the mismatched tough on crime line... There could be an element of that in your reasoning, I feel. Whether information is to be delivered on paper or on screen doesn't predispose it to being written at a certain level of quality. Whether it's being delivered electronically or on paper, there will *always* be a need for people who are able to write clearly. Some information is too critical to risk misinterpretation. It's certainly true that there's a lot of poor writing on the internet, but that's partly because there's so much information. Take this posting as a case in point - I don't claim to write with any particular proficiency, but you're reading it because it landed in your email. Had it not, it's extremely unlikely that we'd be exchanging letters about this topic, if for no other reason than the fact that we didn't realise the other was interested in it. When you read tomes from the 1990s extolling the promise of hypertext to change the way people think and use information, (I recommend the Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook by Berk and Devlin), you begin to realize that its promise was still-born. The hypertext pioneers envisioned a rich panoply of link types that would create hypertexts which were true searchable mazes Frame Technology, beginning in FrameMaker 4, added a rich variety of hypertext link types which would have realized that original vision. True, but linking is difficult. It's easy if the ends of all of the links reside in your domain, but how do you know if the point within a document owned by someone else still means what it did when you first pointed at it? It's tough enough for a link to even know whether the document still exists, let alone how it might degrade gracefully to another resource, how to determine the impact of the missing link on the viability of the rest of the document, etc. It's still relatively early days and linking is one of the key components of a rich internet, so it's getting plenty of attention. When Adobe took over FrameMaker, it could have carried out that vision by implementing all of the FrameMaker link types in PDF. It failed to do so. And so, the HTML standard, with only the most primitive hypertext link type, became the standard. There was some hope that the XML standard would have rich linking capabilities. It added a few additional link types, but nowhere near enough to realize the original promise of hypertext. You certainly could be on to something with that - one of the ways that FrameMaker could be kept relevant would be to concentrate heavily on linking, including to documents outside of the current book. PDF would provide a great platform for that - it might even be enough to increase the use of PDF on the internet. (They'd want to make loading a PDF quicker and less obvious first though.) Getting back to what I state in the first two paragraphs above, I maintain that the ability to acquire in-depth knowledge of a subject is a discipline which is difficult to master. And I have no doubt that well-written, well-organized paper books, particularly
FW: Adobe CEO interview
Hi Dan, Daniel Emory wrote: > It?s estimated that 40% of the US adult population is non-literate, > which means they don?t read books or newspapers. This has been > accompanied by a rapid decline in the ability of college students to > write a half-way decent paragraph in English. The California State > College system, the largest in the nation, takes almost any applicant > who got through high-school degree with half-way decent grades. But > about 40% of its first year students are not capable of doing > college-level work, and thus their first year is dominated by > remedial classes in English, Math and other subjects they should have > mastered in high school. > > These declines all coincide with the growth of the internet, and the > shift from obtaining knowledge from paper books to learning from > feeble snippets of on-line text. The blogosphere, dominated by those > who are at least competent in the English language, consists mainly > of opinions unsupported by any factual basis. Although I feel that what you are saying may well have merit, I'm reluctant to jump to any conclusions too quickly. A favourite example of misdirected causality is the inexplicable reduction in crime for young males in New York city. Politicians claimed for years that it was due to their "tough on crime" policy, yet the drop surpassed that of cities with similar policies. Eventually someone figured out that it coincided with abortion being made more freely available - less children being born into poor homes where they weren't wanted translated into fewer boys thinking crime was the way up and girls thinking pregnancy was. Of course it's not conclusive, but it's as plausible as the mismatched "tough on crime" line... There could be an element of that in your reasoning, I feel. Whether information is to be delivered on paper or on screen doesn't predispose it to being written at a certain level of quality. Whether it's being delivered electronically or on paper, there will *always* be a need for people who are able to write clearly. Some information is too critical to risk misinterpretation. It's certainly true that there's a lot of poor writing on the internet, but that's partly because there's so much information. Take this posting as a case in point - I don't claim to write with any particular proficiency, but you're reading it because it landed in your email. Had it not, it's extremely unlikely that we'd be exchanging letters about this topic, if for no other reason than the fact that we didn't realise the other was interested in it. > When you read tomes from the 1990?s extolling the promise of > hypertext to change the way people think and use information, (I > recommend the ?Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook by Berk and Devlin), you > begin to realize that it?s promise was still-born. The hypertext > pioneers envisioned a rich panoply of link types that would create > hypertexts which were true ?searchable mazes? Frame Technology, > beginning in FrameMaker 4, added a rich variety of hypertext link > types which would have realized that original vision. True, but linking is difficult. It's easy if the ends of all of the links reside in your domain, but how do you know if the point within a document owned by someone else still means what it did when you first pointed at it? It's tough enough for a link to even know whether the document still exists, let alone how it might degrade gracefully to another resource, how to determine the impact of the missing link on the viability of the rest of the document, etc. It's still relatively early days and linking is one of the key components of a rich internet, so it's getting plenty of attention. > When Adobe took over FrameMaker, it could have carried out that > vision by implementing all of the FrameMaker link types in PDF. It > failed to do so. And so, the HTML standard, with only the most > primitive hypertext link type, became the standard. There was some > hope that the XML standard would have rich linking capabilities. It > added a few additional link types, but nowhere near enough to realize > the original promise of hypertext. You certainly could be on to something with that - one of the ways that FrameMaker could be kept relevant would be to concentrate heavily on linking, including to documents outside of the current book. PDF would provide a great platform for that - it might even be enough to increase the use of PDF on the internet. (They'd want to make loading a PDF quicker and less obvious first though.) > Getting back to what I state in the first two paragraphs above, I > maintain that the ability to acquire in-depth knowledge of a subject > is a discipline which is difficult to master. And I have no doubt > that well-written, well-organized paper books, particularly on > difficult subjects, will continue to be the best way to acquire real, > in-depth knowledge of a subject, and subsequently serve its owner as > a
FW: Adobe CEO interview
Peter Gold wrote: > If legible cursive writing was the sole measurement of ability, I'd > be in the same boat as many doctors - floating off to oblivion. Me too - it takes me longer to read my shopping list than to get my groceries... ;-) > However, I'd qualify Marcus' comment about using one's phone for > complex calculations. If you don't have the knowledge to derive a > statement of a need for calculating a solution by using observation, > experience, and analytic thinking, and lack the knowledge to present > the problem statement to the calculating device, then, unless the > device itself has the intelligence to do it for you, and is willing > to do it (think "I'm sorry, Dave, I can't do that") it's whether it's > the original calculus (stones used as counters), abaci, or iPhones, > it's useless. Yes, I agree with that, and I suspect that Dan may as well. (Dan, I hope I don't misrepresent your opinion in this post - I mean "Dan" metaphorically rather than personally.) The thing that's changing is that the internet is providing those devices, so we're able to get correct answers without really understanding what the question was. Take a mortgage calculator - you can pick a mortgage product, plug in the amount that you want to borrow and it will tell you what your monthly payments would be. It knows that the product you chose attracts an initiation fee and that for the amount that you wish to borrow, the bank will give you the mortgage for 25 points less than the standard interest rate. At a deeper level, it knows that the repayments are based on the assumption that the fee will be paid out of the amount borrowed, and numerous other details. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to know those things - I want to know if I'm in the ballpark. Dan might question the accuracy of the calculator and the inability to cross-check it (especially if he was a Floridian voter... :-) and I would agree with him. The average person will lose the ability to do these calculations, but in order to create the calculator, someone will always have to understand how to do them. The same applies for writing, I suspect - most of us will be able to muddle along, but specialist writers will always be required. This does leave us with a gap in our knowledge - we have no choice but to trust the calculator because we couldn't figure it out if we wanted to. I'm less concerned due to a combination of factors - I don't really care in the first place, I'm fairly certain that given the vagaries of the bank's policy I wouldn't be able to figure it out anyway and finally, I *want* the bank to tell me how much it will be. I can put much more faith in an answer that they provided than one that I worked out for myself. > My mother's criticism of the multiplication table matrix printed on > the back cover of my grade-school composition books was, "You'll > never learn to multiply by yourself, if you can just look it up!" Multiplication is an interesting case of abstraction in itself. Mathematicians (which I am *not*) regard multiplication to be shorthand for addition, but we don't teach that to kids. The question 5x6 can also be posed as 5+5+5+5+5+5, but the multiplication version is less verbose, so we pretend that they're different operations in order to make it less confusing. Well, that and the fact that the addition table matrix would have required a substantially bigger back cover... > One of the sequences bore out the premise that even young kids can > figure a lot of this (learning to use the computers to write, look for > information and learning to use it) out for themselves, and help others > to do it. It's hard to even imagine the next couple of generations of computer users. I'll get out of computers before then - it'll hurt my brain way too much trying to keep up with a grade 6 programming class... Marcus
FW: Adobe CEO interview
On 5/18/07, Ann Zdunczyk wrote: > It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices for years > but have yet to see one. On the news last night there was a story about one of the Baltic states (Estonia or Latvia, IIRC) complaining that Russia was attacking their computer systems (which, of course Russia denies!). This state is probably the only one in the world (or at least the first one) that went for the paperless office in their government offices. The CEO of F-Prot (www.fprot.com) commented that sadly it is very easy to attack and force to a standstill such systems, and that [some of] the former USSR nations were using this as a political weapon. I am not going to elaborate about it here, but such attacks can be very difficult to track, and more so as the attackers usually use thousands of "sleepers" all over the world for these attacks. There is, I understand, no solution to the problem in sight. I do not see a paperless office in the near future. There would have to be a major change in the Internet system for that to happen -- which might just as well end in doing away with the Internet as such. Bodvar Bjorgvinsson -- never pessimistic, even on a Monday. > > > OK my two cents for a Friday. > > Have a GREAT weekend everyone. > > Z > > > ** > Ann Zdunczyk > President > a2z Publishing, Inc. > Language Layout & Translation Consulting > Phone: (336)922-1271 > Fax: (336)922-4980 > Cell: (336)456-4493 > http://www.a2z-pub.com > ** >
FW: Adobe CEO interview (Marcus Carr)
This is all really good reading. From: Marcus Carr <mc...@allette.com.au> CC: To: Framers List Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 10:15:01 +1000 Subject: Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview Hi Dan, Daniel Emory wrote: > It?s estimated that 40% of the US adult population is non-literate, > which means they don?t read books or newspapers. This has been > accompanied by a rapid decline in the ability of college students to > write a half-way decent paragraph in English. The California State > College system, the largest in the nation, takes almost any applicant > who got through high-school degree with half-way decent grades. But > about 40% of its first year students are not capable of doing > college-level work, and thus their first year is dominated by > remedial classes in English, Math and other subjects they should have > mastered in high school. > > These declines all coincide with the growth of the internet, and the > shift from obtaining knowledge from paper books to learning from > feeble snippets of on-line text. The blogosphere, dominated by those > who are at least competent in the English language, consists mainly > of opinions unsupported by any factual basis. Although I feel that what you are saying may well have merit, I'm reluctant to jump to any conclusions too quickly. A favourite example of misdirected causality is the inexplicable reduction in crime for young males in New York city. Politicians claimed for years that it was due to their "tough on crime" policy, yet the drop surpassed that of cities with similar policies. Eventually someone figured out that it coincided with abortion being made more freely available - less children being born into poor homes where they weren't wanted translated into fewer boys thinking crime was the way up and girls thinking pregnancy was. Of course it's not conclusive, but it's as plausible as the mismatched "tough on crime" line... There could be an element of that in your reasoning, I feel. Whether information is to be delivered on paper or on screen doesn't predispose it to being written at a certain level of quality. Whether it's being delivered electronically or on paper, there will *always* be a need for people who are able to write clearly. Some information is too critical to risk misinterpretation. It's certainly true that there's a lot of poor writing on the internet, but that's partly because there's so much information. Take this posting as a case in point - I don't claim to write with any particular proficiency, but you're reading it because it landed in your email. Had it not, it's extremely unlikely that we'd be exchanging letters about this topic, if for no other reason than the fact that we didn't realise the other was interested in it. > When you read tomes from the 1990?s extolling the promise of > hypertext to change the way people think and use information, (I > recommend the ?Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook by Berk and Devlin), you > begin to realize that it?s promise was still-born. The hypertext > pioneers envisioned a rich panoply of link types that would create > hypertexts which were true ?searchable mazes? Frame Technology, > beginning in FrameMaker 4, added a rich variety of hypertext link > types which would have realized that original vision. True, but linking is difficult. It's easy if the ends of all of the links reside in your domain, but how do you know if the point within a document owned by someone else still means what it did when you first pointed at it? It's tough enough for a link to even know whether the document still exists, let alone how it might degrade gracefully to another resource, how to determine the impact of the missing link on the viability of the rest of the document, etc. It's still relatively early days and linking is one of the key components of a rich internet, so it's getting plenty of attention. > When Adobe took over FrameMaker, it could have carried out that > vision by implementing all of the FrameMaker link types in PDF. It > failed to do so. And so, the HTML standard, with only the most > primitive hypertext link type, became the standard. There was some > hope that the XML standard would have rich linking capabilities. It > added a few additional link types, but nowhere near enough to realize > the original promise of hypertext. You certainly could be on to something with that - one of the ways that FrameMaker could be kept relevant would be to concentrate heavily on linking, including to documents outside of the current book. PDF would provide a great platform for that - it might even be enough to increase the use of PDF on the internet. (They'd want to make loading a PDF quicker and less obvious first though.) > Getting back to what I state in the first two paragraphs above, I > maintain that the ability to acquire in-depth knowled
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
At 5:31 PM -0400 5/18/07, Ann Zdunczyk wrote: It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices for years but have yet to see one. Its like the people that say books are going away and being replaced by electronic media. I, as a reader, plan to continue reading PAPER books. I do not plan to read on a screen, I do that all day. It is much easier to read a book at the beach, in the tub, in bed etc rather that a laptop, PDF, etc. I do not listen to books on tape, I READ. I love the SMELL of a book. I love the feel of a book. I like FrameMaker. I know FrameMaker. I plan to use it until it no longer works on ANY of the machines I have. I still use FrameMaker on my MAC. I have been using FrameMaker since 3.0 back in the early 90's (when it was Frame Technologies). I use it as it is. I'll ditto that. Dead tree based publishing isn't likely to go away any time soon. - web ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As far as a device that you can comfortably and safely use in the tub is concerned, I don't think that paper will be the delivery method of the future. Its estimated that 40% of the US adult population is non-literate, which means they dont read books or newspapers. This has been accompanied by a rapid decline in the ability of college students to write a half-way decent paragraph in English. The California State College system, the largest in the nation, takes almost any applicant who got through high-school degree with half-way decent grades. But about 40% of its first year students are not capable of doing college-level work, and thus their first year is dominated by remedial classes in English, Math and other subjects they should have mastered in high school. These declines all coincide with the growth of the internet, and the shift from obtaining knowledge from paper books to learning from feeble snippets of on-line text. The blogosphere, dominated by those who are at least competent in the English language, consists mainly of opinions unsupported by any factual basis. When you read tomes from the 1990s extolling the promise of hypertext to change the way people think and use information, (I recommend the Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook by Berk and Devlin), you begin to realize that its promise was still-born. The hypertext pioneers envisioned a rich panoply of link types that would create hypertexts which were true searchable mazes Frame Technology, beginning in FrameMaker 4, added a rich variety of hypertext link types which would have realized that original vision. When Adobe took over FrameMaker, it could have carried out that vision by implementing all of the FrameMaker link types in PDF. It failed to do so. And so, the HTML standard, with only the most primitive hypertext link type, became the standard. There was some hope that the XML standard would have rich linking capabilities. It added a few additional link types, but nowhere near enough to realize the original promise of hypertext. The result is that most online help documents are shovelware. I wrote an article about that, Thoughts About On-Line Help, about 6 years ago. Its still available at: http://www.microtype.com/resources/articles/Oldocs_DE.pdf Although I would probably add some additional concepts and ideas if I wrote that article today, I still stand by most of whats stated there. In particular, I stand by my statements in that article about the many advantages of paper books (or PDFs which faithfully replicate the format and layout of well-designed paper books). Getting back to what I state in the first two paragraphs above, I maintain that the ability to acquire in-depth knowledge of a subject is a discipline which is difficult to master. And I have no doubt that well-written, well-organized paper books, particularly on difficult subjects, will continue to be the best way to acquire real, in-depth knowledge of a subject, and subsequently serve its owner as a valuable reference source. If the internet (and other vehicles of on-line content) continues to serve mainly to encourage an undiscipplined pseudo-approach to real learning, it will remain a major cause of rising non-literacy. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
Overall, I agree with Dan's point on how much opportunity for a rich electronic communications environment has been overlooked. On the other hand, who among us can be sure that there's no alternative rich communications universe embedded in the shorthand languages of IM and rap? Where's the Rosetta Stone that can cross-translate among Standard English, common idiomatic English, generally-accepted slang-lish, blended-with-various-ethnic-based-languages English, etc? Some people can communicate better than others. Woody Guthrie summarized the main themes and meanings of the film of Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath in one night, in language that almost anyone can read and grasp. It probably would survive the cryptic notation of Instant Messaging, with little loss of meaning. (http://www.geocities.com/nashville/3448/tomjoad.html) It might be possible for someone to get a grant funded that examines whether or not the common IM-ing abbreviation-based language works better to communicate the records of contemporary affairs and history across sociocultural groups, than Standard American English. The losses of literacy that Dan points out are more about the ineffectiveness of public education to bring students to a useful level of literacy, than about the media and syntax that's used to transmit recorded culture and history. Regards, Peter Gold KnowHow ProServices Daniel Emory wrote: --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As far as a device that you can comfortably and safely use in the tub is concerned, I don't think that paper will be the delivery method of the future. It’s estimated that 40% of the US adult population is non-literate, which means they don’t read books or newspapers. This has been accompanied by a rapid decline in the ability of college students to write a half-way decent paragraph in English. The California State College system, the largest in the nation, takes almost any applicant who got through high-school degree with half-way decent grades. But about 40% of its first year students are not capable of doing college-level work, and thus their first year is dominated by remedial classes in English, Math and other subjects they should have mastered in high school. These declines all coincide with the growth of the internet, and the shift from obtaining knowledge from paper books to learning from feeble snippets of on-line text. The blogosphere, dominated by those who are at least competent in the English language, consists mainly of opinions unsupported by any factual basis. When you read tomes from the 1990’s extolling the promise of hypertext to change the way people think and use information, (I recommend the “Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook by Berk and Devlin), you begin to realize that it’s promise was still-born. The hypertext pioneers envisioned a rich panoply of link types that would create hypertexts which were true “searchable mazes” Frame Technology, beginning in FrameMaker 4, added a rich variety of hypertext link types which would have realized that original vision. When Adobe took over FrameMaker, it could have carried out that vision by implementing all of the FrameMaker link types in PDF. It failed to do so. And so, the HTML standard, with only the most primitive hypertext link type, became the standard. There was some hope that the XML standard would have rich linking capabilities. It added a few additional link types, but nowhere near enough to realize the original promise of hypertext. The result is that most online help documents are shovelware. I wrote an article about that, “Thoughts About On-Line Help”, about 6 years ago. It’s still available at: http://www.microtype.com/resources/articles/Oldocs_DE.pdf Although I would probably add some additional concepts and ideas if I wrote that article today, I still stand by most of what’s stated there. In particular, I stand by my statements in that article about the many advantages of paper books (or PDFs which faithfully replicate the format and layout of well-designed paper books). Getting back to what I state in the first two paragraphs above, I maintain that the ability to acquire in-depth knowledge of a subject is a discipline which is difficult to master. And I have no doubt that well-written, well-organized paper books, particularly on difficult subjects, will continue to be the best way to acquire real, in-depth knowledge of a subject, and subsequently serve its owner as a valuable reference source. If the internet (and other vehicles of on-line content) continues to serve mainly to encourage an undiscipplined pseudo-approach to real learning, it will remain a major cause of rising non-literacy. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
Hi Dan, Daniel Emory wrote: It’s estimated that 40% of the US adult population is non-literate, which means they don’t read books or newspapers. This has been accompanied by a rapid decline in the ability of college students to write a half-way decent paragraph in English. The California State College system, the largest in the nation, takes almost any applicant who got through high-school degree with half-way decent grades. But about 40% of its first year students are not capable of doing college-level work, and thus their first year is dominated by remedial classes in English, Math and other subjects they should have mastered in high school. These declines all coincide with the growth of the internet, and the shift from obtaining knowledge from paper books to learning from feeble snippets of on-line text. The blogosphere, dominated by those who are at least competent in the English language, consists mainly of opinions unsupported by any factual basis. Although I feel that what you are saying may well have merit, I'm reluctant to jump to any conclusions too quickly. A favourite example of misdirected causality is the inexplicable reduction in crime for young males in New York city. Politicians claimed for years that it was due to their tough on crime policy, yet the drop surpassed that of cities with similar policies. Eventually someone figured out that it coincided with abortion being made more freely available - less children being born into poor homes where they weren't wanted translated into fewer boys thinking crime was the way up and girls thinking pregnancy was. Of course it's not conclusive, but it's as plausible as the mismatched tough on crime line... There could be an element of that in your reasoning, I feel. Whether information is to be delivered on paper or on screen doesn't predispose it to being written at a certain level of quality. Whether it's being delivered electronically or on paper, there will *always* be a need for people who are able to write clearly. Some information is too critical to risk misinterpretation. It's certainly true that there's a lot of poor writing on the internet, but that's partly because there's so much information. Take this posting as a case in point - I don't claim to write with any particular proficiency, but you're reading it because it landed in your email. Had it not, it's extremely unlikely that we'd be exchanging letters about this topic, if for no other reason than the fact that we didn't realise the other was interested in it. When you read tomes from the 1990’s extolling the promise of hypertext to change the way people think and use information, (I recommend the “Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook by Berk and Devlin), you begin to realize that it’s promise was still-born. The hypertext pioneers envisioned a rich panoply of link types that would create hypertexts which were true “searchable mazes” Frame Technology, beginning in FrameMaker 4, added a rich variety of hypertext link types which would have realized that original vision. True, but linking is difficult. It's easy if the ends of all of the links reside in your domain, but how do you know if the point within a document owned by someone else still means what it did when you first pointed at it? It's tough enough for a link to even know whether the document still exists, let alone how it might degrade gracefully to another resource, how to determine the impact of the missing link on the viability of the rest of the document, etc. It's still relatively early days and linking is one of the key components of a rich internet, so it's getting plenty of attention. When Adobe took over FrameMaker, it could have carried out that vision by implementing all of the FrameMaker link types in PDF. It failed to do so. And so, the HTML standard, with only the most primitive hypertext link type, became the standard. There was some hope that the XML standard would have rich linking capabilities. It added a few additional link types, but nowhere near enough to realize the original promise of hypertext. You certainly could be on to something with that - one of the ways that FrameMaker could be kept relevant would be to concentrate heavily on linking, including to documents outside of the current book. PDF would provide a great platform for that - it might even be enough to increase the use of PDF on the internet. (They'd want to make loading a PDF quicker and less obvious first though.) Getting back to what I state in the first two paragraphs above, I maintain that the ability to acquire in-depth knowledge of a subject is a discipline which is difficult to master. And I have no doubt that well-written, well-organized paper books, particularly on difficult subjects, will continue to be the best way to acquire real, in-depth knowledge of a subject, and subsequently serve its owner as a valuable reference source. In-depth knowledge isn't always desirable -
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
Marcus Carr wrote: That said though, there is truth to what you say - the real question is whether it matters. In my parent's day, neat cursive handwriting was very important. It was arguably less important in my day and for my daughter, it will be of little importance, as in her life, she will unquestionably use a keyboard or some other device far more than she ever writes with a ballpoint. The same is true of mathematics - you can do complex calculation on your phone now, so it's not critical that you understand logarithmic tables and the like. I don't think that it's better or worse, just different. If legible cursive writing was the sole measurement of ability, I'd be in the same boat as many doctors - floating off to oblivion. However, I'd qualify Marcus' comment about using one's phone for complex calculations. If you don't have the knowledge to derive a statement of a need for calculating a solution by using observation, experience, and analytic thinking, and lack the knowledge to present the problem statement to the calculating device, then, unless the device itself has the intelligence to do it for you, and is willing to do it (think I'm sorry, Dave, I can't do that) it's whether it's the original calculus (stones used as counters), abaci, or iPhones, it's useless. My mother's criticism of the multiplication table matrix printed on the back cover of my grade-school composition books was, You'll never learn to multiply by yourself, if you can just look it up! Interestingly, on 60 Minutes today, there was a segment on Nicholas Negroponte's One Laptop Per Child project. MIT professor Nicholas Negroponte's dream is to put a laptop computer into the hands of every child. Lesley Stahl reports on his progress in Cambodia and Brazil. In those countries, government subsidies bring the cost of these computers down to $100. When they become available in the U. S., they'll cost $200, because for each one you buy, one is given to a child in a country where they're really needed. The video's available at: http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=2830221n One of the sequences bore out the premise that even young kids can figure a lot of this (learning to use the computers to write, look for information and learning to use it) out for themselves, and help others to do it. Regards, Peter Gold KnowHow ProServices ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
Peter Gold wrote: If legible cursive writing was the sole measurement of ability, I'd be in the same boat as many doctors - floating off to oblivion. Me too - it takes me longer to read my shopping list than to get my groceries... ;-) However, I'd qualify Marcus' comment about using one's phone for complex calculations. If you don't have the knowledge to derive a statement of a need for calculating a solution by using observation, experience, and analytic thinking, and lack the knowledge to present the problem statement to the calculating device, then, unless the device itself has the intelligence to do it for you, and is willing to do it (think I'm sorry, Dave, I can't do that) it's whether it's the original calculus (stones used as counters), abaci, or iPhones, it's useless. Yes, I agree with that, and I suspect that Dan may as well. (Dan, I hope I don't misrepresent your opinion in this post - I mean Dan metaphorically rather than personally.) The thing that's changing is that the internet is providing those devices, so we're able to get correct answers without really understanding what the question was. Take a mortgage calculator - you can pick a mortgage product, plug in the amount that you want to borrow and it will tell you what your monthly payments would be. It knows that the product you chose attracts an initiation fee and that for the amount that you wish to borrow, the bank will give you the mortgage for 25 points less than the standard interest rate. At a deeper level, it knows that the repayments are based on the assumption that the fee will be paid out of the amount borrowed, and numerous other details. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to know those things - I want to know if I'm in the ballpark. Dan might question the accuracy of the calculator and the inability to cross-check it (especially if he was a Floridian voter... :-) and I would agree with him. The average person will lose the ability to do these calculations, but in order to create the calculator, someone will always have to understand how to do them. The same applies for writing, I suspect - most of us will be able to muddle along, but specialist writers will always be required. This does leave us with a gap in our knowledge - we have no choice but to trust the calculator because we couldn't figure it out if we wanted to. I'm less concerned due to a combination of factors - I don't really care in the first place, I'm fairly certain that given the vagaries of the bank's policy I wouldn't be able to figure it out anyway and finally, I *want* the bank to tell me how much it will be. I can put much more faith in an answer that they provided than one that I worked out for myself. My mother's criticism of the multiplication table matrix printed on the back cover of my grade-school composition books was, You'll never learn to multiply by yourself, if you can just look it up! Multiplication is an interesting case of abstraction in itself. Mathematicians (which I am *not*) regard multiplication to be shorthand for addition, but we don't teach that to kids. The question 5x6 can also be posed as 5+5+5+5+5+5, but the multiplication version is less verbose, so we pretend that they're different operations in order to make it less confusing. Well, that and the fact that the addition table matrix would have required a substantially bigger back cover... One of the sequences bore out the premise that even young kids can figure a lot of this (learning to use the computers to write, look for information and learning to use it) out for themselves, and help others to do it. It's hard to even imagine the next couple of generations of computer users. I'll get out of computers before then - it'll hurt my brain way too much trying to keep up with a grade 6 programming class... Marcus ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
FW: Adobe CEO interview
Ann Zdunczyk wrote: > It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices > for years but have yet to see one. Its like the people that say books > are going away and being replaced by electronic media. I, as a reader, > plan to continue reading PAPER books. I do not plan to read on a > screen, I do that all day. It is much easier to read a book at the > beach, in the tub, in bed etc rather that a laptop, PDF, etc. I do not > listen to books on tape, I READ. I love the SMELL of a book. I love the > feel of a book. Despite the fact that environmentally it would be very desirable to eliminate paper, I think the real push has been for the smart organization of information rather than the elimination of a clumsy way of delivering it. By all accounts, the amount of information being stored is still increasing dramatically and it's getting far easier for us to put our hands on it, so it's not that surprising that we continue to use at least as much paper as in the past. As far as a device that you can comfortably and safely use in the tub is concerned, I don't think that paper will be the delivery method of the future. Macintosh will no doubt come out with a range of topic-oriented scents (historic tome, murder mystery, etc.) for their TubPaper (TM) that will achieve your comfort factor as well as providing searchability, bookmarks that don't fall out, background music and can be adjusted for reading in candlelight. I asked my daughter what she was doing at school a couple of weeks ago. "We're creating a database of endangered species" was the answer. I thought that was kind of interesting... because she's 8 years old and in grade 3. Paper books are going the way of the comforting crackling of the wireless. Adobe will have a formidable job of keeping FrameMaker relevant, but like you, I hope they manage to. Marcus
FW: Adobe CEO interview
mcarr at allette.com.au wrote: > Adobe will have a formidable job of keeping FrameMaker relevant, > but like you, I hope they manage to. But why? FM is only a tool for the creation of content. CS3 is also a content creation tool, but does things with various content data types. When I remarked about Narayen's strategy of banking the farm on Web 2.0 I was also pointing to something that I think is a big mistake on his part. He is banking on being able to be the market leader in content creation, which is where there is the greatest competition. For every one of Adobe's products there are alternatives, some of which are free (both in the sense of no charge as well as in terms of licensing). Web 2.0 is nothing more than a phase. It is a developmental plateau on the way to somewhere else and for Narayen to steer the course of Adobe's future towards it means that he is already behind the competition who are moving on to other means of producing output from semi/unstructured data sources. Once upon a time Adobe used to create the targets -- Postscript, PDF, type technologies, etc. --- now they appear to have become me too's. FM is even more relevant now than ever before with its ability to manage semi-structured data and producing multiple forms of output from a single source. Yet it is able to do this from within relatively simple (if somewhat aged) interface. But, having said that, I hope Adobe are never tempted to mess with FrameMaker's interface. It is something I am well used to and I don't have to waste inordinate amounts of time figuring out "where did they put that damned widget this time". Alan
FW: Adobe CEO interview
Alan wrote: >> Adobe will have a formidable job of keeping FrameMaker relevant, >> but like you, I hope they manage to. > > But why? FM is only a tool for the creation of content. CS3 is also > a content creation tool, but does things with various content data > types. I don't really see FrameMaker as being a tool for the creation of content, at least not in the sense that it has been in the past. I see it more as being a tool for the publishing of content. I know that my thinking is colored by the type of work that I trend to be involved with, but I just don't see people setting up for big sets of manuals built on unstructured FrameMaker the way they used to. Frankly, I'd be very surprised if that approach was growing in popularity. I don't know anything about CS3, but any software that contains the word "suite" makes me nervous - my first thought would be "might I need to use it from end-to-end even if I have existing systems functioning well for some components"? I may be completely wrong - please go easy on me if I am. > When I remarked about Narayen's strategy of banking the farm on Web 2.0 > I was also pointing to something that I think is a big mistake on his > part. He is banking on being able to be the market leader in content > creation, which is where there is the greatest competition. I agree with you there - nobody is ever going to own these markets again. I like to think that the interoperability provided by XML has contributed to the demise of software lock-in. Concepts like Software As A Service also eliminate the uneconomical model of many of the licenses purchased not being in use at any given point, as was discussed on Framers over the past week. > Web 2.0 is nothing more than a phase. It is a developmental plateau on > the way to somewhere else and for Narayen to steer the course of > Adobe's future towards it means that he is already behind the > competition who are moving on to other means of producing output from > semi/unstructured data sources. Once upon a time Adobe used to create > the targets -- Postscript, PDF, type technologies, etc. --- now they > appear to have become me too's. That might be a bit harsh - the way things move these days, I think a lot of people feel that metoodom would be a pretty respectable goal. :-) Adobe have to hang their hats on something and while I completely agree that Web 2.0 is ill-defined, I think they could do worse. > FM is even more relevant now than ever before with its ability to manage > semi-structured data and producing multiple forms of output from a single > source. There we disagree. I think that FrameMaker's traditional niche will continue to shrink until the software ceases to be viable. Adobe has picked winners plenty of times in the past, so I have a reasonable amount of faith that they can do it again and keep FrameMaker relevant, but not by maintaining the status quo. > Yet it is able to do this from within relatively simple (if > somewhat aged) interface. But, having said that, I hope Adobe are > never tempted to mess with FrameMaker's interface. It is something > I am well used to and I don't have to waste inordinate amounts of > time figuring out "where did they put that damned widget this time". I think this reflects our different use - I don't really have any loyalty to the interface because I don't spend that much time using it. I'd learn the interface if new features made it worth it. Marcus
FW: Adobe CEO interview
At 5:31 PM -0400 5/18/07, Ann Zdunczyk wrote: >It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices for years >but have yet to see one. Its like the people that say books are going away >and being replaced by electronic media. I, as a reader, plan to continue >reading PAPER books. I do not plan to read on a screen, I do that all day. >It is much easier to read a book at the beach, in the tub, in bed etc rather >that a laptop, PDF, etc. I do not listen to books on tape, I READ. I love >the SMELL of a book. I love the feel of a book. > >I like FrameMaker. I know FrameMaker. I plan to use it until it no longer >works on ANY of the machines I have. I still use FrameMaker on my MAC. I >have been using FrameMaker since 3.0 back in the early 90's (when it was >Frame Technologies). I use it as it is. I'll ditto that. Dead tree based publishing isn't likely to go away any time soon. - web
FW: Adobe CEO interview
--- mcarr at allette.com.au wrote: > As far as a device that you can comfortably and > safely use in the tub is > concerned, I don't think that paper will be the > delivery method of the > future. It?s estimated that 40% of the US adult population is non-literate, which means they don?t read books or newspapers. This has been accompanied by a rapid decline in the ability of college students to write a half-way decent paragraph in English. The California State College system, the largest in the nation, takes almost any applicant who got through high-school degree with half-way decent grades. But about 40% of its first year students are not capable of doing college-level work, and thus their first year is dominated by remedial classes in English, Math and other subjects they should have mastered in high school. These declines all coincide with the growth of the internet, and the shift from obtaining knowledge from paper books to learning from feeble snippets of on-line text. The blogosphere, dominated by those who are at least competent in the English language, consists mainly of opinions unsupported by any factual basis. When you read tomes from the 1990?s extolling the promise of hypertext to change the way people think and use information, (I recommend the ?Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook by Berk and Devlin), you begin to realize that it?s promise was still-born. The hypertext pioneers envisioned a rich panoply of link types that would create hypertexts which were true ?searchable mazes? Frame Technology, beginning in FrameMaker 4, added a rich variety of hypertext link types which would have realized that original vision. When Adobe took over FrameMaker, it could have carried out that vision by implementing all of the FrameMaker link types in PDF. It failed to do so. And so, the HTML standard, with only the most primitive hypertext link type, became the standard. There was some hope that the XML standard would have rich linking capabilities. It added a few additional link types, but nowhere near enough to realize the original promise of hypertext. The result is that most online help documents are shovelware. I wrote an article about that, ?Thoughts About On-Line Help?, about 6 years ago. It?s still available at: http://www.microtype.com/resources/articles/Oldocs_DE.pdf Although I would probably add some additional concepts and ideas if I wrote that article today, I still stand by most of what?s stated there. In particular, I stand by my statements in that article about the many advantages of paper books (or PDFs which faithfully replicate the format and layout of well-designed paper books). Getting back to what I state in the first two paragraphs above, I maintain that the ability to acquire in-depth knowledge of a subject is a discipline which is difficult to master. And I have no doubt that well-written, well-organized paper books, particularly on difficult subjects, will continue to be the best way to acquire real, in-depth knowledge of a subject, and subsequently serve its owner as a valuable reference source. If the internet (and other vehicles of on-line content) continues to serve mainly to encourage an undiscipplined pseudo-approach to real learning, it will remain a major cause of rising non-literacy.
FW: Adobe CEO interview
Overall, I agree with Dan's point on how much opportunity for a rich electronic communications environment has been overlooked. On the other hand, who among us can be sure that there's no "alternative rich communications universe" embedded in the shorthand languages of "IM" and "rap?" Where's the Rosetta Stone that can cross-translate among "Standard English," "common idiomatic English," "generally-accepted slang-lish," "blended-with-various-ethnic-based-languages English," etc? Some people can communicate better than others. Woody Guthrie summarized the main themes and meanings of the film of Steinbeck's "The Grapes of Wrath" in one night, in language that almost anyone can read and grasp. It probably would survive the cryptic notation of Instant Messaging, with little loss of meaning. (http://www.geocities.com/nashville/3448/tomjoad.html) It might be possible for someone to get a grant funded that examines whether or not the common "IM-ing" abbreviation-based language works better to communicate the records of contemporary affairs and history across sociocultural groups, than "Standard American English." The losses of literacy that Dan points out are more about the ineffectiveness of public education to bring students to a useful level of literacy, than about the media and syntax that's used to transmit recorded culture and history. Regards, Peter Gold KnowHow ProServices Daniel Emory wrote: > --- mcarr at allette.com.au wrote: >> As far as a device that you can comfortably and >> safely use in the tub is >> concerned, I don't think that paper will be the >> delivery method of the >> future. > > It?s estimated that 40% of the US adult population is > non-literate, which means they don?t read books or > newspapers. This has been accompanied by a rapid > decline in the ability of college students to write a > half-way decent paragraph in English. The California > State College system, the largest in the nation, takes > almost any applicant who got through high-school > degree with half-way decent grades. But about 40% of > its first year students are not capable of doing > college-level work, and thus their first year is > dominated by remedial classes in English, Math and > other subjects they should have mastered in high > school. > > These declines all coincide with the growth of the > internet, and the shift from obtaining knowledge from > paper books to learning from feeble snippets of > on-line text. The blogosphere, dominated by those who > are at least competent in the English language, > consists mainly of opinions unsupported by any factual > basis. > > When you read tomes from the 1990?s extolling the > promise of hypertext to change the way people think > and use information, (I recommend the > ?Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook by Berk and Devlin), > you begin to realize that it?s promise was still-born. > The hypertext pioneers envisioned a rich panoply of > link types that would create hypertexts which were > true ?searchable mazes? Frame Technology, beginning in > FrameMaker 4, added a rich variety of hypertext link > types which would have realized that original vision. > When Adobe took over FrameMaker, it could have carried > out that vision by implementing all of the FrameMaker > link types in PDF. It failed to do so. And so, the > HTML standard, with only the most primitive hypertext > link type, became the standard. There was some hope > that the XML standard would have rich linking > capabilities. It added a few additional link types, > but nowhere near enough to realize the original > promise of hypertext. > > The result is that most online help documents are > shovelware. I wrote an article about that, ?Thoughts > About On-Line Help?, about 6 years ago. It?s still > available at: > > http://www.microtype.com/resources/articles/Oldocs_DE.pdf > > Although I would probably add some additional concepts > and ideas if I wrote that article today, I still stand > by most of what?s stated there. In particular, I stand > by my statements in that article about the many > advantages of paper books (or PDFs which faithfully > replicate the format and layout of well-designed paper > books). > > Getting back to what I state in the first two > paragraphs above, I maintain that the ability to > acquire in-depth knowledge of a subject is a > discipline which is difficult to master. And I have no > doubt that well-written, well-organized paper books, > particularly on difficult subjects, will continue to > be the best way to acquire real, in-depth knowledge of > a subject, and subsequently serve its owner as a > valuable reference source. If the internet (and other > vehicles of on-line content) continues to serve mainly > to encourage an undiscipplined pseudo-approach to real > learning, it will remain a major cause of rising > non-literacy. >
FW: Adobe CEO interview
Marcus Carr wrote: > > That said though, there is truth to what you say - the real question is > whether it matters. In my parent's day, neat cursive handwriting was > very important. It was arguably less important in my day and for my > daughter, it will be of little importance, as in her life, she will > unquestionably use a keyboard or some other device far more than she > ever writes with a ballpoint. The same is true of mathematics - you can > do complex calculation on your phone now, so it's not critical that you > understand logarithmic tables and the like. I don't think that it's > better or worse, just different. If legible cursive writing was the sole measurement of ability, I'd be in the same boat as many doctors - floating off to oblivion. However, I'd qualify Marcus' comment about using one's phone for complex calculations. If you don't have the knowledge to derive a statement of a need for calculating a solution by using observation, experience, and analytic thinking, and lack the knowledge to present the problem statement to the calculating device, then, unless the device itself has the intelligence to do it for you, and is willing to do it (think "I'm sorry, Dave, I can't do that") it's whether it's the original calculus (stones used as counters), abaci, or iPhones, it's useless. My mother's criticism of the multiplication table matrix printed on the back cover of my grade-school composition books was, "You'll never learn to multiply by yourself, if you can just look it up!" Interestingly, on "60 Minutes" today, there was a segment on Nicholas Negroponte's "One Laptop Per Child" project. "MIT professor Nicholas Negroponte's dream is to put a laptop computer into the hands of every child. Lesley Stahl reports on his progress in Cambodia and Brazil." In those countries, government subsidies bring the cost of these computers down to $100. When they become available in the U. S., they'll cost $200, because for each one you buy, one is given to a child in a country where they're really needed. The video's available at: http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=2830221n One of the sequences bore out the premise that even young kids can figure a lot of this (learning to use the computers to write, look for information and learning to use it) out for themselves, and help others to do it. Regards, Peter Gold KnowHow ProServices
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
Ann Zdunczyk wrote: It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices for years but have yet to see one. Its like the people that say books are going away and being replaced by electronic media. I, as a reader, plan to continue reading PAPER books. I do not plan to read on a screen, I do that all day. It is much easier to read a book at the beach, in the tub, in bed etc rather that a laptop, PDF, etc. I do not listen to books on tape, I READ. I love the SMELL of a book. I love the feel of a book. Despite the fact that environmentally it would be very desirable to eliminate paper, I think the real push has been for the smart organization of information rather than the elimination of a clumsy way of delivering it. By all accounts, the amount of information being stored is still increasing dramatically and it's getting far easier for us to put our hands on it, so it's not that surprising that we continue to use at least as much paper as in the past. As far as a device that you can comfortably and safely use in the tub is concerned, I don't think that paper will be the delivery method of the future. Macintosh will no doubt come out with a range of topic-oriented scents (historic tome, murder mystery, etc.) for their TubPaper (TM) that will achieve your comfort factor as well as providing searchability, bookmarks that don't fall out, background music and can be adjusted for reading in candlelight. I asked my daughter what she was doing at school a couple of weeks ago. We're creating a database of endangered species was the answer. I thought that was kind of interesting... because she's 8 years old and in grade 3. Paper books are going the way of the comforting crackling of the wireless. Adobe will have a formidable job of keeping FrameMaker relevant, but like you, I hope they manage to. Marcus ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Adobe will have a formidable job of keeping FrameMaker relevant, but like you, I hope they manage to. But why? FM is only a tool for the creation of content. CS3 is also a content creation tool, but does things with various content data types. When I remarked about Narayen's strategy of banking the farm on Web 2.0 I was also pointing to something that I think is a big mistake on his part. He is banking on being able to be the market leader in content creation, which is where there is the greatest competition. For every one of Adobe's products there are alternatives, some of which are free (both in the sense of no charge as well as in terms of licensing). Web 2.0 is nothing more than a phase. It is a developmental plateau on the way to somewhere else and for Narayen to steer the course of Adobe's future towards it means that he is already behind the competition who are moving on to other means of producing output from semi/unstructured data sources. Once upon a time Adobe used to create the targets -- Postscript, PDF, type technologies, etc. --- now they appear to have become me too's. FM is even more relevant now than ever before with its ability to manage semi-structured data and producing multiple forms of output from a single source. Yet it is able to do this from within relatively simple (if somewhat aged) interface. But, having said that, I hope Adobe are never tempted to mess with FrameMaker's interface. It is something I am well used to and I don't have to waste inordinate amounts of time figuring out where did they put that damned widget this time. Alan ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
Alan wrote: Adobe will have a formidable job of keeping FrameMaker relevant, but like you, I hope they manage to. But why? FM is only a tool for the creation of content. CS3 is also a content creation tool, but does things with various content data types. I don't really see FrameMaker as being a tool for the creation of content, at least not in the sense that it has been in the past. I see it more as being a tool for the publishing of content. I know that my thinking is colored by the type of work that I trend to be involved with, but I just don't see people setting up for big sets of manuals built on unstructured FrameMaker the way they used to. Frankly, I'd be very surprised if that approach was growing in popularity. I don't know anything about CS3, but any software that contains the word suite makes me nervous - my first thought would be might I need to use it from end-to-end even if I have existing systems functioning well for some components? I may be completely wrong - please go easy on me if I am. When I remarked about Narayen's strategy of banking the farm on Web 2.0 I was also pointing to something that I think is a big mistake on his part. He is banking on being able to be the market leader in content creation, which is where there is the greatest competition. I agree with you there - nobody is ever going to own these markets again. I like to think that the interoperability provided by XML has contributed to the demise of software lock-in. Concepts like Software As A Service also eliminate the uneconomical model of many of the licenses purchased not being in use at any given point, as was discussed on Framers over the past week. Web 2.0 is nothing more than a phase. It is a developmental plateau on the way to somewhere else and for Narayen to steer the course of Adobe's future towards it means that he is already behind the competition who are moving on to other means of producing output from semi/unstructured data sources. Once upon a time Adobe used to create the targets -- Postscript, PDF, type technologies, etc. --- now they appear to have become me too's. That might be a bit harsh - the way things move these days, I think a lot of people feel that metoodom would be a pretty respectable goal. :-) Adobe have to hang their hats on something and while I completely agree that Web 2.0 is ill-defined, I think they could do worse. FM is even more relevant now than ever before with its ability to manage semi-structured data and producing multiple forms of output from a single source. There we disagree. I think that FrameMaker's traditional niche will continue to shrink until the software ceases to be viable. Adobe has picked winners plenty of times in the past, so I have a reasonable amount of faith that they can do it again and keep FrameMaker relevant, but not by maintaining the status quo. Yet it is able to do this from within relatively simple (if somewhat aged) interface. But, having said that, I hope Adobe are never tempted to mess with FrameMaker's interface. It is something I am well used to and I don't have to waste inordinate amounts of time figuring out where did they put that damned widget this time. I think this reflects our different use - I don't really have any loyalty to the interface because I don't spend that much time using it. I'd learn the interface if new features made it worth it. Marcus ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
FW: Adobe CEO interview
It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices for years but have yet to see one. Its like the people that say books are going away and being replaced by electronic media. I, as a reader, plan to continue reading PAPER books. I do not plan to read on a screen, I do that all day. It is much easier to read a book at the beach, in the tub, in bed etc rather that a laptop, PDF, etc. I do not listen to books on tape, I READ. I love the SMELL of a book. I love the feel of a book. I like FrameMaker. I know FrameMaker. I plan to use it until it no longer works on ANY of the machines I have. I still use FrameMaker on my MAC. I have been using FrameMaker since 3.0 back in the early 90's (when it was Frame Technologies). I use it as it is. Even though I use most of the other publishing software also, I prefer FrameMaker. I have to use the other software because my customers do. When I get a FrameMaker project it feels like I am putting on my favorite and most comfortable outfit, usually sweats and warm slippers (I work at home so I can!!). I give my two cents to Adobe reps when I see them. I try to give them ideas like most of you to continue the development of FrameMaker. I HOPE that Adobe continues updating FrameMaker. I push FrameMaker to my customers. In the work that I do I am surprised at the software that some customers use to create the manuals. I am surprised how little the document designers know about the software that they use. OK my two cents for a Friday. Have a GREAT weekend everyone. Z ** Ann Zdunczyk President a2z Publishing, Inc. Language Layout Translation Consulting Phone: (336)922-1271 Fax: (336)922-4980 Cell: (336)456-4493 http://www.a2z-pub.com ** -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Litchfield Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 4:54 PM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Adobe CEO interview On 18/05/2007, at 7:24 PM, Graeme R Forbes wrote: From the interview (http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm? articleid=1741) with the Adobe CEO: * We will continue to extend the capabilities of the core product in each of those segments with some of the features that are available in the other products. But, yes, it is our goal to continue to make sure that we don't leave any customer behind. For a number of customers who have adopted a product like FrameMaker, we will continue to invest in it. * A number that's a log way short of 100%. But the middle sentence does show a sense of humor. One issue that concerns me is that Adobe seems to be betting the farm on Web 2.0 while reducing the importance of print based and other forms of output media. Perhaps that has something to do with Narayen's failed attempt at Pictra. He feels he needs to succeed in that area, to prove his machismo or what ever. don't leave any customer behind reminds me of the US don't leave any child behind education system. Umm, but what does that actually mean, anyway? Alan ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/azdunczyk%40triad.rr.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
FW: Adobe CEO interview
It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices for years but have yet to see one. Its like the people that say books are going away and being replaced by electronic media. I, as a reader, plan to continue reading PAPER books. I do not plan to read on a screen, I do that all day. It is much easier to read a book at the beach, in the tub, in bed etc rather that a laptop, PDF, etc. I do not listen to books on tape, I READ. I love the SMELL of a book. I love the feel of a book. I like FrameMaker. I know FrameMaker. I plan to use it until it no longer works on ANY of the machines I have. I still use FrameMaker on my MAC. I have been using FrameMaker since 3.0 back in the early 90's (when it was Frame Technologies). I use it as it is. Even though I use most of the other publishing software also, I prefer FrameMaker. I have to use the other software because my customers do. When I get a FrameMaker project it feels like I am putting on my favorite and most comfortable outfit, usually sweats and warm slippers (I work at home so I can!!). I give my two cents to Adobe reps when I see them. I try to give them ideas like most of you to continue the development of FrameMaker. I HOPE that Adobe continues updating FrameMaker. I push FrameMaker to my customers. In the work that I do I am surprised at the software that some customers use to create the manuals. I am surprised how little the document designers know about the software that they use. OK my two cents for a Friday. Have a GREAT weekend everyone. Z ** Ann Zdunczyk President a2z Publishing, Inc. Language Layout & Translation Consulting Phone: (336)922-1271 Fax: (336)922-4980 Cell: (336)456-4493 http://www.a2z-pub.com ** -Original Message- From: framers-bounces+azdunczyk=triad.rr@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces+azdunczyk=triad.rr.com at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Alan Litchfield Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 4:54 PM To: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Adobe CEO interview On 18/05/2007, at 7:24 PM, Graeme R Forbes wrote: > From the interview (http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm? > articleid=1741) with the Adobe CEO: > > * > > We will continue to extend the capabilities of the core product in > each of those segments with some of the features that are available in > the other products. But, yes, it is our goal to continue to make sure > that we don't leave any customer behind. For a number of customers who > have adopted a product like FrameMaker, we will continue to invest in > it. > > * > > A number that's a log way short of 100%. But the middle sentence does > show a sense of humor. > One issue that concerns me is that Adobe seems to be betting the farm on Web 2.0 while reducing the importance of print based and other forms of output media. Perhaps that has something to do with Narayen's failed attempt at Pictra. He feels he needs to succeed in that area, to prove his machismo or what ever. "don't leave any customer behind" reminds me of the US "don't leave any child behind" education system. Umm, but what does that actually mean, anyway? Alan ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as azdunczyk at triad.rr.com. Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/azdunczyk%40triad.rr.com Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
