
Microsoft Buying Adobe? - Mikecsi
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKN0721049120101007
======
old-gregg
Jokes aside, it makes perfect sense for both of them. Adobe's CS and Microsoft
Office are naturally self-complementing desktop giants. Both companies make a
ton of money selling desktop software to the enterprise, yet outside of
Flash/Sliverlight battle they don't cross each other paths.

I, for one, welcome this development. It brings some hopes for better
performing Flash, which I hate with a passion but its a fact of life. Flash is
in need of some engineering muscle. There are many things Microsoft can
possibly do to it and most of them are good, see: kill it -> good, open source
it -> good, merge with silverlight -> good.

Same thing with other Adobe products: they used to be best in class some time
ago, but I'm convinced that company cannot code anymore, but Microsoft still
can.

No way this is bad news. The worse that can happen is nothing changes.

Edit: also, lets stop this nonsense with applying "still somewhat profitable"
and "dying" to these companies. Both are doing _great_ financially. Adobe's
profits from CS keep breaking records - look at
[http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/2010...](http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases/201006/Q210Earnings.html)

~~~
pchristensen
Not disagreeing, but _Innovators Dilemma_ theory says that companies that are
about to be disrupted are enjoying the greatest profits and margins ever. The
problem is that the reason the profits are so high is that they've shed their
less profitable divisions and products that might grow into the next big
innovation. Let's say something disrupts MSFTs Office and shrinks its revenue
- what do they have that could replace that?

~~~
iamelgringo
_what do they have that could replace that?_ Sharepoint, SQLServer, Windows 7,
Windows Server, Windows Virtual Server, CRM, Exchange Server, XBox, Xbox live,
Bing, Zune, Microsoft Automotive platform, Win 7 phone.

Microsoft has one of the most diverse revenue streams of any software company.
They're going to be around for a while.

Google should actually be more afraid of disruptive technologies. Their
revenue is primarily from advertising. They are truly a single revenue source
company.

~~~
muhfuhkuh
"Sharepoint, SQLServer, Windows 7, Windows Server, Windows Virtual Server,
CRM, Exchange Server, XBox, Xbox live, Bing, Zune, Microsoft Automotive
platform, Win 7 phone."

Has it actually been determined that Microsoft makes any profit at all from
any of those products? Entertainment division (where XBox and Live and Zune
lives) is about 12% of their revenue and is still not profitable, while search
and online (which is Bing and MSN) loses $700 Million every quarter or
thereabouts (at least it did last fiscal quarter).

Their bread and butter has always been Windows and Office. That other stuff
are loss leaders, in a way.

~~~
protomyth
Sharepoint is a pretty good seller for them. Exchange has as much of a lock on
corporations as Windows.

------
matrix
I suppose this is feasible if Microsoft is looking to acquire Adobe's
enterprise customer base - the PDF, document management, etc part of the
company. Having Air/Flex/Flash might also be nice, but doesn't seem like a
good fit for Microsoft's traditional Windows-centric strategy (one they should
abandon, in my view - the days of owning the market via the desktop are
rapidly coming to a close).

What I'd love to see is Microsoft buy the Flash/PDF side of the company, and
then the creative arm (CS, the type foundry, lightroom, etc) be spun off into
an independent company that was once again run by people passionate about
design and great software.

~~~
mcbain
What is Microsoft's track record for spinning off companies?

The Photoshop/CS part of Adobe is somewhat profitable, correct? Would MS let
it go (even for a bucket of cash)?

~~~
Keyframe
Softimage was bought for a purpose and spun off later. It was bought by
Microsoft to port Softimage|3D (and develop XSI) for NT platform - to show NT
is as powerful for those applications as IRIX was. It was done, and it was
sold later to AVID, now Softimage is part of Autodesk.

On a side note, I always thought Autodesk was Adobe's natural predator, I was
expecting a buy offer from them.

~~~
virtualritz
It took Soft years to recover from that imho.

When I wrote a an XSI plugin for a feature film production, in 2005, for XSI
running on Linux, half of the API was still using COM, it the app required a
special gcc version that shipped with the sdk to compile plugins with and the
Python was ActiveState Python (which clashed with the Linux system's Python).
In short, it was a disaster from a developers, and still a lot of trouble from
a user's pov.

Now Adobe doesn't support Linux much but if what MS did to XSI is anything to
go by, I wouldn't want to be a developer on one of those apps, after the
acquisition.

~~~
Keyframe
I agree, Softimage was just mishandled. It was brought into Microsoft with a
single task, and Sumatra(XSI) was architected at a really bad point in time
for them. It was done on the verge of NT era, so they went berserk. Softimage
(they have renamed XSI) is now a really solid piece of software, AGAIN
mishandled by Autodesk. sigh.

------
jasonkester
This has one major implication that makes me want to root for the deal to
close:

Photoshop & Flash would be covered by an MSDN subscription.

So, instead of dishing out $1000 for CS6, we need only enroll in BizSpark (or
whatever Microsoft's next version of its ISV thing is called), and pay $400
for all our OS's, all our dev tools, and all our graphics stuff in one
package. Now all they need to do is buy Codesmith, Red Gate and Jetbrains so
that I never need to pay full price for software again.

~~~
twodayslate
Thanks for telling me about BizSpark! I love you!

~~~
rbanffy
Tell that a couple years from now...

------
dbrannan
I've often wondered why Apple doesn't buy Adobe, kill all development for PCs,
and leave Microsoft high and dry in the creative market.

Just saying...

~~~
dagw
I wonder if Microsoft is thinking the same thing. Either as a defensive move
to make sure Photoshop will always work on Windows or as an offensive move and
making Photoshop and friends windows only in an attempt to strangle the OS X
platform.

~~~
bradly
Apple has been able to create pro level software for both audio and video
editing industries. If Adobe/Microsoft scraped its mac line of products, I bet
Apple would have a competing product out in 12 months that graphic designers
would flock to.

~~~
carbon8
Note, however, that those were all originally acquisitions. FCP was born at
Macromedia and Apple purchased the product and hired the team. Shake came from
the Nothing Real acquisition. Logic is from the Emagic acquisition.

~~~
davidedicillo
Apple at that point would buy Pixelmator in a heartbeat and make its own
product.

------
revorad
_Such a deal could be worth $15 billion or more based on Adobe's current
market value._

Adobe is worth less than half of Facebook? Rolls eyes

~~~
joezydeco
Apples and Oranges. Adobe is publicly traded. When (if) Facebook IPOs, they
will not be worth $33 billion.

[http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2585-facebook-is-not-
worth-33...](http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2585-facebook-is-not-
worth-33000000000)

~~~
revorad
I know, I'm equally amused by the valuations.

It's a bit like old school advertising (billboards, TV) versus Google pay-per-
click ads. As soon as you can measure something accurately, it's value
decreases.

~~~
irrelative
Indeed. Old school advertising was sort of like a mystery box. What do you
think's inside? It could be ANYTHING!

Sort of like the maxim "Half my advertising works, I just don't know which
half." Well, Google let you measure which half, and improve on the other.

------
charlief
Regarding: "Adobe's shares rise as much as 17 percent"

Just a small detail, but the above bullet exaggerates the indicative reaction
of the market. It was up 17 percent for an instant because someone fat
fingered and bought it for $30.00 exactly at 3:08pm (Added: 12 minutes after
the announcement at 2:56pm), maybe a little excited to buy in. Really it is up
10-11%, which is a strong and positive reaction, but there is more uncertainty
factored into the price than what the bullet would seem to imply.

~~~
zokier
Gotta love stock markets. A _rumor_ arises of two CEO's _secretly_ meeting,
and stocks skyrocket instantly. I'd assume that nobody actually knows what
they were discussing, if they even met. Wouldn't be much of a secret meeting
otherwise.

~~~
narkee
It's really interesting, when you think about it as a system that changes in
response to observation.

Can you imagine if physical systems worked like that? That observed physical
phenomena would change in response to what the experimenter/observer _thinks_
will happen?

~~~
pmichaud
Yeah, that's sort of what actually does happen.

~~~
narkee
I should have been more precise when I said observation. In QM, clearly
scientific "observation" acts on the system, causing the system to "collapse"
into a definite state, but what I meant by observation in my previous comment
was that speculative observation, commentary and opinion can affect the state
of the system.

That is clearly not true for physical systems.

------
andybak
Can everyone commenting on this please remember that Adobe produces software
aside from Flash and Reader?

Those two may interfere with your browsing habits but just because you don't
come into contact with anything else Adobe produces doesn't mean it doesn't
have some importance in the software industry.

------
mcfunley
"Adobe, Microsoft expected to collapse into new black hole after getting
nearly 90% of the world's shitty C++ together under one roof."

~~~
mahmud
Don't know about the rest of Adobe, but the flash team is heavily intertwined
with mozilla and google developers. Go sample irc.mozilla.org sometime.

Fun fact, the first JavaScript was written by a Netscaper in Lisp. The first
ActionScript was in Standard ML, and now both guys work on ECMAScript :-)
ActionScript's engine powers Mozilla's JS engine (yes, flash and firefox
engines off the same code base!) and the Lisper guy works on V8. Get into the
javascript scene and you will find the intellectual incest that is hacking.

------
MichaelApproved
I think MS time and money would be better spent buying much smaller web
companies that innovate and grow. Adobe is old and shrinking.

As a .net dev id love to see them grow the community beyond enterprise.

------
mootothemax
I'm not sure I understand: how would a merger between these two companies get
past the regulators? I doubt they'd let Apple jump into bed with Adobe, let
alone Microsoft...

~~~
mattparcher
From the original NYT report [1]:

 _Randal C. Picker, a professor of law of the University of Chicago law
school, said in a telephone interview that the technology space is drastically
different than it was when Microsoft was originally charged with antitrust
violations and an acquisition or partnership of this nature would likely not
be halted._

 _Mr. Picker said that the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission
are focused on other large technology companies and consumer related issues._

[1] [http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/microsoft-and-
adobe...](http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/microsoft-and-adobe-chiefs-
meet-to-discuss-partnerships/)

~~~
mootothemax
Thanks, very interesting. I'm genuinely surprised though, as we're talking
about some huge spaces being gobbled up: Photoshop, ColdFusion, Director,
Flash, FrameMaker, Illustrator etc. And those are just some of their bigger
names! :)

~~~
andrewf
I would have thought that the antitrust concerns would go the other way this
time - the combined company using the dominance of Photoshop to prop up
Windows (by cancelling the Mac version), or the dominance of Flash to prop up
Windows Mobile (by killing Flash for Android).

------
threepointone
As a thought: If it does happen, I can totally see an MS Office GRAND DELUXE
edition that puts together Office and CS. And I would guess that the price
would be less than the sum of the individual packages.

That wouldn't be too bad, really.

~~~
d2viant
They haven't even included Visio in the Office bundle yet, so I doubt they'd
put Photoshop in there.

------
cryptoz
"Microsoft Flash".

 _shudder_

~~~
ladon86
Microsoft Photoshop. Windows 8 only. :(

~~~
protomyth
Ribbons in CS6

~~~
russell
I have done a little PhotoShop. My GR has done a lot of CS4. I cant imaging
how MS could make it less intuitive.

------
rbanffy
...because two bricks float better than one...

------
neovive
I just don't see the synergies of a full takeover beyond owning the rights to
the PDF format. A full takeover would result in Microsoft paying a high
premium for a set of desktop design applications (CS suite) that are not part
of its DNA. Microsoft excels at building excellent tools for developers, but
never seems to do a good job with design tools. Adobe is the opposite.

What's more possible is some sort of partnership that enables stronger PDF
support in Office, improved Flash support in Windows Phone and better
integration between Office and CS applications.

Microsoft's primary business is selling Windows and Office desktop licenses.
Since many Adobe CS users also own Windows and Office licenses, better
integration between the two suites would be beneficial for both companies.
Introducing a new mobile phone OS based on Flash/Flex/Silverlight or some
other combination would not be worth the acquisition cost.

------
rgrieselhuber
An interesting move from an analytics perspective. They'd get Omniture and
valuable data about the biggest advertising budgets spent online.

------
iuguy
This would be quite interesting. If Microsoft bought Adobe, what would happen
to PDF on Mac? What would happen to Silverlight? Would the next Office use PDF
as a standard format?

Then there's the creative suite. What would happen to photoshop? Dreamweaver
(or MS Frontpage 2012 as it'd be renamed)? InDesign (or Microsoft Publisher
2012 as it'd be called)?

Also think about the other side of it. The Acrobat team would be forced to
actually secure their reader instead of relying on researchers to do it for
them.

I think this can only be a good thing(tm). As Dan Kaminsky once said, "What
could possibly go wrong?"

~~~
dsspence
Apple doesn't license PDF from Adobe even though it is part of OS X's native
graphics renderer.

“The Quartz renderer and the PDF interpreter that Apple ships with Mac OS X
are built with Apple code, with no external licenses, by Apple employees.
Adobe just publishes a specification for how it’s supposed to function. This
gives Apple considerably more flexibility with regard to what Quartz and the
PDF interpreter can be used for.”

<http://www.prepressure.com/pdf/basics/osx_quartz>

~~~
protomyth
Steve Jobs learned from his experience with Adobe and the licensed version of
Display Postscript. (see footnote 1
<http://daringfireball.net/2008/02/flash_iphone_calculus> )

~~~
iuguy
Thanks to you and the parent commenter for a very insightful response.

------
ja27
"Steven A. Ballmer, Microsoft’s chief executive, recently showed up with a
small entourage of deputies at Adobe’s offices to hold a secret meeting..."

Ballmer's not that dumb, is he? Sounds like posturing for Apple / Google.

------
mattparcher
From the original NYT report [1], the discussions seem to be less about
acquisition, and more about “Apple and its control of the mobile phone market
and how the two companies could partner in the battle against Apple.”

Indeed, acquisition is a real and fascinating possibility, but surely there
are many other ways they could work together to fight Apple, if that is what
they want to do.

[1] [http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/microsoft-and-
adobe...](http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/microsoft-and-adobe-chiefs-
meet-to-discuss-partnerships/)

------
rwhitman
I'm really scared of a future where microsoft forces itself into my life by
acquiring everything I use on a regular basis.

------
olalonde
Microsoft should start thinking about acquiring a web company instead. One
day, they will look back and realize that, in retrospective, they shouldn't
have held on to the desktop. An analogy could be made with newspapers who held
on to the paper. Time might prove me wrong, but I doubt it.

~~~
Niten
For my part, I'm glad there are still companies like Microsoft, Apple, and
Adobe "holding onto the desktop", selling me software that I can run on my own
hardware, allowing me to keep my data to myself.

------
TorKlingberg
This would be the final end of the desktop application. Adobe is the last
remaining large independent maker of mass-market desktop applications.
Everyone else has been crushed between the web, Microsoft and open source.

~~~
ja2ke
Except for everyone else who still makes programs for people who create things
which aren't just code or the written word... Audio, video, 3D, print and web
visual design are all still done on the desktop, and only a slice of that is
controlled by Adobe.

------
roadnottaken
One big upside to this that I can see is that it might result in
standardization of the Adobe CS GUI. It's been getting weirder and weirder
with every new version, to the point where nothing I know about how Windows
programs are supposed to behave applies.

That said, considering that MSFT just f __*ed up the Office GUI (ribbon, etc)
I probably shouldn't hold my breath.

Seriously, what's wrong with menus and windows?

------
code_duck
I was wondering if MS was going to buy Adobe 7-8 years ago, if not 12, but it
seems odd at this point.

------
Scott_MacGregor
If this happens, I wonder how long it will take to fold the Adobe contacts and
products into BizSpark.

------
vincell1
This is probably one of those high priced mergers that wont really help MSN
compete with Apple. Doesn't Apple hate flash? And isn’t HTML5 the future? I
think MSN would be better off spending money on a smaller company that can
really help its mobile strategy.

------
rfolstad
Microsoft wants to bundle flash into their web browser and phones just like
google?!

------
evo_9
It's funny but I avoid Adobe products more than anyone else these days - an
'honor' held by Microsoft for a very long time. I don't know what is worse
Acrobat or Flash at this point (esp. on mac).

------
protomyth
Apple really needs to buy Adobe. Apple's response will determine how much life
they see in their "truck" (OS X) line. This, coupled with Intel's comments on
Apple, really make me wonder.

~~~
xenophanes
What comments by intel?

~~~
mcbain
Maybe various comments indicating how they are unhappy they've missed the
mobile bus, including seemingly oddball suggestions like a tool to "port" iOS
apps to x86: [http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/69637/20101007/intel-
porting...](http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/69637/20101007/intel-porting-apps-
smartphones-tablets-apple-ios-app-store-appup-nokia-meego-infineon-iphone-
apps-de.htm)

------
MichaelApproved
Could they be doing this so flash 11 includes silverlight support?

~~~
lallysingh
Microsoft Flashlight?

------
golgo13
What would this mean for Flash and Silverlight? Would MS also can the
Expression Studio as well? Why would the same company put out Illustrator and
Expression Design?

------
SwaroopH
Microbe?

------
rmason
umjames - ColdFusion is built upon Java, of course it runs on the Mac as well
as 'nix. If you go to a gathering of CF developers eighty percent of them are
running Mac laptops.

------
aseem
Does that mean the new runtime will be called FlashLight?

~~~
juanefren
I think is funny enough to deserve a non-negative score :) (+1)

------
codedivine
Well, are Flash and AIR supported on Windows Phone 7?

------
jerhewet
WHY?!?! Why, God, oh WHY!

Adobe has long lost any luster it might have had, and has descended into
outsourced maintenance-ware. An acquisition like this would be about as smart
as Intel acquiring Mc(rap)fee...

EDIT: aCquisition.

~~~
protomyth
Well, to be fair, maybe Flash for OS X would actually improve. On the other
hand, Flash for Linux might meet with an unfortunate accident.

~~~
pseudonym
50-100% processor usage isn't already an unfortunate accident?

~~~
sliverstorm
Look on the bright side- it doesn't yet melt your CPU. Under MS's guiding
hand, I'm sure it would figure out how.

~~~
dinkumthinkum
I just don't get that. It's not like MS have the superior computer scientists
and the rest of us are little children. Adobe has the money to pay people to
solve those problems. The Flash situation on Mac and Linux is just ridiculous.

~~~
sliverstorm
Yes, but Adobe obviously elects not to pay people to solve those problems. The
question, then, becomes 'why'.

------
spicyj
Please, no.

~~~
dstein
What's the worst that could happen? This might actually create a vortex of
suckage capable of destroying them both.

~~~
andybak
You don't do graphic design, do you?

------
napierzaza
My god, with them together, what great software will they make!

~~~
rbritton
Think of what great software activation schemes they will make!

~~~
seldo
And the updates! The glorious, unending stream of modal software-update
dialogs!

~~~
benologist
Could be worse .... Apple could buy them, making an incremental Photoshop
update 6 gig + an hour to install.

~~~
aniket_ray
Not sure why you were downvoted. You made a valid point.

Slightly offtopic but since people are dicussing updates. Updates are an
important part of the sotfware lifecycle. It's no big deal that sometimes the
updater might need to be updated.

I personally get a bit angry when of all people, software engineers get
annoyed about updates. You should know better that the update to software
would push better algorithms, reducing CPU and memory usage while it might
also have security fixes making software more secure.

Nobody (not even Apple) makes perfect software. There is no such thing as bug
free code. Updates fix bugs.

I understand it is a bit psychological too, since people complain more about
free updates than paid ones.

Engineers should promote updates amongst friends and family and not deride
updates in public.

~~~
Kliment
There's updates and there's updates. If an update automagically installs
itself and restarts your machine because you went to the kitchen to make
yourself a tea and a sandwich and you lose work, that's one thing. Same if an
update forces you to wait for it to download and install when you really need
to get some work done. Bonus negative points if you are on a connection where
you pay by the kilobyte with international roaming. If an update asks for
consent, installs cleanly without breaking things or making your machine
unusable for the time, and does not destroy your work if you aren't paying
attention, that's another thing. There's a good reason people dislike updates.
The correct thing to do is fix them, not advocate them.

------
voxxit
God help us.

------
smashing
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

------
commieneko
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly
cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

------
hswolff
I feel like there's a joke in there somewhere... Something about how an adobe
(proper noun) is naturally small and soft. Seems somehow fitting for the two
companies to become one, no?

~~~
lazugod
Adobe is a type of brick, so not particularly soft.

