9 ms·

After Raising $235K, Abode Remains Committed to Taking on Adobe

86 points by sctgrhm 3y ago

aerodog 3y ago
Inkscape and Graphite have contributors...can the whole community be galvanized behind 'the one to rule them all'?
- unixhero 3y ago
  And Krita!!!
- mcdonje 3y ago
  I haven't heard of Graphite. But yeah, Inkscape, Gimp, Dark Table, Blender, etc. World class programs. There's no need for this.
  - throw_m239339 3y ago
    I mean, all that money could be put to better use and fund Gimp or Inkscape for instance, instead of that vaporware. But I guess people are more willing to give money to these Kickstarter marketing pitch.
  - constantcrying 3y ago
    "Let's invest money to continue enhancing existing solutions, which are free and open for all" sounds just so much less exciting than "we are going to end Adobe with $235k from our backers".
    - mcdonje 3y ago
      Maybe the $235k should be spent on paying Stuart Semple to market the existing solutions.
  - itronitron 3y ago
    As someone that has used three of those applications, and actively uses two of them I think simply having documented workflows for how to produce certain industry standard outputs from the programs would be of great benefit. If the kickstarter campaign just produces some utilities to support that I think it would benefit a lot of artists.
    - mcdonje 3y ago
      This is a good point. Anything to lower the barrier to entry, and UI is the biggest complaint I keep hearing. I don't get many of the UI complaints because I have always used Inkscape, so I have the same problem but in reverse. So, I get it.
madarcho 3y ago
I imagine a branding change will be in order before actually delivering anything to users? While I could believe in the artist and their history of fighting off legal challenges, I am sceptical around the ability to (re)build even one of the mentioned tools for the budget. Adobe has an immense moat (hence its complete gall around subscription pricing) for a reason. Otherwise everyone would just be using GIMP.
- sam_goody 3y ago
  Actually, Serif has ventured surprisingly deeply into Adobe's territory. I know professional designers that prefer Affinity for many projects. They still pay for Adobe, still use Adobe often (and agree that when they need it - Affinity is not yet close), but actually prefer Affinity for some projects. Now, even taking on Affinity will cost more than a few hundred thou, but if you can get traction the sky is the limit. One idea would be to fork Gimp, focus mostly on the UI, and allow for all changes to be pulled back upstream. That would essentially turn them into the steward for GiMP, but may give them access to talent that otherwise would be out of reach and that would split the community.
- itronitron 3y ago
  >> I imagine a branding change will be in order before actually delivering anything to users? I certainly hope not. I don't think companies should expect to be able to hijack a common word as their company name and then complain when another company uses a different word as its name.
A_D_E_P_T 3y ago
Remember those "day in the life of a Google Project Manager" videos, where they do nothing but hang out on Zoom meetings and pig out on free food and snacks? Yeah, in many cases, those folks make roughly $235k/year. (And consume another $100k/year in lobster, shrimp, smoothies, and snickers bars.) $235k is absolutely nothing for software development, and you probably won't be able to hire even one talented developer -- let alone a team -- with a war-chest that size.
- sam_goody 3y ago
  Well, no. If everything is open source, $235K is good for perks and incentives - and to ensure that the project is alive and active. People will do a whole lot when the incentive is not the paycheck.
  - gizmo 3y ago
    Gimp and Paint.net have probably benefited from a million hours of open source labor and yet their capabilities are nowhere near Adobe's products. People underestimate how much work commercial software takes by many orders of magnitude. This kickstarter is maybe performance art but if they're serious there is no chance in hell they will actually produce software that is actually competitive with an Adobe suite product.
    - herbst 3y ago
      No idea about Paint.Net but there is not a single thing i could name that I am missing with Gimp. The only downside of Inkscape is that it doesn't properly open and save the most recent Adobe formats other than that I also have no idea why I would need anything more than what Inkscape offers. Sure the Adobe tools have a lot to explore, a lot of buttons and options hidden in millions of submenus. But a good portion of computer users have only a limited need for tools like this, no interest in that constant learning curve after major updates and no use for all those advanced features. Imagine I learned using these tools 20 years ago, and while they heavily improved they still work exactly the same. Every time I meet Photoshop it 180d their design and button placements... My point is you do not need to feature match Adobe to compete, making it more accessible alone could be a selling point.
martin_a 3y ago
As someone who was trained extensively on Adobe products and is using them regularly, I can just recommend to give the Affinity tools a look. (They also got a summer sale running right now, so you can grab the whole suite for a $150 one time payment.) They work really well, some things are just the same as in the Creative Cloud, and I'am not missing anything so far. Sadly, the commercial world will mostly stick to Adobe, so I'll have to use that at work, too. Pricing for the Creative Cloud is just too high if you want to do it "for fun", though.
- hizanberg 3y ago
  Yep long time happy Affinity perpetual universal license customer, who uses their products on Windows, macOS/M2 and iPad. As a dev, Adobe’s premium tax is irrational.
fastball 3y ago
I feel like the inevitable trademark dispute would not be in Semple's favor. He seems to think it's fine, probably because he's gotten away with it in the past due to "parody", but when you're actually selling a product that is the same as the product the other company is selling, I think it will be much harder to use that defense.
toshk 3y ago
Hahah. Love it. However I would suggest to already start raising money for the upcoming lawsuit.
- Paul-Craft 3y ago
  Better yet, get all the money in real currency, then go burn it outside an Adobe office.
traceroute66 3y ago
$235K ? Yeah, erm, sure you're not missing a few zeros at the end of that ? First people want well written software that has ongoing support and updates. $235K will barely get you to a workable beta version that competes with the Adobe suite. Secondly, that's a hell of a risk calling yourself "Abode" and having a logo that could be argued to be "confusingly similar". Even if Adobe don't take you to court over it, they could still easily make you rack up $235K in out-of-court lawyers fees.
gyulai 3y ago
$235K sounds about right. With regard to the legal fees they'll burn through for their humorous "trademark".
tomalaci 3y ago
Important: This is not VC funding. This is a Kickstarter project [1]. Honestly, this feels like a scam. Their logo and name is stupidly similar to Adobe which would obviously result in trademark lawsuit. I think they are just scrounging up money from the Kickstarter and will just disappear after a while. [1] https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/culturehustle/abode-a-suite-of-world-class-design-and-photography-tools https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/culturehustle/abode-a-s...
- aredox 3y ago
  Semple is a very serious person - in a very British, deadpan humour way. But he delivered what he promised w.r.t. the extreme pigments he developed.
- brettermeier 3y ago
  You could have read the whole article, then you wouldn't have missed this paragraph: "The other, perhaps more urgent issue is the threat of Adobe’s legal department. The marketing and branding of the software looked a little too on the nose for the multi-billion dollar company to ignore. Semple says he’s ready should Adobe decide to flex its legal muscle. “I have lawyers, and I’ve taken advice. We have solid plans in place. I would also point out that nobody has seen the final branding and no software that infringes on any of Adobe’s trademarks has been produced,” he says. Examples of the software icons Abode displayed on its Kickstarter. “I have successfully challenged IP owned by Tiffany and Co, Pantone, Mattel, and others over the years. I feel we have a good and thorough understanding of where the legal line is and an ability to get as close to that as possible without overstepping it.”"
  - traceroute66 3y ago
    > I feel we have a good and thorough understanding of where the legal line is and an ability to get as close to that as possible without overstepping it Honestly, that statement doesn't sit well with me. Most sensible business people like to have a generous buffer between themselves and the legal line. If you make it your business model that you constantly try to test the boundaries legal line, then one day it is going to come back and bite you in the backside. The history books are littered with examples. It also means in practical terms that most of your $235k is going to disappear on lawyers fees.
ipython 3y ago
Totally confused as abode is also the name of a smart home security product — goabode.com
codeptualize 3y ago
Really confused by this.. $235K is not nearly enough to make even one of these apps. Unless they can get devs to work for free it's not happening. Also Affinity exists, their suite has basically the same apps as they claim they will build, they have one-time very reasonably priced licenses. The only potential difference is that you need to pay for major version updates, from 1 to 2 took a bit under 10 years if I'm not mistaken. Affinity has allowed me to not use Adobe for a long time, (until they bought Figma.. but well). And it seems odd to me to clone very old software in a world that has evolved. Anyway, always pro having more options, so good luck to them!
- matthewowen 3y ago
  I have to assume they’re gonna fork GIMP, make the UI look more like photoshop, and call it a day.
jacobp100 3y ago
This is such a bad take. There’s already a bunch of apps that don’t operate on subscription models - like Affinity Photo, Pixelmator Pro - and free apps like GIMP Not only that, they cost more than the each of the apps I listed
AraceliHarker 3y ago
A lot of people continue to use Adobe, no matter how much they rip them off, because there is no alternative, for better or worse, and when someone somewhere says they are going to make apps that can compete with Adobe, I don't think professional quality apps will actually be developed.
chiefalchemist 3y ago
I get and appreciate the joke but... - $235k is sweet FA - Going after Goliath out of gate is a rookie mistake. Niche down as tight as possible. They should be looking for niche Adobe is missing and then continue for there. Don't compete with Adobe. Instead, move into a blue ocean with as little competition as possible. It'll be interesting to watch but that funding needs a zero or two added to the end.
tyho 3y ago
> WHO’S BEHIND IT? > I’m Stuart Semple, I’m an artist and an activist. I come from the contemporary art world and have had several exhibitions around the world. > More relevant to this is the fact I’ve been working with technology my whole life. I studied advanced art and design, and I have been using well-known software tools since the 90s. > I’ve found an amazingly passionate team of geeks > To make amazing word class software costs money. There’s no point doing this unless it’s really really good. The geeks are being extremely generous but they will need to be paid. So your pledge is going to be used to make sure they can live whilst they do the work. > You can expect: > ONdesign - a familiar and fully featured Desktop publishing application > illustrateIT - a vector drawing and illustration package, with all the bits you love using > photoPOP - photo editing > Impress - super-fast mobile app, full of templates. I don't think the artist/activist with no business experience, programming ability, who has found "a team of geeks" will succeed in building a full replacement of the Adobe suite. The extent of this endeavor seems to be the thought "I feel like Adobe products should be cheaper than they are. They must only be expensive because of capitalism" and then the creation of a kickstarter grift.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
giantg2 3y ago
Wow the naming is rough for dyslexic people.
constantcrying 3y ago
$235K does not seem like the amount of money needed to take on Adobe. At the very, very best this gets you 4 developers and an artist for a year, I don't see how that is enough to even compete with the numerous FOSS alternatives. This is an artist wanting to make multiple high effort products. I wouldn't be surprised if there is some serious confusion about what it takes to develop software going on here. I also don't think that having Adobe, but without subscriptions, is really the solution to the problem. There are already usable, if not good FOSS alternatives out there. Maybe building up those is more productive?
- beckler 3y ago
  Stuart Semple is kinda known for pulling stunts like this. Whenever Vantablack was released to the world, the artist Anish Kapoor got exclusive artistry license rights for the pigment. Semple was rather upset about it, so he then made a pigment called "Pinkest Pink" and one of the terms and conditions of buying it is that you agree to never share it was Kapoor. I don't know what his intention is with this project, but I'm sure it'll have an interesting outcome.
  - constantcrying 3y ago
    Sure. But at this point around 3000 people have given him money for a product.
whywhywhywhy 3y ago
I dislike Adobe more than most people and feel more strongly than most that it's essential we have viable alternatives. But the whole way this has gone about seems incredibly naive both to the realities of building piece of software like that and not to mention just trying to make the "Open Office" to Adobes "MS Office" is really shortsighted considering what modern tools look like. Feel the ultimate end of this is running out of money probably with barely a prototype and causing a lot of bad blood with the artists and illustrators who trusted him with their money, also naive to how much this stuff actually costs when the founder can't create anything towards the goal themselves. Oh I also notice they fell into amateur crowdfunding trap of offering merch for a tier as low as £129. Getting those produced will cost at least £30 each for only 320 of them, shipping anywhere in the world, hoodies are heavy and bulky can go up to £50, the time/money wasted organizing the logistics of it isn't worth it. By the end of it you've probably lost money.
indigoabstract 3y ago
Hold my beer.. Leeeeeroy! There is a Photoshop alternative already (Photopea), but its maker chose to keep quiet about battling corporate overlords and such matters. Obviously a marketing noob, compared to this fiery kickstarter.
npteljes 3y ago
$235K and 16 months? What are they going to do, rebrand open source software? I really doubt anything will come of this project. I really like this guy (or his PR), but I can't see this project to succeed in any way.
footlose_3815 3y ago
That demo had literally no technical features demoed. I was excited for a second but that video really is for suckers. It looks like they didn't work on the product yet at all.
DueDilligence 3y ago
[dead]
freediverx 3y ago
While I love the idea of sticking it to Adobe, that’s not remotely enough time or money. That would barely cover the cost of a single skilled developer working for one year.

86 points by sctgrhm 3y ago

aerodog 3y ago

Inkscape and Graphite have contributors...can the whole community be galvanized behind 'the one to rule them all'?

unixhero 3y ago
And Krita!!!
mcdonje 3y ago
I haven't heard of Graphite. But yeah, Inkscape, Gimp, Dark Table, Blender, etc. World class programs. There's no need for this.
- throw_m239339 3y ago
  I mean, all that money could be put to better use and fund Gimp or Inkscape for instance, instead of that vaporware. But I guess people are more willing to give money to these Kickstarter marketing pitch.
- constantcrying 3y ago
  "Let's invest money to continue enhancing existing solutions, which are free and open for all" sounds just so much less exciting than "we are going to end Adobe with $235k from our backers".
  - mcdonje 3y ago
    Maybe the $235k should be spent on paying Stuart Semple to market the existing solutions.
- itronitron 3y ago
  As someone that has used three of those applications, and actively uses two of them I think simply having documented workflows for how to produce certain industry standard outputs from the programs would be of great benefit. If the kickstarter campaign just produces some utilities to support that I think it would benefit a lot of artists.
  - mcdonje 3y ago
    This is a good point. Anything to lower the barrier to entry, and UI is the biggest complaint I keep hearing. I don't get many of the UI complaints because I have always used Inkscape, so I have the same problem but in reverse. So, I get it.

madarcho 3y ago

I imagine a branding change will be in order before actually delivering anything to users? While I could believe in the artist and their history of fighting off legal challenges, I am sceptical around the ability to (re)build even one of the mentioned tools for the budget. Adobe has an immense moat (hence its complete gall around subscription pricing) for a reason. Otherwise everyone would just be using GIMP.

sam_goody 3y ago
Actually, Serif has ventured surprisingly deeply into Adobe's territory. I know professional designers that prefer Affinity for many projects. They still pay for Adobe, still use Adobe often (and agree that when they need it - Affinity is not yet close), but actually prefer Affinity for some projects. Now, even taking on Affinity will cost more than a few hundred thou, but if you can get traction the sky is the limit. One idea would be to fork Gimp, focus mostly on the UI, and allow for all changes to be pulled back upstream. That would essentially turn them into the steward for GiMP, but may give them access to talent that otherwise would be out of reach and that would split the community.
itronitron 3y ago
>> I imagine a branding change will be in order before actually delivering anything to users? I certainly hope not. I don't think companies should expect to be able to hijack a common word as their company name and then complain when another company uses a different word as its name.

A_D_E_P_T 3y ago

Remember those "day in the life of a Google Project Manager" videos, where they do nothing but hang out on Zoom meetings and pig out on free food and snacks? Yeah, in many cases, those folks make roughly $235k/year. (And consume another $100k/year in lobster, shrimp, smoothies, and snickers bars.) $235k is absolutely nothing for software development, and you probably won't be able to hire even one talented developer -- let alone a team -- with a war-chest that size.

sam_goody 3y ago
Well, no. If everything is open source, $235K is good for perks and incentives - and to ensure that the project is alive and active. People will do a whole lot when the incentive is not the paycheck.
- gizmo 3y ago
  Gimp and Paint.net have probably benefited from a million hours of open source labor and yet their capabilities are nowhere near Adobe's products. People underestimate how much work commercial software takes by many orders of magnitude. This kickstarter is maybe performance art but if they're serious there is no chance in hell they will actually produce software that is actually competitive with an Adobe suite product.
  - herbst 3y ago
    No idea about Paint.Net but there is not a single thing i could name that I am missing with Gimp. The only downside of Inkscape is that it doesn't properly open and save the most recent Adobe formats other than that I also have no idea why I would need anything more than what Inkscape offers. Sure the Adobe tools have a lot to explore, a lot of buttons and options hidden in millions of submenus. But a good portion of computer users have only a limited need for tools like this, no interest in that constant learning curve after major updates and no use for all those advanced features. Imagine I learned using these tools 20 years ago, and while they heavily improved they still work exactly the same. Every time I meet Photoshop it 180d their design and button placements... My point is you do not need to feature match Adobe to compete, making it more accessible alone could be a selling point.

martin_a 3y ago

As someone who was trained extensively on Adobe products and is using them regularly, I can just recommend to give the Affinity tools a look. (They also got a summer sale running right now, so you can grab the whole suite for a $150 one time payment.) They work really well, some things are just the same as in the Creative Cloud, and I'am not missing anything so far. Sadly, the commercial world will mostly stick to Adobe, so I'll have to use that at work, too. Pricing for the Creative Cloud is just too high if you want to do it "for fun", though.

hizanberg 3y ago
Yep long time happy Affinity perpetual universal license customer, who uses their products on Windows, macOS/M2 and iPad. As a dev, Adobe’s premium tax is irrational.

fastball 3y ago

I feel like the inevitable trademark dispute would not be in Semple's favor. He seems to think it's fine, probably because he's gotten away with it in the past due to "parody", but when you're actually selling a product that is the same as the product the other company is selling, I think it will be much harder to use that defense.

toshk 3y ago

Hahah. Love it. However I would suggest to already start raising money for the upcoming lawsuit.

Paul-Craft 3y ago
Better yet, get all the money in real currency, then go burn it outside an Adobe office.

traceroute66 3y ago

$235K ? Yeah, erm, sure you're not missing a few zeros at the end of that ? First people want well written software that has ongoing support and updates. $235K will barely get you to a workable beta version that competes with the Adobe suite. Secondly, that's a hell of a risk calling yourself "Abode" and having a logo that could be argued to be "confusingly similar". Even if Adobe don't take you to court over it, they could still easily make you rack up $235K in out-of-court lawyers fees.

gyulai 3y ago

$235K sounds about right. With regard to the legal fees they'll burn through for their humorous "trademark".

tomalaci 3y ago

Important: This is not VC funding. This is a Kickstarter project [1]. Honestly, this feels like a scam. Their logo and name is stupidly similar to Adobe which would obviously result in trademark lawsuit. I think they are just scrounging up money from the Kickstarter and will just disappear after a while. [1] https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/culturehustle/abode-a-suite-of-world-class-design-and-photography-tools https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/culturehustle/abode-a-s...

aredox 3y ago
Semple is a very serious person - in a very British, deadpan humour way. But he delivered what he promised w.r.t. the extreme pigments he developed.
brettermeier 3y ago
You could have read the whole article, then you wouldn't have missed this paragraph: "The other, perhaps more urgent issue is the threat of Adobe’s legal department. The marketing and branding of the software looked a little too on the nose for the multi-billion dollar company to ignore. Semple says he’s ready should Adobe decide to flex its legal muscle. “I have lawyers, and I’ve taken advice. We have solid plans in place. I would also point out that nobody has seen the final branding and no software that infringes on any of Adobe’s trademarks has been produced,” he says. Examples of the software icons Abode displayed on its Kickstarter. “I have successfully challenged IP owned by Tiffany and Co, Pantone, Mattel, and others over the years. I feel we have a good and thorough understanding of where the legal line is and an ability to get as close to that as possible without overstepping it.”"
- traceroute66 3y ago
  > I feel we have a good and thorough understanding of where the legal line is and an ability to get as close to that as possible without overstepping it Honestly, that statement doesn't sit well with me. Most sensible business people like to have a generous buffer between themselves and the legal line. If you make it your business model that you constantly try to test the boundaries legal line, then one day it is going to come back and bite you in the backside. The history books are littered with examples. It also means in practical terms that most of your $235k is going to disappear on lawyers fees.

ipython 3y ago

Totally confused as abode is also the name of a smart home security product — goabode.com

codeptualize 3y ago

Really confused by this.. $235K is not nearly enough to make even one of these apps. Unless they can get devs to work for free it's not happening. Also Affinity exists, their suite has basically the same apps as they claim they will build, they have one-time very reasonably priced licenses. The only potential difference is that you need to pay for major version updates, from 1 to 2 took a bit under 10 years if I'm not mistaken. Affinity has allowed me to not use Adobe for a long time, (until they bought Figma.. but well). And it seems odd to me to clone very old software in a world that has evolved. Anyway, always pro having more options, so good luck to them!

matthewowen 3y ago
I have to assume they’re gonna fork GIMP, make the UI look more like photoshop, and call it a day.

jacobp100 3y ago

This is such a bad take. There’s already a bunch of apps that don’t operate on subscription models - like Affinity Photo, Pixelmator Pro - and free apps like GIMP Not only that, they cost more than the each of the apps I listed

AraceliHarker 3y ago

A lot of people continue to use Adobe, no matter how much they rip them off, because there is no alternative, for better or worse, and when someone somewhere says they are going to make apps that can compete with Adobe, I don't think professional quality apps will actually be developed.

chiefalchemist 3y ago

I get and appreciate the joke but... - $235k is sweet FA - Going after Goliath out of gate is a rookie mistake. Niche down as tight as possible. They should be looking for niche Adobe is missing and then continue for there. Don't compete with Adobe. Instead, move into a blue ocean with as little competition as possible. It'll be interesting to watch but that funding needs a zero or two added to the end.

tyho 3y ago

> WHO’S BEHIND IT? > I’m Stuart Semple, I’m an artist and an activist. I come from the contemporary art world and have had several exhibitions around the world. > More relevant to this is the fact I’ve been working with technology my whole life. I studied advanced art and design, and I have been using well-known software tools since the 90s. > I’ve found an amazingly passionate team of geeks > To make amazing word class software costs money. There’s no point doing this unless it’s really really good. The geeks are being extremely generous but they will need to be paid. So your pledge is going to be used to make sure they can live whilst they do the work. > You can expect: > ONdesign - a familiar and fully featured Desktop publishing application > illustrateIT - a vector drawing and illustration package, with all the bits you love using > photoPOP - photo editing > Impress - super-fast mobile app, full of templates. I don't think the artist/activist with no business experience, programming ability, who has found "a team of geeks" will succeed in building a full replacement of the Adobe suite. The extent of this endeavor seems to be the thought "I feel like Adobe products should be cheaper than they are. They must only be expensive because of capitalism" and then the creation of a kickstarter grift.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

giantg2 3y ago

Wow the naming is rough for dyslexic people.

constantcrying 3y ago

$235K does not seem like the amount of money needed to take on Adobe. At the very, very best this gets you 4 developers and an artist for a year, I don't see how that is enough to even compete with the numerous FOSS alternatives. This is an artist wanting to make multiple high effort products. I wouldn't be surprised if there is some serious confusion about what it takes to develop software going on here. I also don't think that having Adobe, but without subscriptions, is really the solution to the problem. There are already usable, if not good FOSS alternatives out there. Maybe building up those is more productive?

beckler 3y ago
Stuart Semple is kinda known for pulling stunts like this. Whenever Vantablack was released to the world, the artist Anish Kapoor got exclusive artistry license rights for the pigment. Semple was rather upset about it, so he then made a pigment called "Pinkest Pink" and one of the terms and conditions of buying it is that you agree to never share it was Kapoor. I don't know what his intention is with this project, but I'm sure it'll have an interesting outcome.
- constantcrying 3y ago
  Sure. But at this point around 3000 people have given him money for a product.

whywhywhywhy 3y ago

I dislike Adobe more than most people and feel more strongly than most that it's essential we have viable alternatives. But the whole way this has gone about seems incredibly naive both to the realities of building piece of software like that and not to mention just trying to make the "Open Office" to Adobes "MS Office" is really shortsighted considering what modern tools look like. Feel the ultimate end of this is running out of money probably with barely a prototype and causing a lot of bad blood with the artists and illustrators who trusted him with their money, also naive to how much this stuff actually costs when the founder can't create anything towards the goal themselves. Oh I also notice they fell into amateur crowdfunding trap of offering merch for a tier as low as £129. Getting those produced will cost at least £30 each for only 320 of them, shipping anywhere in the world, hoodies are heavy and bulky can go up to £50, the time/money wasted organizing the logistics of it isn't worth it. By the end of it you've probably lost money.

indigoabstract 3y ago

Hold my beer.. Leeeeeroy! There is a Photoshop alternative already (Photopea), but its maker chose to keep quiet about battling corporate overlords and such matters. Obviously a marketing noob, compared to this fiery kickstarter.

npteljes 3y ago

$235K and 16 months? What are they going to do, rebrand open source software? I really doubt anything will come of this project. I really like this guy (or his PR), but I can't see this project to succeed in any way.

footlose_3815 3y ago

That demo had literally no technical features demoed. I was excited for a second but that video really is for suckers. It looks like they didn't work on the product yet at all.

DueDilligence 3y ago

[dead]

freediverx 3y ago

While I love the idea of sticking it to Adobe, that’s not remotely enough time or money. That would barely cover the cost of a single skilled developer working for one year.