Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

10124Re: [PPLetterpress] Ragemaker

Expand Messages
  • Scott Rubel
    Sep 9, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      The comment about pirating brought back a memory. Pirating is, of
      course, stealing, but I realize that I could transfer my typesetting
      skills from handset to digital because someone "put" Pagemaker on my
      first Mac in the early 80s. I barely knew where software came from back
      then and had little clue that I was doing anything worse than taking a
      cassette made from a friend's LP.

      I guess I used a pirated version for a couple of years, but that's what
      got me into it and purchasing legal versions ever since then,
      subsequently to Quark, and then to InDesign, Photoshop, Freehand,
      Illustrator, &c. Who knows what would have become of me (and how many
      thousands Adobe and others would have missed out on) had it not been for
      my "free sample?"

      --Scott

      Gerald Lange wrote:
      > In defense of PM
      >
      >
      >> There is a reason Ragemaker was shelved once Aldus was purchased by
      >> Adobe.
      >>
      >
      > Hardly. Very few folks remember it was once owned by Altsys. Or that
      > Fontographer was owned by Altyys as well.
      >
      > I find that most people who stuck with Ragemaker were doing it
      >
      >> for some kind of "I'm not selling out to Quark" stance. Basically
      >> people used Ragemaker because it was cheap and easy to pirate.
      >> Everyone had a pirated copy of Ragemaker.
      >>
      >
      > I have never had a pirated copy of PageMaker or Quark.
      >
      >
      > To redevelop Ragemaker was too expensive and everyone
      >
      >> generally accepted that a redevelopment would make it too much like
      >> Quark, which would bring many lawsuits from Quark. They loved to sue
      >> anyone who infringed on their model.
      >>
      >
      > Apparently Adobe was able to work that out, Re: InDesign. Quark's
      > model was based on previous proprietary applications. They could sue
      > whoever they wanted. Big deal. Did they ever win? They should have
      > paid more attention to the product.
      >
      > Gerald
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 17 messages in this topic