Adobe is going to kill Fireworks(twitter.com)
twitter.com
Adobe is going to kill Fireworks
https://twitter.com/DeeSadler/status/331209193451315202
106 comments
100% agree with what you said, I use it for all my graphic design, UX design and sometimes I also stretch it to do for print graphics (yeah, for print it ends with and import to PS and export to pdf).
...but it's also buggy as hell! If you're a FW user, take PS or Illustrator for a spin and it will seem wind-fast and rock-solid in comparison. The FW codebase may be in need of a complete rewrite or hardcore refactoring considering how brittle the software feels and maybe Adobe doesn't want to have talented coders working on this, especially since PS is being slowly improved with webdev friendly features. But I really hope they change their mind ...FW is the only design tool with an UI that fits my workflow and bends around my mind instead of requiring my mind to bend around its quirks
...but it's also buggy as hell! If you're a FW user, take PS or Illustrator for a spin and it will seem wind-fast and rock-solid in comparison. The FW codebase may be in need of a complete rewrite or hardcore refactoring considering how brittle the software feels and maybe Adobe doesn't want to have talented coders working on this, especially since PS is being slowly improved with webdev friendly features. But I really hope they change their mind ...FW is the only design tool with an UI that fits my workflow and bends around my mind instead of requiring my mind to bend around its quirks
In many ways it feels like the number one change Adobe did to Fireworks is to make it slower, for no discernible reason.
And Fireworks is quite buggy in some details, and it being a completely different codebase didn't help. I agree that AI and PS are much better in terms of stability and codebase and support, but they still feel like you're using an electric toothbrush to paint a wall.
For print graphics, it's LaTeX for me. It's not an entirely sane choice. Either that or very high resolution Fireworks, trying to deal with HTML5 (and bending that into a PDF with horrific results) or just giving up and using Word. Or Illustrator, for that matter, which is the sane choice. But Illustrator sits in an awkward gap and InDesign isn't much better either in that regard.
There's a market out there for a non-WYSIWYG application for print design.
And Fireworks is quite buggy in some details, and it being a completely different codebase didn't help. I agree that AI and PS are much better in terms of stability and codebase and support, but they still feel like you're using an electric toothbrush to paint a wall.
For print graphics, it's LaTeX for me. It's not an entirely sane choice. Either that or very high resolution Fireworks, trying to deal with HTML5 (and bending that into a PDF with horrific results) or just giving up and using Word. Or Illustrator, for that matter, which is the sane choice. But Illustrator sits in an awkward gap and InDesign isn't much better either in that regard.
There's a market out there for a non-WYSIWYG application for print design.
+1 for Fireworks is my groove and Photoshop doesn't feel right. Sad indeed.
Yes, it will be a very sad day. That program has been my bread and butter for so damn long. Photoshop and Illustrator can't even remotely compare to the power of fireworks when it comes to prototyping.
Agreed. I can only assume that at least 50% of the people that use Photoshop only do it because they've never tried Fireworks (or have to, because everyone else does). Of course, that means Adobe is sort of competing with it's own product, so it was inevitable that Fireworks would disappear some day.
To the best of my knowledge, Fireworks has no competitor or open source equivalent. If anyone is thinking about it, you'd have a customer for life from me.
To the best of my knowledge, Fireworks has no competitor or open source equivalent. If anyone is thinking about it, you'd have a customer for life from me.
[deleted]
Wish they make it open source rather than killing it. The codebase is anyways not native adobe's.
that’s a perfect summation of why i love fireworks as well. i often find it difficult to explain exactly why, but it has more to do with the way you get things done than any particular feature. i sort of grew up with it, and as such, find it very natural; have tried to adapt to similar programs but struggle as they completely break my workflow.
and i sort of saw this coming for a while now given its somewhat odd positioning in adobe's product portfolio (overlap with photoshop, illustrator) and the lack of meaningfully updates over the past few iterations (though, as mentioned, there really hasn’t been much room for improvement for a while..). i’ve looked for alternatives, but sadly, can’t seem to find anything suitable.. on the plus side though, i imagine current versions should be perfectly capable for some time to come.
it is sad day indeed though.
and i sort of saw this coming for a while now given its somewhat odd positioning in adobe's product portfolio (overlap with photoshop, illustrator) and the lack of meaningfully updates over the past few iterations (though, as mentioned, there really hasn’t been much room for improvement for a while..). i’ve looked for alternatives, but sadly, can’t seem to find anything suitable.. on the plus side though, i imagine current versions should be perfectly capable for some time to come.
it is sad day indeed though.
I've been using Fireworks for years, back to Macromedia Fireworks 4. It's much better/faster than Photoshop for web design (rounded square corners come to mind).
If you work on a Mac, consider Sketch by Bohemian Coding : http://www.bohemiancoding.com/sketch/ It's a great app, is updated very frequently and has come a very long way and could almost be seen as already superior to Fireworks CS6 in most ways.
If you work on a Mac, consider Sketch by Bohemian Coding : http://www.bohemiancoding.com/sketch/ It's a great app, is updated very frequently and has come a very long way and could almost be seen as already superior to Fireworks CS6 in most ways.
Old now, but in 2010 Jon Hicks reviewed a bunch of Fireworks alternatives: http://hicksdesign.co.uk/journal/fireworks-alternatives-on-t... Well worth a read. It reignited on Twitter last week:
https://twitter.com/Hicksdesign/status/329882707507154944 https://twitter.com/Hicksdesign/status/329882861337464832
https://twitter.com/Hicksdesign/status/329882707507154944 https://twitter.com/Hicksdesign/status/329882861337464832
Just use a plugin to enable round corner editing, like http://photoshopscripts.wordpress.com/2013/02/03/corner-edit...
Sketch looks nice, but seems like more of an Illustrator competitor than a Fireworks or PS replacement. Also, how does it handle PSD import. PSD is pretty much the standard for layered image sharing and FW opens PSD's near-perfectly.
It's definitely a Fireworks replacement: slices export, CSS export, etc. It functions like Illustrator in the way that it uses a board (group of assets) rather than a limited canvas (a single asset), but it is not a software for doing illustrations or whatever you call what Illustrator does (not native speaker here, obv).
Edit: it does @2x automated exports too, for instance. Quite handy for iOS coding or responsive design.
I've never had to open PSDs with Sketch, so I can't tell. If you have any question, feel free to tweet their account on twitter: I hear they are reactive and very friendly. And definitely close to developers and designers: a lot of the features added this year have come from user suggestions. Can't tell the same story with Adobe...
Edit: it does @2x automated exports too, for instance. Quite handy for iOS coding or responsive design.
I've never had to open PSDs with Sketch, so I can't tell. If you have any question, feel free to tweet their account on twitter: I hear they are reactive and very friendly. And definitely close to developers and designers: a lot of the features added this year have come from user suggestions. Can't tell the same story with Adobe...
Sketch doesn't yet support PSD. PSD format is a little bit of a complex format to support. However they have made it clear that it is a very high priority on their list several times. So it will come eventually.
It's more of a Fireworks or Illustrator replacement then a PS replacement. It doesn't come with all the lovely filters and stuff PS has. It also doesn't have the complexities of Illustrator. But if you are a web developer, it has some of the best tools for that specific development. Icon design, web design, buttons, etc. are all a snap to create.
It's more of a Fireworks or Illustrator replacement then a PS replacement. It doesn't come with all the lovely filters and stuff PS has. It also doesn't have the complexities of Illustrator. But if you are a web developer, it has some of the best tools for that specific development. Icon design, web design, buttons, etc. are all a snap to create.
I think the OP was talking about replacing Fireworks' excellent vector editing abilities.
The best way I've found to make rounded corners in Photoshop is by using the round rectangle vector tool. It's relatively new, so you may not have tried it.
I can't tell if you're being snarky, or just don't have experience.
It's not the creation of rounded rectangles. It's being able to change the radius afterwards (which Photoshop can't do). Also, if you want to change the size of the rectangle later in Photoshop, without distorting the corners, it's not easy -- you have to subselect specific control points, and then move them.
It's not impossible in Photoshop, it's just that modifying rounded rectangles is a huge pain.
It's not the creation of rounded rectangles. It's being able to change the radius afterwards (which Photoshop can't do). Also, if you want to change the size of the rectangle later in Photoshop, without distorting the corners, it's not easy -- you have to subselect specific control points, and then move them.
It's not impossible in Photoshop, it's just that modifying rounded rectangles is a huge pain.
I'm not being snarky. Sorry of if it came out that way. You're right, changing the radius is too difficult; I'm just remembering back when creating rounded rectangles was itself a multistep process.
Indeed. For years we had to use workarounds and various cheats. Having different radii was a pain in the ass in PS, but a breeze in FW.
It's a breeze in PS now too.
Well, that's if you fork for the latest Creative Cloud subscription, or wait for the next boxed version.
The upcoming Creative Cloud version, called Photoshop CC (Creative Cloud), finally offers re-adjustable radii (for all corners).
See more here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=B...!
Well, that's if you fork for the latest Creative Cloud subscription, or wait for the next boxed version.
The upcoming Creative Cloud version, called Photoshop CC (Creative Cloud), finally offers re-adjustable radii (for all corners).
See more here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=B...!
"now" is decidedly premature. Adobe's announcement yesterday happened after this conversation, and I don't recall them making the new Photoshop available right now. And, seriously, if they have to make it one of the primary features highlighted during their keynote, it's only telling that it's coming very, very late.
Sorry to hear this news. First Google Reader and now Fireworks! The writing has been on the wall for many years, but it is still quite upsetting. I've been a heavy user of Fireworks since version 1 since it really gets the job done vs. Photoshop for layouts, slicing and exporting. The workflow for web design just feels faster when compared to Photoshop. The combined vector/bitmap flow is unparalleled and Photoshop layers feel quite slow for simple web workflows. I can go months without opening Photoshop and it feels like a beast when I do. Hopefully, Adobe can make a "Fireworks"-friendly or "Web Design" workspace in PS.
Fireworks fits an excellent niche, which is probably why Adobe likely won't sell it. I really liked some the new version 6 features, such as instantly turning designs in CSS3.
Sorry to see you go FW.
Fireworks fits an excellent niche, which is probably why Adobe likely won't sell it. I really liked some the new version 6 features, such as instantly turning designs in CSS3.
Sorry to see you go FW.
> Hopefully, Adobe can make a "Fireworks"-friendly or "Web Design" workspace in PS.
This would make sense, but I doubt they would be able to pull it off with the UI. Maybe they have decided that they have the market and people will just have to migrate.
This would make sense, but I doubt they would be able to pull it off with the UI. Maybe they have decided that they have the market and people will just have to migrate.
It's definitely wishful thinking on my part. The UI in Photoshop would make this difficult. I might just have to switch to Illustrator for more of my layout work since I dislike the bitmap-heavy workflow of PS. Everything besides editing photos or building composites in PS feels non-intuitive.
My UI/UX design company developed our own tool to replace Photoshop for our rapid prototyping and UI design work. It is publicly available by now. http://www.antetype.com
We switched from Photoshop to Antetype company-wide now and we don't miss it (It's still here for Icon Design though). We also felt Antetype superior to Fireworks as it has ways do deal with dynamic layouts and prototypic interactivity.
We switched from Photoshop to Antetype company-wide now and we don't miss it (It's still here for Icon Design though). We also felt Antetype superior to Fireworks as it has ways do deal with dynamic layouts and prototypic interactivity.
WHAT THE HELL.
It does CSS Sprites
CSS Properties
LIVE MOCKUPS
God damn adobe. I've gone so long without having to touch photoshop or illustrator for web dev because FIREWORKS IS PERFECT.
It does CSS Sprites
CSS Properties
LIVE MOCKUPS
God damn adobe. I've gone so long without having to touch photoshop or illustrator for web dev because FIREWORKS IS PERFECT.
Often times I feel like I'm in the minority, but I rarely use Fireworks for anything. Perhaps I'm just more comfortable in Photoshop, but I often found that Fireworks didn't fit my workflow.
I've read a ton of articles on how/why I should use Fireworks for web design. Perhaps somebody could inform me on what I'm missing.
I've read a ton of articles on how/why I should use Fireworks for web design. Perhaps somebody could inform me on what I'm missing.
i'm the complete opposite. i latched-onto macromedia fireworks before adobe bought it up (probably because i managed to get it for free¹) and have never been able to comfortably shift to photoshop..
i get the sense that you can achieve very similar outcomes using either one, but just always preferred the way you do so with fireworks over photoshop and similar programs. i’m not too savvy in the design space, but would appreciate any insights into the differences between the two, particularly as it relates to workflow.
¹ should note that while i initially gained exposure to the program via less-than-legal ways, having since grown up i am now a happy paying customer. i imagine this experience is quite common and this type of exposure a net benefit to companies like adobe.
i get the sense that you can achieve very similar outcomes using either one, but just always preferred the way you do so with fireworks over photoshop and similar programs. i’m not too savvy in the design space, but would appreciate any insights into the differences between the two, particularly as it relates to workflow.
¹ should note that while i initially gained exposure to the program via less-than-legal ways, having since grown up i am now a happy paying customer. i imagine this experience is quite common and this type of exposure a net benefit to companies like adobe.
I am the reverse of you, so I can't talk with any great authority, either. But every time I've used Photoshop I've gotten sick of having to create dozens of layers for everything i do- in Fireworks everything is it's own independent, editable vector object. I just find it far, far easier.
Not having to think about layers (until they are actually needed) is my favorite core feature of FW. Why couldn't Adobe just add this as an option to PS.
Our new vector drawing app, WebCode, is a nice replacement for Fireworks: http://www.webcodeapp.com/
It generates CSS, JavaScript+Canvas and SVG code from your drawings in real time and can also import PSD documents.
The generated code works great on both Retina and non-Retina displays. You can even preview how your drawings would look on Retina displays directly in WebCode. It inherited a lot of things from PaintCode (our app for Mac and iOS developers), which makes it very nice for user interface design.
It generates CSS, JavaScript+Canvas and SVG code from your drawings in real time and can also import PSD documents.
The generated code works great on both Retina and non-Retina displays. You can even preview how your drawings would look on Retina displays directly in WebCode. It inherited a lot of things from PaintCode (our app for Mac and iOS developers), which makes it very nice for user interface design.
Is it using WebKit for rendering?
where is the windows version?
Lost me at the color picker. Is there any way to switch to using the standard OS X color picker?
Also, preferences aren't in the usual spot (under the Apple menu)?
Also, preferences aren't in the usual spot (under the Apple menu)?
Sad and a little bit worried about this. While I will still use Fireworks for years after it's death (assuming I can), I'm not so sure what the path is for designers like me who use Fireworks for complete web design.
Unlike most here in this thread, I don't use FW for wireframing, prototyping or simple UI design. It's been our primary design for complete web/ui design tool for over a decade.
Let's hope Adobe comes to their senses.
Unlike most here in this thread, I don't use FW for wireframing, prototyping or simple UI design. It's been our primary design for complete web/ui design tool for over a decade.
Let's hope Adobe comes to their senses.
Yeah, I se/used Fireworks for almost everything. Designing in it is the easiest i've ever experienced, and I've been using it for over a decade as well.
Fireworks is the only Adobe product I use religiously. I never understood why it didn't take off with the web design world. I believe it to be the most intuitive of the bunch.
Simple things like copy/paste work like they should, and whereas PS might be more robust, it takes 2-3x more clicks to achieve what FW can do in just a few.
Simple things like copy/paste work like they should, and whereas PS might be more robust, it takes 2-3x more clicks to achieve what FW can do in just a few.
yes yes yes. I can't believe this at all...
I can't believe this. Photoshop is not meant for web design, we only have Fireworks for the task.
A simple task like selecting a layer in Photoshop makes me want to cry.
A simple task like selecting a layer in Photoshop makes me want to cry.
If you're using the pointer tool, hold down [cmd] on a Mac or [ctrl] on Windows and click on something in the layer you want to select.
Right-click to get a list of layers under your pointer. Or you can set a preference that click on an element automatically selects that layer in the layer palette. This makes you cry?
Design with 300 layers. Trying to select a text layer. Gotta hit juuuust the right pixel.
Or say you have grouped layers, and there's a semitransparent layer in one group, and a background in another group, and 20 groups in between those groups.
Or say you have grouped layers, and there's a semitransparent layer in one group, and a background in another group, and 20 groups in between those groups.
I fully agree. As a front-end developer, working with Fireworks is a breeze, it's fun. Slicing designs, exporting sprites and measuring elements is all done easily and in a very user-friendly manner. The few sites I have developed from a Photoshop design have always caused trouble, because Photoshop is simply not made for the task.
Gradients in Fireworks are so very simple. With opacity and all. With barely a click more than you need, and insanely obvious to even beginners. In Photoshop I have no idea where to start.
I switched to Sketch because of Adobe's abysmal support and direction with Fireworks. I'm not surprised this is happening, but I'm sad. I still use Fireworks, but figured I had to start getting used to something else in preparation.
They're stupid, Fireworks is awesome. Most people using Photoshop don't know about Fireworks or think they 'should' use Photoshop, so they do. Even tho it's a pain in the ass.
They're stupid, Fireworks is awesome. Most people using Photoshop don't know about Fireworks or think they 'should' use Photoshop, so they do. Even tho it's a pain in the ass.
Adobe is migrating everyone to the new cloud services, so it makes sense. Fireworks > Edge Reflow / Dreamweaver, Flash > Edge Animate. Only problem is that they're experimenting so much with new apps that I don't know what to invest my time in learning (I'm looking at you Proto).
Fireworks is/was also important in the workflow for flash professional. What does this tell us about the future of that program? Personally I think it's a stupid move of Adobe. They have been cashing on it for years, with very small updates for big prices. Why stop cashing now ?
Been a Fireworks user for years for UI mockups and graphic design. Would be tragic if this news is true. One alternative not mentioned here is Omnigraffle. It is actually very well suited for UI design though not as much for visual design but you can get pretty close.
I knew the gig was up when the CC announcement today mentioned Photoshop had adjustable rounded corner radius (the fact that this makes a press release should make some people pause before using Photoshop for their web comps, not that it will really stop anybody) and Illustrator now supports CSS exporting for gradients and such (CSS exporting being a feature of Fireworks CS6).
I would feel less abandoned by Adobe if they could simply make a better dedicated wireframing tool that shares the best of InDesign, Illustrator and Photoshop rather than making me choose if today I want PDFs, Vector or Bitmap.
I would feel less abandoned by Adobe if they could simply make a better dedicated wireframing tool that shares the best of InDesign, Illustrator and Photoshop rather than making me choose if today I want PDFs, Vector or Bitmap.
Hello Everyone,
I've been a fireworks user since the product's initial release. I consider it to be an essential tool for rapid prototyping, designer-developer workflow, and Web graphic asset creation. Please consider signing the following petition to either encourage Adobe to continue Fireworks development or convert Fireworks to an open source project. thanks in advance for your support!
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/dont-kill-adobe-fireworks...
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/dont-kill-adobe-fireworks...
This made me realize how much I miss Freehand which was way better and easier then AI. Now Adobe kills another superior piece of software made by Macromedia. On the other hand, Flash still lives strong.
Go figure.
Go figure.
Somewhat makes sense to me. I haven't used Fireworks in a long time and I'm not a designer, but it seemed like it was a user friendly hybrid of Photoshop (for raster) and Illustrator (for vector.) It seemed that together Photoshop and Illustrator could do everything you needed for the web, but that required a lot bigger payment, a lot of controls you didn't use, another software program and there were some minor things that weren't quite as smooth for web (aside from the UI.) I'm surprised Fireworks has lasted this long.
This is sad. Back when I was heaving in print-based design, I used Photoshop religiously, but when I switched to web, Fireworks was my tool of choice.
I need FW way more than I need PS these days.
How's Acorn as a replacement?
I need FW way more than I need PS these days.
How's Acorn as a replacement?
I don't think this comes as a huge surprise to many. There were big hopes for Fireworks after the buyout that never materialised, and while it has seen steady — albeit minor —iteration since, it never ended up inheriting the Photoshop features that I for one hoped it would.
In stark contrast to PS, FW is one of a select few pieces of Adobe creative software that always 'just worked' as I expected. It is a remarkably intuitive tool for many tasks, and it'll be a shame to see it go.
In stark contrast to PS, FW is one of a select few pieces of Adobe creative software that always 'just worked' as I expected. It is a remarkably intuitive tool for many tasks, and it'll be a shame to see it go.
I do hope this isn't true, Fireworks certainly had its place, Photoshop was overkill for designing web pages.
I suppose it only fitted a small niche but it still did a great job!
I suppose it only fitted a small niche but it still did a great job!
I've never really been able to solidly get into Fireworks, despite trying several times. The fans love it, but I've personally found it very clunky.
However, a colleague swears by it for designing and developing HTML email newsletters. The general state of support for HTML and CSS in email clients is extremely poor, so you have to use inline styles and table-based layouts. Fireworks is perfect for this.
However, a colleague swears by it for designing and developing HTML email newsletters. The general state of support for HTML and CSS in email clients is extremely poor, so you have to use inline styles and table-based layouts. Fireworks is perfect for this.
I've been looking for a good alternative for years, but keep coming back to Fireworks. I am not surprised but still disappointed.
I see more people writing about how they are using Illustrator to design sites now than Fireworks/Photoshop. Claiming that it helps design responsive sites better/more intuitively.
I haven't used Fireworks for years. Once you are proficient in Photoshop, I rarely found a reason to open Fireworks even given all of its benefits.
I haven't used Fireworks for years. Once you are proficient in Photoshop, I rarely found a reason to open Fireworks even given all of its benefits.
> Once you are proficient in Photoshop,
I have no desire to ever be proficient in photoshop, which is why I like Fireworks. It's easy for me, a programmer, to open it up, figure out how to do what I need to do, and then get back to working on whatever site I'm working on.
I don't have half a day to spend trying to figure out how to change the white background to transparent because I want to introduce a background switcher to a website. I also don't want to have a designer do it either, not when I can open Fireworks and complete that task in 5 minutes.
That's the power of Fireworks in my opinion - a graphics tool for non-designers.
I have no desire to ever be proficient in photoshop, which is why I like Fireworks. It's easy for me, a programmer, to open it up, figure out how to do what I need to do, and then get back to working on whatever site I'm working on.
I don't have half a day to spend trying to figure out how to change the white background to transparent because I want to introduce a background switcher to a website. I also don't want to have a designer do it either, not when I can open Fireworks and complete that task in 5 minutes.
That's the power of Fireworks in my opinion - a graphics tool for non-designers.
I use Illustrator to make all my icons now, since I've switched to using SVG for high-res display support. Wouldn't try to use it for mocking up an entire site though; FW is much more suited to that. Working with Illustrator for large numbers of shapes and gradients is insanely inefficient. Illustrator is for precision work and advanced vector shapes, while FW is for throwing a bunch of (commonly shaped) shit at a wall and seeing what sticks, and for that there's none better.
I don't really like this approach. Don't do web design in Illustrator, do it in HTML5 + CSS3. Sure, it might take a little longer at first, but the time saved over a longer time frame makes it worth it in so many different ways.
Instead, graphics software should be used for elements in the layout rather than the layout itself.
It turns out that positioning is quite orthogonal to colour. Borders are orthogonal to textures. Sizes are orthogonal to form design. Not entirely, but that's, in the first instance, how they should be formalised before further dependencies.
It is in combining them that we find beauty. And CSS3 is a far more suitable way of doing just that in a considered fashion than Illustrator could ever be.
Instead, graphics software should be used for elements in the layout rather than the layout itself.
It turns out that positioning is quite orthogonal to colour. Borders are orthogonal to textures. Sizes are orthogonal to form design. Not entirely, but that's, in the first instance, how they should be formalised before further dependencies.
It is in combining them that we find beauty. And CSS3 is a far more suitable way of doing just that in a considered fashion than Illustrator could ever be.
I agree, I do a lot of design in browser now as well. I was just stating you tend to see more articles about Illustrator and its benefits to a design workflow over that of Fireworks.
The sad part of all of this is that there is still no true alternative to Fireworks... anywhere! :\
It's true, nothing that combines its simplicity, focus, and ease of use. Though fortunately there have been a number of great indie devs who've stepped in to make terrific graphics editing software: Acorn & Pixelmator are among the two best. My personal favorite (and closest true alternative) is Sketch:
http://www.bohemiancoding.com/sketch/
http://www.bohemiancoding.com/sketch/
I really hope this isn't true, I've yet to find a replacement for fireworks either open or paid
If you work on a Mac, Sketch is a worthy replacement: http://www.bohemiancoding.com/sketch/
It is! But it is vector only which may or may not be a concern. And it doesn't import or export PSDs or AIs so if you live embedded in Adobe workflow it probably isn't for you.
This doesn't mean the software cannot be used anymore, right?
Not immediately, but once a software product is killed, you won't get updates for future Operating Systems, no security updates, no support for new file formats ... eventually it just dies a death of time decay.
This would be a good time for Adobe to open source it, right? So it can be ported to Linux and live forever?
As a competitor to PS and Illustrator, that will never happen.
I thought PS and Illustrator were terrible tools in the competency domain of Fireworks?
They're less efficient and more difficult to learn, but they are serviceable for everything FW is used for.
Is there a real confirmation on this or is this all based on that tweet and the 7 responses below it?
"People were telling me about it," isn't a good enough source for me.
"People were telling me about it," isn't a good enough source for me.
She is a senior community leader in the Adobe user group community and runs a designers conference. She is also a big Fireworks fan. If she's tweeting it, believe me it's true.
I think Adobe have slowly killed Fireworks for years by slowly letting it languish (as opposed to the swift axe that cut Freehand).
What do people use Fireworks for?
Quick image creation and editing. Backgrounds, resizes, taking incoming files from designers and making them 'usuable', in whatever meaning that word takes at the time. Prototyping design (i.e. "good enough until we pay a designer" design), etc.
Designing interfaces usually. It's a mixture of the vector and rastor editor and has a really simple to use UI. I'm mainly a developer but I could pick it up pretty quickly once the designers showed me the basics. Powerful but simple to use tool.
I use to draw interface layout and slices for my games, to create art that mix vectors and bitmaps, to create sprites and pixel art, to rapid prototyping of game art, and nothing beats it when it come to design web stuff.
I am game dev, all the mentioned things are in that context.
I am game dev, all the mentioned things are in that context.
I like Fireworks for rapidly prototyping designs. I don't really use the slice/export feature, but for prototyping before committing to code, Fireworks works perfectly for me. I've been using it for over 10 years now and have become extremely quick and comfortable in it.
Photoshop never felt right to me for doing prototypes that eventually iterate into an actual design spec. I need to crack open Photoshop a few times a year. I'm in Fireworks almost everyday. I'm sure a lot of it is my muscle memory, but for many of my graphic and photo editing tasks, Fireworks is so much faster.
Unfortunately, Fireworks has become less intuitive as its evolved and I suspect it's lost a lot of its luster to new users. Even though I'm only using Photoshop a few times a year, I still need to keep it around.
I suppose this change by Adobe will force me out of an old habit, but I'm looking forward to exploring some non-Adobe options.
Photoshop never felt right to me for doing prototypes that eventually iterate into an actual design spec. I need to crack open Photoshop a few times a year. I'm in Fireworks almost everyday. I'm sure a lot of it is my muscle memory, but for many of my graphic and photo editing tasks, Fireworks is so much faster.
Unfortunately, Fireworks has become less intuitive as its evolved and I suspect it's lost a lot of its luster to new users. Even though I'm only using Photoshop a few times a year, I still need to keep it around.
I suppose this change by Adobe will force me out of an old habit, but I'm looking forward to exploring some non-Adobe options.
Fireworks is an atrociously buggy, poorly designed piece of shit, but it's stil been the best app for web and UI design.
However, in the past 6 months I've started using an app called Antetype instead, and can't recommend it enough for screen design. http://antetype.com/
However, in the past 6 months I've started using an app called Antetype instead, and can't recommend it enough for screen design. http://antetype.com/
scuse my french but before saying that you should fucking learn how to use it
What kind of rejoinder is that? I used it heavily for three years. It's a joke. Here's a tiny fraction of the shit I encountered every day: http://fwsucks.tumblr.com/
yes. bluepill said it perfectly.
OT: I hate sliding hero-unit carousels that don't pause on hover. I am trying to look at your damn image, hold it still!
Also, get off my lawn.
Also, get off my lawn.
Hopefully someone from Adobe is able to comment on this news.
That's crazy. Why would Adobe want to do this?
Nice for it being OSS and all that, but I had to edit XML just to reorder some layers.
Definitely not the same features and polish.
Definitely not the same features and polish.
http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/Layer_Dialog
inkscape shares many features with fireworks. it's a great alternative for a big chunk of similar applications.
inkscape shares many features with fireworks. it's a great alternative for a big chunk of similar applications.
That dialog only worked AFTER I edited the XML.
[deleted]
I've managed with Potatochop for the past decade just fine...
Will it help Inkscape?
Could Inkscape advocate Adobe to let Fireworks live to help SVG grow?
Could Inkscape advocate Adobe to let Fireworks live to help SVG grow?
I fail to see how keeping Fireworks around would help SVG. Does Fireworks even support SVG? Isn't it using layered PNG as native format?
Both Expression Design and Fireworks are now out of the way, so Inkscape could get a lot more traction.
Both Expression Design and Fireworks are now out of the way, so Inkscape could get a lot more traction.
Inkscape's QT-based(?) UI looks like a hot mess and feels just as bad on OS X.
It's probably fine for Windows, though.
It's probably fine for Windows, though.
Inkscape interface does most everything I need, except I miss Photoshop's 'Layer Effects' workflow, which makes designing and organizing filters less messy.
I use Linux.
I use Linux.
User-friendly but quite powerful behind the scenes. I could never get the hang of Photoshop or Illustrator. Sure, Photoshop may have features or Illustrator knows how to do text flow, but if you have creativity and you know what you want, then Fireworks does everything possible to get out of your way yet is even intuitive for beginners with the same UI. Everything is discoverable, all the features are quite orthogonal to each other and it throws open how ridiculous the need to choose between vector and bitmap everywhere else really is.
If this turns out to be true, it's a sad day.