According to YouTube videos, Adobe must be having a nightmare, not to mention sleepless nights!
<https://youtu.be/doHqV2t26KU> <https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ArtCraft>
Just 48 hours after Vibe released his products, Adobe called a special
board meeting and requested an urgent meeting with the Trump
administration to discuss ways to stop AI reverse-engineering Adobe products.
It's a worrying time for the greedy corporation that made the
subscription model mandatory in the software industry ?? we saw HP's CEO leave the firm for PayPal when HP customers started switching to Ecotank printers, which don't require a subscription, and we might see the same thing happen at Adobe.
Just 48 hours after Vibe released his products, Adobe called a special
board meeting and requested an urgent meeting with the Trump
administration to discuss ways to stop AI reverse-engineering Adobe
products.
On 10/08/2026 7:29 PM, MegaNZ wrote:
Just 48 hours after Vibe released his products, Adobe called a special
board meeting and requested an urgent meeting with the TrumpNever happened.
administration to discuss ways to stop AI reverse-engineering Adobe
products.
Made up, fictional scenario, exaggeration of tech commentary.
Fake news, fake reporting, fake opinion, fake etc.
Viber is not a 'his'
Op 09-10-2026 om 09:21 schreef ....winston:
On 10/08/2026 7:29 PM, MegaNZ wrote:
Just 48 hours after Vibe released his products, Adobe called a specialNever happened.
board meeting and requested an urgent meeting with the Trump
administration to discuss ways to stop AI reverse-engineering Adobe
products.
Made up, fictional scenario, exaggeration of tech commentary.
Fake news, fake reporting, fake opinion, fake etc.
Viber is not a 'his'
It definitely exists, just installed it on a virtual MX 25.
Very quick test shows it works, can't judge how good it is or how close
to the real thing, the last Photoshop I used was 5.5, 25 years ago.
On 10/09/2026 2:02 PM, dillinger wrote:
Op 09-10-2026 om 09:21 schreef ....winston:
On 10/08/2026 7:29 PM, MegaNZ wrote:
Just 48 hours after Vibe released his products, Adobe called a special >>>> board meeting and requested an urgent meeting with the TrumpNever happened.
administration to discuss ways to stop AI reverse-engineering Adobe
products.
Made up, fictional scenario, exaggeration of tech commentary.
Fake news, fake reporting, fake opinion, fake etc.
Viber is not a 'his'
It definitely exists, just installed it on a virtual MX 25.
Very quick test shows it works, can't judge how good it is or how close
to the real thing, the last Photoshop I used was 5.5, 25 years ago.
The software was valid.
The commentary(special board meeting, request meet with the 'dear old uncle scam administration' was not(i.e. fake)
Vibe is not a 'his' (pronoun)
Vibe, in this case(vibe-coding) is a noun.
The 'his', iirc - creator/author of open-source Adobe alternative is Brandon Thomas
It would be like convincing the average person that
LibreOffice is a decent replacement for MSOffice.
It's a decent tool, if that's what all your associates
use, but if you're collaborating with a group
of MSOffice users, your work will stick out like
a sore thumb. Like, say, change tracking doesn't work
on your chapter, and it works on the rest of the group.
Those sorts of things.
It would be like convincing the average person that
LibreOffice is a decent replacement for MSOffice.
It's a decent tool, if that's what all your associates
use, but if you're collaborating with a group
of MSOffice users, your work will stick out like
a sore thumb. Like, say, change tracking doesn't work
on your chapter, and it works on the rest of the group.
Those sorts of things.
According to YouTube videos, Adobe must be having a nightmare, not to
mention sleepless nights!
<https://youtu.be/doHqV2t26KU> <https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ArtCraft>
Just 48 hours after Vibe released his products, Adobe called a special
board meeting and requested an urgent meeting with the Trump
administration to discuss ways to stop AI reverse-engineering Adobe
products.
It's a worrying time for the greedy corporation that made the
subscription model mandatory in the software industry ? we saw HP's CEO
leave the firm for PayPal when HP customers started switching to Ecotank printers, which don't require a subscription, and we might see the same
thing happen at Adobe.
Brian Gregory wrote:
Professionals who compare the two side by side say the clones fall short in ways that are quite likely to be important to most professionals.
This week ... once AI gets its teeth into bugfixing that could change surprisingly quickly.
Brian Gregory wrote:
Professionals who compare the two side by side say the clones fall
short in ways that are quite likely to be important to most
professionals.
This week ... once AI gets its teeth into bugfixing that could change surprisingly quickly.
On 11/10/2026 22:39, Andy Burns wrote:
Brian Gregory wrote:
Professionals who compare the two side by side say the clones fall short >>> in ways that are quite likely to be important to most professionals.
This week ... once AI gets its teeth into bugfixing that could change surprisingly quickly.
It's not so much bugs, it's that Adobe knows great ways to implement
things like object masking. If the AI doesn't know, and if it's not
actually reverse engineering it probably won't know, then it can't
implement it so well.
Should Adobe be scared ? I don't think so. The OCR worked after a fashion, but it is really no better than some Tesseract adventure. It is about
as useful as OCRmypdf.
On 10/09/2026 9:46 PM, Paul wrote:
Should Adobe be scared ? I don't think so. The OCR worked after a fashion, >> but it is really no better than some Tesseract adventure. It is about
as useful as OCRmypdf.
That's in agreement and similar sentiment from a cross-section of Enterprise and SMB admin testing (large and small volume of seats)
˙- Another reasonable comment is expenses associated with retraining including training time loss of productivity(i.e. not working on existing responsibilities, new troubleshooting tasking, etc.
On 10/09/2026 9:46 PM, Paul wrote:
Should Adobe be scared ? I don't think so. The OCR worked after a
fashion,
but it is really no better than some Tesseract adventure. It is about
as useful as OCRmypdf.
That's in agreement and similar sentiment from a cross-section of
Enterprise and SMB admin testing (large and small volume of seats)
˙- Another reasonable comment is expenses associated with retraining including training time loss of productivity(i.e. not working on
existing responsibilities, new troubleshooting tasking, etc.
On Tue, 10/13/2026 1:49 PM, ....winston wrote:
On 10/09/2026 9:46 PM, Paul wrote:
Should Adobe be scared ? I don't think so. The OCR worked after a fashion, >>> but it is really no better than some Tesseract adventure. It is about
as useful as OCRmypdf.
That's in agreement and similar sentiment from a cross-section of Enterprise and SMB admin testing (large and small volume of seats)
˙- Another reasonable comment is expenses associated with retraining including training time loss of productivity(i.e. not working on existing responsibilities, new troubleshooting tasking, etc.
For some of them, they don't need training, because they haven't
even done the ribbon yet, and the menu is pretty barren. It won't
take long to fix that.
And while I was pessimistic a few days ago, that this effort could
finish, I discovered in a recent article, there *is* a way they could
do it.
You can take the existing executable code and reverse engineer it, turning it into source code which is close enough to match 83% of the executable,
byte for byte. Then, by writing an architecture spec based on the
patterns in the reversed engineer effort, you can work in the
forward direction and pretend it was a "clean room" effort.
As the executable code should now be quite different.
Only the theft of non-public algorithms would be a giveaway .
The only thing wrong with that method, is it would take a couple
million dollars worth of tokens to do it. The people doing these
things, are using bulk-rate methods, instead of normal subscriptions.
There were some subscriptions that did not bill at the token level.
About the same as renting an Amazon instance.
Paul
On 10/13/2026 4:38 PM, Paul wrote:
On Tue, 10/13/2026 1:49 PM, ....winston wrote:
On 10/09/2026 9:46 PM, Paul wrote:
Should Adobe be scared ? I don't think so. The OCR worked after a >>>>fashion,
but it is really no better than some Tesseract adventure. It is about >>>>as useful as OCRmypdf.
That's in agreement and similar sentiment from a cross-section of >>>Enterprise and SMB admin testing (large and small volume of seats)
˙- Another reasonable comment is expenses associated with retraining >>>including training time loss of productivity(i.e. not working on existing >>>responsibilities, new troubleshooting tasking, etc.
For some of them, they don't need training, because they haven't
even done the ribbon yet, and the menu is pretty barren. It won't
take long to fix that.
Missing part of the point. OpenSource products(AI or not AI) are not >exclusively static. In the Enterprise environment, training across large >quantity of seats is a continuous long term expense(and those seats can be
a multiple thousands of seats across an entire corporation).
While Adobe Systems(and earlier Macromedia) products are also not static, >but the basic design and use has remained reasonably common over the years.
Features in either product may be common, it's the human behavior
requiring the training.
If I'm Adobe, now I'm worried. It would be pretty expensive to do it
this way, but then, the results would also be pretty impressive.
On 15/10/2026 in message <11aqrrl$2h2sf$1@dont-email.me> ....winston wrote:
On 10/13/2026 4:38 PM, Paul wrote:
On Tue, 10/13/2026 1:49 PM, ....winston wrote:
On 10/09/2026 9:46 PM, Paul wrote:
Should Adobe be scared ? I don't think so. The OCR worked after a
fashion,
but it is really no better than some Tesseract adventure. It is about >>>>> as useful as OCRmypdf.
That's in agreement and similar sentiment from a cross-section of
Enterprise and SMB admin testing (large and small volume of seats)
˙- Another reasonable comment is expenses associated with retraining
including training time loss of productivity(i.e. not working on
existing responsibilities, new troubleshooting tasking, etc.
For some of them, they don't need training, because they haven't
even done the ribbon yet, and the menu is pretty barren. It won't
take long to fix that.
Missing part of the point. OpenSource products(AI or not AI) are not
exclusively˙ static.˙ In the Enterprise environment, training across
large quantity of seats is a continuous long term expense(and those
seats can be a multiple thousands of seats across an entire corporation).
While Adobe Systems(and earlier Macromedia) products are also not
static, but the basic design and use has remained reasonably common
over the years.
Features in either product may be common, it's the human behavior
requiring the training.
That's a standard marketing response to try and frighten people into
staying with expensive, subscription only, products.
On 10/15/2026 4:50 PM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 15/10/2026 in message <11aqrrl$2h2sf$1@dont-email.me> ....winston >>wrote:
On 10/13/2026 4:38 PM, Paul wrote:
On Tue, 10/13/2026 1:49 PM, ....winston wrote:
On 10/09/2026 9:46 PM, Paul wrote:
Should Adobe be scared ? I don't think so. The OCR worked after a >>>>>>fashion,
but it is really no better than some Tesseract adventure. It is about >>>>>>as useful as OCRmypdf.
That's in agreement and similar sentiment from a cross-section of >>>>>Enterprise and SMB admin testing (large and small volume of seats)
˙- Another reasonable comment is expenses associated with retraining >>>>>including training time loss of productivity(i.e. not working on existing
responsibilities, new troubleshooting tasking, etc.
For some of them, they don't need training, because they haven't
even done the ribbon yet, and the menu is pretty barren. It won't
take long to fix that.
Missing part of the point. OpenSource products(AI or not AI) are not >>>exclusively˙ static.˙ In the Enterprise environment, training across >>>large quantity of seats is a continuous long term expense(and those seats >>>can be a multiple thousands of seats across an entire corporation).
While Adobe Systems(and earlier Macromedia) products are also not static, >>>but the basic design and use has remained reasonably common over the >>>years.
Features in either product may be common, it's the human behavior >>>requiring the training.
That's a standard marketing response to try and frighten people into >>staying with expensive, subscription only, products.
Still missing the big picture. 'People' in Enterprise are the users and >don't make the decisions. Companies prefer long term contractual >relationships with software providers with a history of success(in the
case of Adobe subscription/cloud based, 24/7/365 support, unlimited 1:1 >troubleshooting support, cost expensed[not capitalized], pre-packaged >self-guided implementation and training.)
-i.e. free, AI models of a proven product may meet some 'people' needs but >remain infants without much foundation, history and benefit beyond(it's >free).
On 12/10/2026 23:24, Paul wrote:
If I'm Adobe, now I'm worried. It would be pretty expensive to do it
this way, but then, the results would also be pretty impressive.
Fair point.
Maybe laws will be changed and/or code will soon be obfuscated or hidden
in secure enclaves.
However look how many companies still use Microsoft Office when several
very capable compatible alternatives exist.
On 15/10/2026 in message <njd1kgFktb1U2@mid.individual.net> Brian Gregory wrote:
On 12/10/2026 23:24, Paul wrote:
If I'm Adobe, now I'm worried. It would be pretty expensive to do it
this way, but then, the results would also be pretty impressive.
Fair point.
Maybe laws will be changed and/or code will soon be obfuscated or hidden in secure enclaves.
However look how many companies still use Microsoft Office when several very capable compatible alternatives exist.
I had an interesting discussion with Google's AI recently in connection with programming for Windows. It was about the ListView control included with Visual Studio which is one of the most complained about controls because you can't control the height of the Header or ListViewItems and it flickers every time you breathe.
I have written my own based on the Microsoft version and had fixed the row height and flickering but not the Header height. AI˙ suggested a way of doing it which worked once but it reverted if a column width was changed. I followed up the next day and the AI bot came up with the cure which was intercepting one specific Windows Message and manipulating the result sent back to windows every time it was raised, not just the first time.
It works perfectly but raises questions. Any programmer who uses this control will know its limitations and the work rounds but the suggestion from AI has never come up in the 21 years that Visual Studio has been around. Has AI ferreted it out from one of the software companies that provides a better ListView control and released proprietary code into the wild?
I had an interesting discussion with Google's AI recently in connection >>with programming for Windows. It was about the ListView control included >>with Visual Studio which is one of the most complained about controls >>because you can't control the height of the Header or ListViewItems and it >>flickers every time you breathe.
I have written my own based on the Microsoft version and had fixed the row >>height and flickering but not the Header height. AI˙ suggested a way of >>doing it which worked once but it reverted if a column width was changed. >>I followed up the next day and the AI bot came up with the cure which was >>intercepting one specific Windows Message and manipulating the result sent >>back to windows every time it was raised, not just the first time.
It works perfectly but raises questions. Any programmer who uses this >>control will know its limitations and the work rounds but the suggestion >>from AI has never come up in the 21 years that Visual Studio has been >>around. Has AI ferreted it out from one of the software companies that >>provides a better ListView control and released proprietary code into the >>wild?
It just means it was discussed in a place your search engine never
happened to visit.
The "base" training set, is 420TB of data. And actual data sets today, are >multiple
times that big. Have you read 420TB of text since you were born ? I
suspect not.
Jeff Gaines wrote:
I don't know how many people are writing code and want a decent
LsitView but there are thousands of comments and suggestions all over
the Internet dating back to 2005.
The thousands of comments and suggestions aren't relevant, but they are
what search engines will tend to give you; the one correct answer is what >counts and AI has absorbed that information ... if you ask it the same >question again, does it give you any context to where it found it?
On 16/10/2026 in message <njei7rFsdhsU1@mid.individual.net> Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:
I don't know how many people are writing code and want a decent
LsitView but there are thousands of comments and suggestions all over
the Internet dating back to 2005.
The thousands of comments and suggestions aren't relevant, but they are what search engines will tend to give you;˙ the one correct answer is what counts and AI has absorbed that information ... if you ask it the same question again, does it give you any context to where it found it?
The one correct answer must be among those comments and suggestions then, although neither I nor anybody else has found it or it would be common knowledge.
On Fri, 10/16/2026 8:28 AM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 16/10/2026 in message <njei7rFsdhsU1@mid.individual.net> Andy Burns >>wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:
I don't know how many people are writing code and want a decent >>>>LsitView but there are thousands of comments and suggestions all over >>>>the Internet dating back to 2005.
The thousands of comments and suggestions aren't relevant, but they are >>>what search engines will tend to give you;˙ the one correct answer is >>>what counts and AI has absorbed that information ... if you ask it the >>>same question again, does it give you any context to where it found it?
The one correct answer must be among those comments and suggestions then, >>although neither I nor anybody else has found it or it would be common >>knowledge.
Make it your mission to find it.
Jeff Gaines wrote:
Paul wrote:
Make it your mission to find it.
No chance! I have been looking for it since 2005 and it is one of the >>most common programming questions that is asked, frankly if it's not on >>StackOverflow it doesn't exist in the public domain.
Yes, but you've been asking search engines before, now you've turned to
AI, I thought you liked being nice to them :-P
On 16/10/2026 in message <njei7rFsdhsU1@mid.individual.net> Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:
I don't know how many people are writing code and want a decent
LsitView but there are thousands of comments and suggestions all over
the Internet dating back to 2005.
The thousands of comments and suggestions aren't relevant, but they are what search engines will tend to give you;˙ the one correct answer is what counts and AI has absorbed that information ... if you ask it the same question again, does it give you any context to where it found it?
The one correct answer must be among those comments and suggestions then, although neither I nor anybody else has found it or it would be common knowledge.
On 16/10/2026 in message <11asepe$31c1a$1@dont-email.me> ....winston wrote:
On 10/15/2026 4:50 PM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 15/10/2026 in message <11aqrrl$2h2sf$1@dont-email.me> ....winston
wrote:
On 10/13/2026 4:38 PM, Paul wrote:
On Tue, 10/13/2026 1:49 PM, ....winston wrote:
On 10/09/2026 9:46 PM, Paul wrote:
Should Adobe be scared ? I don't think so. The OCR worked after a >>>>>>> fashion,
but it is really no better than some Tesseract adventure. It is >>>>>>> about
as useful as OCRmypdf.
That's in agreement and similar sentiment from a cross-section of >>>>>> Enterprise and SMB admin testing (large and small volume of seats) >>>>>> ˙- Another reasonable comment is expenses associated with
retraining including training time loss of productivity(i.e. not
working on˙ existing responsibilities, new troubleshooting
tasking, etc.
For some of them, they don't need training, because they haven't
even done the ribbon yet, and the menu is pretty barren. It won't
take long to fix that.
Missing part of the point. OpenSource products(AI or not AI) are not
exclusively˙ static.˙ In the Enterprise environment, training across
large quantity of seats is a continuous long term expense(and those
seats can be a multiple thousands of seats across an entire
corporation).
While Adobe Systems(and earlier Macromedia) products are also not
static, but the basic design and use has remained reasonably common
over the years.
Features in either product may be common, it's the human behavior
requiring the training.
That's a standard marketing response to try and frighten people into
staying with expensive, subscription only, products.
Still missing the big picture. 'People' in Enterprise are the users
and don't make the decisions. Companies prefer long term contractual
relationships with software providers with a history of success(in the
case of Adobe subscription/cloud based, 24/7/365 support, unlimited
1:1 troubleshooting support, cost expensed[not capitalized], pre-
packaged self-guided implementation and training.)
-i.e. free, AI models of a proven product may meet some 'people' needs
but remain infants without much foundation, history and benefit
beyond(it's free).
Again that just looks like marketing bullshit.
On 16/10/2026 in message <njemqbFt5osU1@mid.individual.net> Andy Burns wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:
Paul wrote:
Make it your mission to find it.
No chance! I have been looking for it since 2005 and it is one of the˙ most common programming questions that is asked, frankly if it's not on˙ StackOverflow it doesn't exist in the public domain.
Yes, but you've been asking search engines before, now you've turned to AI, I thought you liked being nice to them :-P
I am, Skynet is real!
On 10/16/2026 3:42 AM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 16/10/2026 in message <11asepe$31c1a$1@dont-email.me> ....winston >>wrote:
On 10/15/2026 4:50 PM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 15/10/2026 in message <11aqrrl$2h2sf$1@dont-email.me> ....winston >>>>wrote:
On 10/13/2026 4:38 PM, Paul wrote:
On Tue, 10/13/2026 1:49 PM, ....winston wrote:
On 10/09/2026 9:46 PM, Paul wrote:
Should Adobe be scared ? I don't think so. The OCR worked after a >>>>>>>>fashion,
but it is really no better than some Tesseract adventure. It is >>>>>>>>about
as useful as OCRmypdf.
That's in agreement and similar sentiment from a cross-section of >>>>>>>Enterprise and SMB admin testing (large and small volume of seats) >>>>>>>˙- Another reasonable comment is expenses associated with retraining >>>>>>>including training time loss of productivity(i.e. not working on˙ >>>>>>>existing responsibilities, new troubleshooting tasking, etc.
For some of them, they don't need training, because they haven't >>>>>>even done the ribbon yet, and the menu is pretty barren. It won't >>>>>>take long to fix that.
Missing part of the point. OpenSource products(AI or not AI) are not >>>>>exclusively˙ static.˙ In the Enterprise environment, training across >>>>>large quantity of seats is a continuous long term expense(and those >>>>>seats can be a multiple thousands of seats across an entire >>>>>corporation).
While Adobe Systems(and earlier Macromedia) products are also not >>>>>static, but the basic design and use has remained reasonably common over
the years.
Features in either product may be common, it's the human behavior >>>>>requiring the training.
That's a standard marketing response to try and frighten people into >>>>staying with expensive, subscription only, products.
Still missing the big picture. 'People' in Enterprise are the users and >>>don't make the decisions. Companies prefer long term contractual >>>relationships with software providers with a history of success(in the >>>case of Adobe subscription/cloud based, 24/7/365 support, unlimited 1:1 >>>troubleshooting support, cost expensed[not capitalized], pre- packaged >>>self-guided implementation and training.)
-i.e. free, AI models of a proven product may meet some 'people' needs >>>but remain infants without much foundation, history and benefit >>>beyond(it's free).
Again that just looks like marketing bullshit.
It may look like that(to you, from a strictly consumer perspective) but
it's likely that perception originates from never having been on the >Enterprise side of contractual support(SaaS and/or EAs) for software >providers(e.g. Windows, Azure, Adobe, Oracle, Salesforce, etc.)
On Fri, 10/16/2026 9:58 AM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 16/10/2026 in message <njemqbFt5osU1@mid.individual.net> Andy Burns >>wrote:
Jeff Gaines wrote:
Paul wrote:
Make it your mission to find it.
No chance! I have been looking for it since 2005 and it is one of the˙ >>>>most common programming questions that is asked, frankly if it's not on˙ >>>>StackOverflow it doesn't exist in the public domain.
Yes, but you've been asking search engines before, now you've turned to >>>AI, I thought you liked being nice to them :-P
I am, Skynet is real!
OK, can you do this ?
Paste the answer in Harmony format (which is the Markdown it uses)
into a posting, for the answer you got where it was revealed what
the important/mystery bits were given to you. Place a <===
next to the bits that arrived from the unknown-type source.
I keep some of my runs, question and answer, in separate text files, for >reference later. Not all the runs though, usually just the
ones with programs in them.
Our best learning, comes from "audience challenges", where you
get to see a query made from a different perspective and how
the machine behaved. That's how we poke the corners and edges
of the machine, individual human queries are great for that,
because people will try the strangest things. Like Micky asking
a question about a Time Life book (short essays), where the machine
kept giving different answers for what characters were being
written about. That was my first chance to use High Reasoning
to get the machine to admit the info was not in the training
material and it was just making shit up. It's hard to understand
how it scraped the title of the book and the concept the book had
short essays in it, yet it did not manage to record what
the topic of the essays was (Albert Einstein or Soupy Sales).
The first shared challenge here, was the "list the US presidents",
where Arlen asked the LLM-AI to sort the answer a particular way.
And the machine kept dropping one of the Presidents names. Not
a controversial figure, more of a relatively obscure one, and the
machine did not managed to answer the question properly until
in frustration I added "And don't lose any Presidents!" to the
query. It doesn't make a lot of sense, why that caused the correct
answer to come out of the machine. Other people had also been doing
that test on the Internet, and observed the same behavior, one
individual kept being dropped from the list. That's really about
the worst case scenario you can imagine for an LLM-AI, where the
query is not challenging, it's definitely in the training set,
and it got fumbled. It means we can't trust them to do anything right.
Paul
On 16/10/2026 in message <11atego$3cn5n$2@dont-email.me> ....winston wrote:
On 10/16/2026 3:42 AM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 16/10/2026 in message <11asepe$31c1a$1@dont-email.me> ....winston
wrote:
On 10/15/2026 4:50 PM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 15/10/2026 in message <11aqrrl$2h2sf$1@dont-
email.me> ....winston wrote:
On 10/13/2026 4:38 PM, Paul wrote:
On Tue, 10/13/2026 1:49 PM, ....winston wrote:
On 10/09/2026 9:46 PM, Paul wrote:
Should Adobe be scared ? I don't think so. The OCR worked after >>>>>>>>> a fashion,
but it is really no better than some Tesseract adventure. It is >>>>>>>>> about
as useful as OCRmypdf.
That's in agreement and similar sentiment from a cross-section >>>>>>>> of Enterprise and SMB admin testing (large and small volume of >>>>>>>> seats)
˙- Another reasonable comment is expenses associated with
retraining including training time loss of productivity(i.e.
not˙ working on existing responsibilities, new troubleshooting >>>>>>>> tasking, etc.
For some of them, they don't need training, because they haven't >>>>>>> even done the ribbon yet, and the menu is pretty barren. It won't >>>>>>> take long to fix that.
Missing part of the point. OpenSource products(AI or not AI) are
not exclusively˙ static.˙ In the Enterprise environment, training >>>>>> across large quantity of seats is a continuous long term
expense(and those seats can be a multiple thousands of seats
across an entire corporation).
While Adobe Systems(and earlier Macromedia) products are also not >>>>>> static, but the basic design and use has remained reasonably
common˙˙ over the years.
Features in either product may be common, it's the human behavior >>>>>> requiring the training.
That's a standard marketing response to try and frighten people
into staying with expensive, subscription only, products.
Still missing the big picture. 'People' in Enterprise are the users
and don't make the decisions. Companies prefer long term contractual
relationships with software providers with a history of success(in
the case of Adobe subscription/cloud based, 24/7/365 support,
unlimited˙ 1:1 troubleshooting support, cost expensed[not
capitalized], pre-˙ packaged self-guided implementation and training.) >>>> -i.e. free, AI models of a proven product may meet some 'people'
needs but remain infants without much foundation, history and
benefit beyond(it's free).
Again that just looks like marketing bullshit.
It may look like that(to you, from a strictly consumer perspective)
but it's likely that perception originates from never having been on
the Enterprise side of contractual support(SaaS and/or EAs) for
software providers(e.g. Windows, Azure, Adobe, Oracle, Salesforce, etc.)
That is somewhat patronising and part of the marketing defence, I used
to vet contracts for these services.
On 10/16/2026 3:27 PM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 16/10/2026 in message <11atego$3cn5n$2@dont-email.me> ....winston >>wrote:
On 10/16/2026 3:42 AM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 16/10/2026 in message <11asepe$31c1a$1@dont-email.me> ....winston >>>>wrote:
On 10/15/2026 4:50 PM, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 15/10/2026 in message <11aqrrl$2h2sf$1@dont- email.me> ....winston >>>>>>wrote:
On 10/13/2026 4:38 PM, Paul wrote:
On Tue, 10/13/2026 1:49 PM, ....winston wrote:
On 10/09/2026 9:46 PM, Paul wrote:
Should Adobe be scared ? I don't think so. The OCR worked after a >>>>>>>>>>fashion,
but it is really no better than some Tesseract adventure. It is >>>>>>>>>>about
as useful as OCRmypdf.
That's in agreement and similar sentiment from a cross-section of >>>>>>>>>Enterprise and SMB admin testing (large and small volume of seats) >>>>>>>>>˙- Another reasonable comment is expenses associated with retraining
including training time loss of productivity(i.e. not˙ working on >>>>>>>>>existing responsibilities, new troubleshooting tasking, etc. >>>>>>>>>
For some of them, they don't need training, because they haven't >>>>>>>>even done the ribbon yet, and the menu is pretty barren. It won't >>>>>>>>take long to fix that.
Missing part of the point. OpenSource products(AI or not AI) are not >>>>>>>exclusively˙ static.˙ In the Enterprise environment, training across >>>>>>>large quantity of seats is a continuous long term expense(and those seats
can be a multiple thousands of seats across an entire corporation). >>>>>>>
While Adobe Systems(and earlier Macromedia) products are also not static,
but the basic design and use has remained reasonably common˙˙ over the >>>>>>>years.
Features in either product may be common, it's the human behavior >>>>>>>requiring the training.
That's a standard marketing response to try and frighten people into >>>>>>staying with expensive, subscription only, products.
Still missing the big picture. 'People' in Enterprise are the users and >>>>>don't make the decisions. Companies prefer long term contractual >>>>>relationships with software providers with a history of success(in the >>>>>case of Adobe subscription/cloud based, 24/7/365 support, unlimited˙ 1:1 >>>>>troubleshooting support, cost expensed[not capitalized], pre-˙ packaged >>>>>self-guided implementation and training.)
-i.e. free, AI models of a proven product may meet some 'people' needs >>>>>but remain infants without much foundation, history and benefit >>>>>beyond(it's free).
Again that just looks like marketing bullshit.
It may look like that(to you, from a strictly consumer perspective) but >>>it's likely that perception originates from never having been on the >>>Enterprise side of contractual support(SaaS and/or EAs) for software >>>providers(e.g. Windows, Azure, Adobe, Oracle, Salesforce, etc.)
That is somewhat patronising and part of the marketing defence, I used to >>vet contracts for these services.
I understand your position...but to imply the entire spectrum of SaaS/EAs) >is 'marketing' would still be a very narrow perception, even for one that >currently or previously 'vets contracts'.
Jeff Gaines wrote:
Paul wrote:
Make it your mission to find it.
No chance! I have been looking for it since 2005 and it is one of the
most common programming questions that is asked, frankly if it's not on
StackOverflow it doesn't exist in the public domain.
Yes, but you've been asking search engines before, now you've turned to
AI, I thought you liked being nice to them :-P
--
23467009
| Sysop: | Tetrazocine |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, VIC, Australia |
| Users: | 7 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 28:54:28 |
| Calls: | 221 |
| Files: | 21,513 |
| Messages: | 84,565 |