admin wrote
Toasty wrote
Yes, I get that size for the image, and yes, it still has artifacts.
What kind of display are you using? What is the browser (exact version) that you are using?
I can see this on any LCD screen for the most part, but it's mostly apparent on DVI or HDMI connected displays, as the color reproduction is most accurate. I'm using Firefox v11, however I can also see it on IE9, and Chrome/Opera/Safari (which I don't have the version numbers right this moment).
It's cool though, if you'd rather attack your users than understand that they're trying to give creative criticism, then that's the path you're taking. Sounds risky in the tough business climate as of late.
We're just discussing, there was no attack.
Understood.
So why would I look at Abyss one way and Photoshop the other?
A) The size of the package. Abyss is extremely lightweight, with a presumably much smaller codebase.
Yes it is much smaller and we're always working to avoid bloating the software for maximum performance. So it takes time and know-how to achieve that (in comparison with Adobe which simply adds new code to old code without any need or will to clean the whole project.)
Understood, and streamlined software is very desirable. I never stated it wasn't, what I did state is that the release cycle doesn't seem like the software is fresh. There is a
list of items that may dissuade people from using Abyss, and may help show a more frequent release cycle, which has the added bonus of making people with update protection feel like they're getting something extra.
B) The amount of users. Adobe doesn't have to work hard to gain a market presence, they've had that for years in their market. Abyss is rarely known out of some very small circles.
We're not working to achieve worldwide dominance and generate billions of dollars to reward our investors. We're only craft a product which satisfies our users and customers.
That's nice, but who doesn't want billions and dominance?
C) Why are you comparing apples to oranges? Are you making a raster graphics editor, or a web server? If you're going to answer with webserver, let's look at your biggest, and most fit, competitor
Apache's release cycle, which also happens to be free (not saying Abyss should be, but it's a buying decision). Currently, Aprelium doesn't even take the
largest share of servers into consideration... Linux. Do you provide the package? Yes. But this site is obviously geared to Windows. You should drop Mac support, and use that effort towards Linux. Also, for the X1 users, require display of your logo button, don't just state "it would be nice."
First of all, Apache's release cycle is slow (too) and no new features have been added in years. All their releases are just bug fixes. They have 3 minor releases in 2 years
http://httpd.apache.org/ and all of them are to correct problems.
This
Apache 2.4 was released in the last 2 months.
Second, we won't ditch the Mac for two reasons : porting Abyss Web Server on the Mac takes no more than a few minutes for each release. And more than 10% of our customers (paying) are Mac users.
Understood.
Third, we don't see how we're favoring Windows. We offer customized documentation for each version and we explain the difference between the operating systems whenever a feature requires that. Each version looks and is native to its OS. Apart from that, the software is made to act similarly on each OS and that's a big plus not a disadvantage.
Regarding the Linux version, have you tried it? What do you reproach to the Linux version of Abyss Web Server?
I haven't, I said the forums are geared that way.
We understand your suggestions but we've been in the Web server's business for 10 years now and we've seen companies enter and leave. Some changed their activities and some sunk. It is a tough business and we're the only independent company which is still on the market. Not everyone loves Apache, few can pay for IIS and its suite, and some prefer different alternatives...
I hate configuring Apache, for sure.
We are in the business to serve our users and customers and to provide them with the best software we can write. We're not here to be a worldwide success à la Facebook or Google. We're writing "boring" and "professional" software contrarily to others who are publishing shiny desktop applications or games that any grandma could use. ;-)
And I appreciate that, and have wrote a testimonial about that, I also have a blog where I promote your software. My concern is most definitely not with your server, just your fitness in the market.
We hope we've clarified our position a little bit. Your comments and feedback are welcome.