CharlesJeter.com » madcap flare

Adobe laying off 600 employees | Will RoboHelp Survive?

Charles — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 15:08:13 +0000

Technorati Tags: adbe,adobe,layoff,recession,madcap,madcap flare,adobe TCS,earnings,adobe flex,msft,microsoft,technical communicator,technical communication,silverlight

No Jedi Mind Tricks Necessary

Whether there are corporate profits or not the Grinch, it seems, has struck twice in one calendar year for Adobe (NASD: ADBE). You heard my forecast about Adobe’s 2008 earnings here in last year’s posts and who can forget my venting in 2007 regarding Adobe’s negative user support strategy.

Now they have to cut 8% of their global workforce. Looks like the San Diego office will be shut down from the tweets I’ve read and MDowney, the Flex evangelist I was following in my Flex vs. Silverlight series is moving on as well… Good luck to everyone.

From the San Francisco Chronicle: Adobe laying off 600 employees

Adobe Systems in San Jose is laying off 600 employees and will restructure its business, the company announced Wednesday after the stock market closed.

Bottom line analysis for 2009: Adobe will survive in one form or another however all their software programs may not.

No Compelling Reason To Upgrade

Without the Vista mandatory upgrade upswing working in Adobe’s favor, I stated that this year’s sales were going to be significantly lower. I said sell short because there was no compelling reason to upgrade and people would figure they could get by just fine with last year’s model of CS3.

Panic in the streets of Bangalore… MadCap Flare Emerges

Well, ‘panic’ is not entirely fair to state about the Mumbai area after their recent security fiasco.

Gorillas in the Mists

MadCap Software is currently pounding Adobe on the Technical Communication workflow front. According to the MadCap October press release two independent blogging polls showed MadCap Flare to be the new Gorilla in the Game, promoted up from Chimpanzee:

Flare was identified as the authoring application of choice by more than 39 percent of respondents to the surveys conducted on behalf of the HAT-Matrix.com and I’d Rather Be Writing technical communications blogs.

The surveys represent the first time that Flare, which debuted in March 2006, has seen higher customer use than any other competing solution–including legacy applications that have been on the market for more than a decade.

Add to this the 2008 recession stone skipping across the water and it means sobering trends for ADBE, losing ground on several fronts. From the San Francisco Chronicle:

The layoffs are in progress and represent 8 percent of Adobe’s global workforce, a spokeswoman said. They will affect all regions and business units. Adobe plans to offer more details Dec. 16 during its regular earnings conference call.

I’m not wishing for anyone to be out of work this holiday season. I was initially made aware of this by backtracking the ever-increasing Google hits from my article that detailed last year’s Adobe Holiday season layoffs when I stated:

Personally, I think this goes back to (my opinion) the unconscious Adobe strategy to offshore all assets. Eventually everyone not performing 80 hour workweeks will lose their jobs in San Diego in favor of India based talent.

Sorry Adobe, No Freeloading From Microsoft’s OS Changes

Finally the insanity of upgrading a major suite like a brain-damaged maze rat hitting the lever for another piece of cheese has been closely examined by the bean-counters.

Again from the Chronicle:

“The global economic crisis significantly impacted our revenue during the fourth quarter,” Adobe’s president and chief executive officer, Shantanu Narayen, said in a statement. “We have taken action to reduce our operating costs and fine-tune the focus of our resources on key strategic priorities.”

Narayen said the chief cause of Adobe’s problems is weaker-than-expected demand for the company’s latest software, Creative Suite 4, which began shipping in October.

In short, economic buyers are looking at the WHY involved with an upgrade to a product every year and not seeing much substance. “Why are you wanting a new version of a product to do your job that you’re already going to do…?”

It simply means the value of the upgrade from CS2 or CS3 to CS4 isn’t compelling enough. I love this part of Narayen’s quote in the Chronicle:

The suite combines several tools used by illustrators and designers and is central to Adobe’s plans to create software that can connect the Web with PCs and phones.

Referring to the Adobe Media Player gambit they were trying to leverage against Microsoft? I’m going to lump that in with the Rich Internet Applications battle analyzed last year.

From CharlesJeter.com – Rich Internet Applications War Is Brewing last May:

Apparently Adobe is betting on its Flash penetration giving it an advantage in shoehorning users into downloading the Adobe Media Player, and Microsoft enjoys the simple advantage of being able to offer Windows Media Player as they have done for nearly ten cycles as an integrated part of the Windows operating system.

In short, Microsoft is continuing to severely pound Adobe in the Media Player world. Adobe is getting no traction with this tactic in this economy.

MSFT is still continuing to attack the Macromedia-originated Flex with Silverlight. Now that their Flex pitchman Downey is out of the Flex role he dominated, I’m wondering how MSFT will respond to this opening. If they’re smart, they’ll hire Downey to take apart his old firm. He has guts and he’s technically smart as well.

Where will Adobe turn? They’ve got plenty of money in the bank to ride this out, it might just be cutting back on innovation.

Theory: Adobe is not going to spend dev money where it’s failing

When your flagship product suite is not selling, what happens to the lower-tier products and the people who support them? They’re expendable. They get cut.

The second part is directly in the TechComm world. Again, I predicted this last year:

If stock prices start slipping, where are they going to make their cuts? I am predicting that it’s now or never for RoboHelp; if they don’t perform by mid-2008, resources could be pulled off for other products that make a higher profit.

With RoboHelp sliding quickly to the middle of the pack of TechComm tools those resources may not be saved for a rainy day when they could be repurposed to save the company’s bottom line.

I expect axes to cut across new features and for sales of lower tier products like Adobe TCS to stay flat for a good two years.

By the way, Tom Johnson took an undeserved beating in the HATT forums about his survey, and his survey results were redeemed by Char’s hat-matrix.com evaluation.

RoboHelp is, by virtue of Adobe’s business model, going to have resources cut. Even Captivate is in jeopardy; sales figures are probably great but what has Captivate’s upgrade selling point been since the Technical Communications Suite (TCS) came out?

What is the compelling new feature set for TCS?

Bundling mid-grade products together to beat an emerging market leader has failed. According to the two surveys, that strategy just didn’t sell customers on the value of the Adobe TCS products. Even if overall sales are still high, the economic conditions mean the automatic buy orders aren’t going to be authorized.

What does that mean for Technical Communicators?

If you see names changing in the Tech Comm blog at Adobe, it might be time to learn another tool. Being able to add the MadCap Flare software list to your repertoire might net you the job you need should your position become affected by the economy.

If you can wait another year for the suite upgrade then you do it when times are tough and every dollar counts. Or you migrate to another tool for cost or cost-benefit reasons.

What does this mean for Investors?

It means there’s enough confusion going on that other companies might pull significant market share away from Adobe. That weakens them and makes it easy for takeover.

Getting FLOSSy: Acrobat Killer Or HAT Replacement?

Charles — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 07:59:50 +0000

Technorati Tags: adobe acrobat,adobe FrameMaker,FLOSS,wikipatterns,wiki,technical communication,technical communicator,madcap flare,madcap blaze,x-edit,buzzword,flossmanuals,madcap team server,open source

FLOSS Manuals: The OTHER FM for PDFs

Some writers truly hate Adobe Acrobat and any tool that can do the job better is worth a shot, particularly if it’s open source and easily navigated. Flossmanuals.net introduces FLOSS which does a lot of the single desktop Acrobat Pro’s job – collaboratively and open source.

Could FLOSS be the new Acrobat Pro killer?

FLOSS could bridge the gaps between Subject Matter Expert (SME) authoring of content and true documentation. For the specific purpose of supporting open source collaborative efforts this is heaven sent. Most open-source dev teams are simply not able to have those wonderful team meetings for doc review either for financial or time management purposes.

Update: Anne Gentle’s site talks about an event called a Booksprint that FlossManuals.net is doing for technical writers in support of open source programs.

I’ve been reading Janet Swisher’s review of FLOSS Manuals. She examines the pros and cons of Wiki briefly and explains the problem / solution of FLOSS definitively:

You can write documentation using an open source word processor like OpenOffice.org Writer, but you still need a content management system of some kind to handle versioning of drafts and communication within a project community, and CMSs are complex to set up and maintain.

And so a divide has emerged, with open source programmers on one side, wishing somebody would come help write the docs, and potential writers on the other side, too intimidated or too busy to learn the tools to work on open source projects.

FLOSS Manuals bridges that divide, and does so in a way that is deeply rooted in the open source ethos of community and collaboration.

FLOSS and Wikis for Documentation

The implementation and administration of the wiki model always seems to be the insurmountable challenge, if one is to be found. Janet has a solid point regarding Stewart Mader’s viewpoint on wikis for documentation:

I’ve generally been skeptical of wiki advocates who say, “Oh yeah, and you can create documentation in a wiki, too”, because I’ve seen very few actual examples.

Janet’s link refers to an article by Stewart Mader regarding the specific issue of documentation within a wiki. This happens to be an area where Stewart Mader and I disagreed earlier this year. I haven’t heard of many live wikis truly impacting technical writing and Janet confirms this from her perspective as well.

I’m happy to report that Stewart, Janet, and I technically all win on this point.

FLOSS Manuals IS a wiki, but it’s purpose-built for creating documentation. Its founders have created an open-source standard of documentation that blends reading, writing, plus allowing output and redistribution of content, all efficiently administrated for the open-source community.

However, each manual must be managed separately and that’s where technical writing and document content management skills shine.

Flossmanuals: A Help Authoring Tool Killer?

This bears examining because there’s a lot to be said about context-sensitive help within applications as well as the authoring platform for help. Tom Johnson’s recent poll and the ensuing HATT debate shows a passionate user base for tools.

Janet states:

Flossmanuals.net is heavily oriented towards book-style manuals; you could use it for topic-oriented online help, but it might be a stretch—a HAT it is not. But now that there is FLOSS Manuals, there simply is no longer a technological reason for any open source project not to have documentation.

I agree with this. There’s a method to the madness when you’re writing online help files and formatting is a critical element which a formal HAT tool is designed for.

For now, FLOSS is free*, with a minor amount of techie magic necessary. I envision beginning tech writers using this to support their early projects for open source software and quickly learning the basics of the technical communication trade.

*From the Flossmanuals site:

Our principle aim is not to be a publisher but to create as many tools and outlets for quality free documentation as possible. If that means you wish to use the FM tool set but host or ‘publish’ under your own banner, then that’s excellent. We are very happy to offer you a documentation platform to meet all your documentation needs.

Of course, all this is for free software / open source software projects only. If you create proprietary software then…

Clearly this means that you need to talk to them before boldly profiting from this community.

Workflow Focused Help Authoring Tools

Figuring out the fastest and best workflow is something the MadCap and Adobe teams are each wrangling, however they have markedly different approaches.

MadCap’s Team Server solution is in development. Along with the expected release of the publication centered form of Flare, Blaze, this is their collaborative workflow answer.

Adobe seems to be several generations behind MadCap. Adobe’s answer to innovation seems to be to continue bundling new product lines into their Technical Communications Suite, plus to integrate what MadCap introduces as quickly as possible. If they can’t directly compete with innovation, bundling secondary products is another way to add value.

I can see that both are working towards collaboration tools – MadCap with X-Edit, Adobe with Acrobat and their newly acquired web-based collaborative tool, Buzzword.

My Opinion:

FLOSSManuals.net is a great place to start writing content for developers if you’re just starting out or would like to support a friend’s really cool application. I know of several for-profit companies that put out free widgets of one sort or another that don’t have tech writing staff. This would be perfect for that as well.

The other side of the coin is that it gives a good measure of what’s actually effective. While wiki implementation is challenging, on a cost scale when someone like FLOSSManuals is administrating it, it’s definitely worth exploring.

While not a HAT replacement, this model may work well to supplement a workflow.

Save Yourself $700 and a Headache | Is MadCap Flare Now Leading Adobe RoboHelp In HAT War?

Charles — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 07:26:34 +0000

Technorati Tags: adobe robohelp,adobe acrobat,microsoft Word,madcap flare,pdf,xps,help authoring tool,Adobe AIR

How much money do you need to pay to make quality PDFs? According to Tom Johnson, the I’d Rather Be Writing author, zero.

Free PDF Generation

Tom opens by talking about that irritating little release updater that Adobe runs in the background. Speaking about PDF functionality that exists in Word 2007 Tom states:

…you can download the Save as PDF or XPS add-in for Microsoft Word 2007 for free. It’s less than 1 megabyte to download, and it quickly and flawlessly converts Word docs to PDF, even with hyperlinks. If you have non-Word documents to convert, Primo PDF (another free PDF alternative) will do it absolutely free.

I keep wondering why Microsoft wasn’t able to package this add-in with their updates, or initially with the product.

After reading my PDF summary from January you’ll know my position on this necessary but often overused documentation format. Yes, I use it. Yes, it is a standard. But not worth $700 if you don’t have to spend it.

Help Authoring Tool War – Now Led By MadCap?

What brought me to the IRBW site this evening was the poll that Sharon mentioned. Surfing over to IRBW I checked it out – here’s the Authoring Tool voting stats listed as of today.

I’m not surprised. This is what happens when you lose confidence in the software manufacturer who takes over a popular product such as RoboHelp and loses touch with the market.

Adobe, Adobe… Is AIR going to ‘Help’ you?

AIR seems to get some traction for ADBE however. The stock is still trading near 52-week high levels and has been climbing since it’s low around March of this year.

I’ll have to do a follow-up to my 2007 prediction of stock value for Adobe (NASD: ADBE) dropping this year. After all, Microsoft (NASD: MSFT) isn’t releasing Vista and ADBE’s forced upgrade tactic isn’t as relevant.

We’ll have to see how things go at the end of the fiscal year… They could prove me wrong.

Am I First to Coin The Term AIRHelp?

Then again, last month Ben Minson’s two part review of the RoboHelp Packager for AIR public beta raised some solid questions about the functionality of the software for the end user.

I’m not sold on .air taking over the world of WWW just yet. I agree with most of this take from Ben Minson on ADBE AIR:

Adobe seems to be following a good line of thinking here with AIR help. But remember, users want simplicity. Having to install each help system as an application is asking too much of everyday users.

This use case for AIRHelp would tend to put us back to the .chm days with a distributable file that needed to be on every system running it. eHelp introduced WebHelp as a way to get away from that back in 2002.

ADBE’s RoboHelp… Innovative A Year Too Late To Be Innovative

Doing something like Web 2.0 two release cycles behind your competition is not innovative. It’s keeping up with the market that’s trying to leave you behind. AuthorIT and MadCap Flare been-there and done-that already.

I reviewed MadCap’s Web 2.0 functionality last year as the Feedback Service. It doesn’t require installation on the client side of anything special and works cross-platform. It’s been pointed out that it can run on any IIS server on your network, even your desktop in your office.

From MadCap Mike’s Musings – Comparing Documentation Server Software – MadCap Feedback Server and RoboHelp Server:

Web 2.0 – The MadCap Feedback Server support for Web 2.0 community technologies is a complete turnkey system. Once installed there is nothing that your developers or programmers need to do to make this work. All that is required is for you to select the appropriate options while publishing your Flare projects to turn these capabilities on.

In contrast, the few similar options that Adobe has introduced are limited to the Air output only (not available in the more popular WebHelp) and even then require either programmer/developer hours or Rube Goldberg-esque scenarios where data files have to be emailed back and forth between users.

Ben’s review points out the obvious flaw; why make end users download and install something special rather than transparently do the Web 2.0 on the server side? Additionally, having an attachment-based data output for the actual server doesn’t make much sense either.