I like what Adobe has done with InDesign. I have used it many times to produce commercial flyers for a company I worked for. Sounds like a nice interface for Muse and is more like the good thinking that came from Macromedia who made the best UI.
I wish Adobe had not bought out Macromedia. Or I wish that Adobe would have been forced to donate Fireworks to Gimp. Adobe has done little with those properties compared to what Macromedia was doing. Which is good in that Adobe has not mutilated Fireworks too much since they owned it, but bad in that it has not been developed into the Photoshop killer it should have been.
[citation][nom]thecapulet[/nom]Either I can buy it 100% and it's mine, or else I don't want it.[/citation]When you "buy" it, you're not buying the software, only a license. The license says so. Buying the software (with all copyrights, trademarks, and patents) from Adobe will cost a lot more than just $180.
[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]Pffft, Notepad++ costs $0[/citation]
Notepad++ license may cost $0, but you're not getting the rights to the ownership of the software at that price. The same is true for most any "free" software including those with GNU GPL or BSD-style open source licenses. Besides, EditPad is better
[citation][nom]Dandalf[/nom]This monthly subscription thing smells like an anti-piracy measure to me.Although, I did just fart.[/citation]
Yeah... and I'm sure it'll be cracked soon enough. (oddly enough, it's not on bittorrent yet.)
[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]GNU GPL gives you the right to use, modify and distribute the software (as long the software or its derivative is distributed under the same license). What's missing there?[/citation]The right to change the license. Only the creator can do that (including releasing it under multiple licenses).