Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:

>
> So because news editors who have nothing to do with Adobe nor asked them
> before publishing their articles claimed that it's free, Apple should
> somehow comply? Why, exactly?
>

Good point; but I would imagine that *something* must have initially convinced
the tech news sites that it was all free, before Adobe's clarification. Just a
guess, though; I haven't actually read (or found) either the 'basis' of the
free-software-offer, or the 'official' direct-from-Adobe message "not to
download." Except on said tech web sites. (I would be interested to read the
original sources if they exist.)

Or did the initial 'free' idea come about simply because a tech writer somewhere
came across the (original) download page and *assumed* that the software was
free, due to Adobe's reported 'glitch'? If so, Adobe bears at least some
responsibility for the foul-up.

But this seems academic now, as Adobe then put up a (new?) page allowing anyone
to download the stuff, no strings attached.

Post a reply to this message