Google| Subject | Re: post processing |
| From | Tony Cooper |
| Date | 03/16/2014 02:35 (03/15/2014 21:35) |
| Message-ID | <5fv9i9lab69t5t2e07v3cc3ff0rv7jthdb@4ax.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | nospam |
| Followups | nospam (35m) > Tony Cooper |
On Sat, 15 Mar 2014 19:22:39 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
nospamWeasel away, but the point is that Adobe *does* approve some vendors and withholds approval on others.
In article <qpi9i910nohjta47gaqf9j3g6o7j1sdrsn@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>wrote:Tony Coopernospam
Read down to where it says "The plug-ins here are from Adobe approved publishers, meaning that Adobe has reviewed and accepted the publisher."
it's a marketing agreement. nothing more.
It's not a "nothing more" thing if it's an agreement. A marketing agreement means Adobe has given their stamp of approval to the vendor. Since you claim to have written plug-ins, and had no idea that Adobe approves some plug-ins, it's obvious that nothing you've produced has met sufficient standards to be approved by Adobe. No surprise there.
obviously if adobe is going to showcase a product on their site they will want to approve it.I get it, and have done so since the beginning. I asked if Adobe approved any vendors and you insisted on ducking the question, evading an answer, and harping on the fact that it's not needed. Obviously, you didn't know that Adobe does, in fact, approve some plug-ins. Now you know.
what you don't get is that isn't needed.
-- Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
03/13/2014-
-
-
