Problems running Fontographer 4.1 on XP?

On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 23:40:16 +0000 (UTC), "MB"
wrote:

Problems running Fontographer 4.1 on XP?

Loads up, then crashes out displaying the following message:
Could not initialize the program, because there is not enough memory available to run.
Code = -30202

Anyone had similar problems?

No, but I stopped using it at Win2k. it hasn’t (and won’t be) updated. it’s effectively dead software now. Macormedia have moved into other areas and print isn’t very profitable any more.

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, relinqui

Anyone had similar problems?

It’s a common bug. Here is a link to some old usenet discussions:

http://tinyurl.com/u1vp

-Jan

MB
wrote in message

Problems running Fontographer 4.1 on XP?

Loads up, then crashes out displaying the following message: Could not initialize the program, because there is not enough memory available to run.
Code = -30202

If you have any more than 512MB of RAM installed on a computer Fontographer will lose its mind and display that message. There are some workarounds (listed in the technical notes section at the Macromedia website). Many do not work on a majority of machines.

This is issue is just one of the reasons why I have for keeping an old computer alive and running.

Bobby Henderson

Hecate wrote in message

No, but I stopped using it at Win2k. it hasn’t (and won’t be) updated. it’s effectively dead software now. Macormedia have moved into other areas and print isn’t very profitable any more.

Macromedia is setting themselves up like a bowling pin in putting all their emphasis on webby crap. Sure, they’re moving lots of copies of DreamweaverMX and FlashMX. But how long will that last. Many professional graphics artists are quickly abandoning the web thing since there is little to no money in it. That field is overrun by many with little to no talent in terms of graphic design (which is the primary reason why the majority of web sites look like garbage). Those with no talent are divided between two types of people, amateurs who think they are artists because they can point and click in Dreamweaver and computer programmers who are more left-side-of-the-brain types whose talents don’t lend much to creativity.

So, a lot of professional graphic artists who can make great looking artwork have gone back to doing print work or moving into other fields like 3D, video graphics and film. I see Macromedia doing NOTHING in terms of supporting any of that.

At least Adobe has sense enough to stay somewhat diversified. Apps like Illustrator and Photoshop can lend themselves to lots of different uses. InDesign is finally turning into the Quark Killer it was meant to be. Adobe may not have a professional level 3D app in its suite of applications. But apps like Illustrator, Photoshop and After Effects do much to extend the power of pro-level 3D apps like Cinema4D, Studio3D Max, Maya and Lightwave.

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 13:44:20 -0600, "Bob"
wrote:

Hecate wrote in message

No, but I stopped using it at Win2k. it hasn’t (and won’t be) updated. it’s effectively dead software now. Macormedia have moved into other areas and print isn’t very profitable any more.

Macromedia is setting themselves up like a bowling pin in putting all their emphasis on webby crap. Sure, they’re moving lots of copies of DreamweaverMX and FlashMX. But how long will that last. Many professional graphics artists are quickly abandoning the web thing since there is little to no money in it. That field is overrun by many with little to no talent in terms of graphic design (which is the primary reason why the majority of web sites look like garbage). Those with no talent are divided between two types of people, amateurs who think they are artists because they can point and click in Dreamweaver and computer programmers who are more left-side-of-the-brain types whose talents don’t lend much to creativity.

So, a lot of professional graphic artists who can make great looking artwork have gone back to doing print work or moving into other fields like 3D, video graphics and film. I see Macromedia doing NOTHING in terms of supporting any of that.

I agree to an extent, though I think you’ll find the web is becoming more, rather than less, important. And Macromedia are trying to do for the web what MS did for the Operating System, and to large extent, succeeding.

At least Adobe has sense enough to stay somewhat diversified. Apps like Illustrator and Photoshop can lend themselves to lots of different uses. InDesign is finally turning into the Quark Killer it was meant to be. Adobe may not have a professional level 3D app in its suite of applications. But apps like Illustrator, Photoshop and After Effects do much to extend the power of pro-level 3D apps like Cinema4D, Studio3D Max, Maya and Lightwave.

Yes, they have, but their problem is that they may end up doing nothing quite as well as they should. IR as a web app is just crap and activation is going to put a lot of individual designers off (i.e professionals who can’t get the business copies of the new suites because they only require one copy). InDesign is excellent and already much easier to use than Quark, and Photoshop is, Photoshop 😉 But I won’t be upgrading it past v.7 unless I have absolutely no choice. Illustrator, unless the new version is better has fallen behind both Freehand and Corel Draw, not to mention Canvas. But, I won’t be upgrading because…

So, we live in interesting times 😉

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, relinqui

Unless there’s a reason you need to use Fontographer, switch to Fontlab. It’s actually being updated regularly. Has Opentype support too.

"MB" wrote in message

Problems running Fontographer 4.1 on XP?

Loads up, then crashes out displaying the following message:
Could not initialize the program, because there is not enough memory available to run.
Code = -30202

Anyone had similar problems?

"Hecate" wrote in message

So, a lot of professional graphic artists who can make great looking

artwork

have gone back to doing print work or moving into other fields like 3D, video graphics and film. I see Macromedia doing NOTHING in terms of supporting any of that.

I agree to an extent, though I think you’ll find the web is becoming more, rather than less, important. And Macromedia are trying to do for the web what MS did for the Operating System, and to large extent, succeeding.

Sure, the web is important and will become more important in the future. Still, the point I made is valid. Many graphics people will starve trying to make any money in web design. All the amateurs have driven the pay scales way down. On the other end you have all the non-creative programmers who think they are artists for the same reason the amateurs pass themselves off as artists: they think being able to use an app qualifies one as an artist. So in the end great looking websites are clearly in the minority. Most of it is just depressing looking clutter.

I really have to come down hard on all these technical schools and even some colleges who provide "art education" yet only teach computer apps. The graphical landscape across America is a total mess because of this. To put it in "analog" terms the equivalent would be someone deciding, "I’m going to be a painter" and he goes to the art supply store buys an oil paint set and thinks that because he now has the equipment he is in the same league as Rembrandt, but offers his services for less.

On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 20:06:17 GMT, "Bob"
wrote:

"Hecate" wrote in message

So, a lot of professional graphic artists who can make great looking

artwork

have gone back to doing print work or moving into other fields like 3D, video graphics and film. I see Macromedia doing NOTHING in terms of supporting any of that.

I agree to an extent, though I think you’ll find the web is becoming more, rather than less, important. And Macromedia are trying to do for the web what MS did for the Operating System, and to large extent, succeeding.

Sure, the web is important and will become more important in the future. Still, the point I made is valid. Many graphics people will starve trying to make any money in web design. All the amateurs have driven the pay scales way down. On the other end you have all the non-creative programmers who think they are artists for the same reason the amateurs pass themselves off as artists: they think being able to use an app qualifies one as an artist. So in the end great looking websites are clearly in the minority. Most of it is just depressing looking clutter.

I really have to come down hard on all these technical schools and even some colleges who provide "art education" yet only teach computer apps. The graphical landscape across America is a total mess because of this. To put it in "analog" terms the equivalent would be someone deciding, "I’m going to be a painter" and he goes to the art supply store buys an oil paint set and thinks that because he now has the equipment he is in the same league as Rembrandt, but offers his services for less.

I hate to say this, but I’ve got to agree. Much the same in the UK,

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, relinqui

It runs fine on an old P3, 233 with 96 megs running Millenium. That old box is still pretty reliable.
Peter Cowie
"Bob" wrote in message

MB
wrote in message

Problems running Fontographer 4.1 on XP?

Loads up, then crashes out displaying the following message: Could not initialize the program, because there is not enough memory available to run.
Code = -30202

If you have any more than 512MB of RAM installed on a computer

Fontographer

will lose its mind and display that message. There are some workarounds (listed in the technical notes section at the Macromedia website). Many

do

not work on a majority of machines.

This is issue is just one of the reasons why I have for keeping an old computer alive and running.

Bobby Henderson

Hecate …

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 13:44:20 -0600, "Bob"
wrote:

Hecate wrote in message

No, but I stopped using it at Win2k. it hasn’t (and won’t be) updated. it’s effectively dead software now. Macormedia have moved into other areas and print isn’t very profitable any more.

Macromedia is setting themselves up like a bowling pin in putting all their emphasis on webby crap. Sure, they’re moving lots of copies of DreamweaverMX and FlashMX. But how long will that last. Many professional graphics artists are quickly abandoning the web thing since there is little to no money in it. That field is overrun by many with little to no talent in terms of graphic design (which is the primary reason why the majority of web sites look like garbage). Those with no talent are divided between two types of people, amateurs who think they are artists because they can point and click in Dreamweaver and computer programmers who are more left-side-of-the-brain types whose talents don’t lend much to creativity.

So, a lot of professional graphic artists who can make great looking artwork have gone back to doing print work or moving into other fields like 3D, video graphics and film. I see Macromedia doing NOTHING in terms of supporting any of that.

I agree to an extent, though I think you’ll find the web is becoming more, rather than less, important. And Macromedia are trying to do for the web what MS did for the Operating System, and to large extent, succeeding.

At least Adobe has sense enough to stay somewhat diversified. Apps like Illustrator and Photoshop can lend themselves to lots of different uses. InDesign is finally turning into the Quark Killer it was meant to be. Adobe may not have a professional level 3D app in its suite of applications. But apps like Illustrator, Photoshop and After Effects do much to extend the power of pro-level 3D apps like Cinema4D, Studio3D Max, Maya and Lightwave.

Yes, they have, but their problem is that they may end up doing nothing quite as well as they should. IR as a web app is just crap and activation is going to put a lot of individual designers off (i.e professionals who can’t get the business copies of the new suites because they only require one copy). InDesign is excellent and already much easier to use than Quark, and Photoshop is, Photoshop 😉 But I won’t be upgrading it past v.7 unless I have absolutely no choice. Illustrator, unless the new version is better has fallen behind both Freehand and Corel Draw, not to mention Canvas. But, I won’t be upgrading because…

So, we live in interesting times 😉

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, relinqui

Yeah. Anyone fancer a beer at the local?