Corel Forcing to Use New Files Only

[Bobby H]

Corel is superior with internal file sourcing. I can't tell you how many times Adobe files were missing links...

That's user error rather than anything to blame on Adobe. People are lazy as hell. By default, if you drag and drop an image file into an Illustrator document the image will be placed as a linked file. It doesn't take much effort to click the little "embed" button on the menu bar. Apparently that's too much to ask from people who are fixing to send art files to someone else.

CorelDRAW embeds dragged/dropped images by default, which has its own drawbacks.

I can waste all kinds of time going down a long list of things where CorelDRAW outdoes Illustrator and other points where Illustrator completely beats CorelDRAW. But I'm not going to do that.

 

[CizreK]

Yea but can adobe even hold files internally? The entire linking system is so garbage to me. Its a primitive way to do it in my opinion.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

Yea but can adobe even hold files internally? The entire linking system is so garbage to me. Its a primitive way to do it in my opinion.

Yes you can embed. Embed has it's place (for me, when it's more finished and ready for sending it off to a 3rd party for whatever reason, production and/or archiving). Linking is good when things are still in flux. If one is still editing designs/audio/whatever and it's embedded already, every new edit means having to redo the embedding. That's not as efficient as linking, seeing changes update in real time and when everything is good to go at that point in time embed it.

Each has their place depending on what one is doing at that point in time.

 

[CizreK]

Yes you can embed. Embed has it's place (for me, when it's more finished and ready for sending it off to a 3rd party for whatever reason, production and/or archiving). Linking is good when things are still in flux. If one is still editing designs/audio/whatever and it's embedded already, every new edit means having to redo the embedding. That's not as efficient as linking, seeing changes update in real time and when everything is good to go at that point in time embed it.

Each has their place depending on what one is doing at that point in time.

In the like 25+ years I have used corel I have never had it lose something embedded. Not saying it can't happen but - it never has with me. I always use it.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

In the like 25+ years I have used corel I have never had it lose something embedded. Not saying it can't happen but - it never has with me. I always use it.

I haven't had Adobe lose something embedded either. If it did, that would be a bug and should be fixed. Linking is where one may have that issue if the linked file moves etc. Having said that, when there are still edits being made, if I was to edit something in Ps or another program, I wouldn't want to export->embed and repeat however many times until the job was done. I would use linking and once it was finalized, embed.

Now, if the inefficiency of always embedding while things are still being worked on in separate programs doesn't bother one, sure, go for it. It is trivial to embed a linked item in Adobe once everything is done. It's essentially one button and that's it to embed all objects (unless they have changed with CC, I stopped using Adobe once they went Saas). Personally, I can understand and prefer Adobe's usage first in that regard. However, that would be determined on what one is used to with initially starting. I firmly believe that people should be willing to change if they switch programs, expecting 1:1 operations when going from different programs (1:1 importing of the other's master file etc as well) is just not logical to expect. One can hope/wish for that to happen, just doesn't make much logical sense.

 

[John Miller]

I have a serious issue with subscription software and have none. Not Corel, not quick books, not a one. I get by just fine on the most recent version that you can own. I run Corel 2025 because they offered a one time purchase price in a promotion. I can remember answering a Corel survey years back where they asked if I’d be interested in subscription software. I told them that they weren’t a utility like the phone company or electric company. They sell software and should keep it that way. Obviously they didn’t listen to me and are probably making 3X the money.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

I have a serious issue with subscription software and have none.

SaaS is what got me off of Adobe (wasn't much of a fan of Corel, I had X5 and X6 which was apart of my digitizing software, installed X5, but not X6) when they swapped. I still had Win7 at the time on one bare metal machine for awhile after which it was through a VM. Win 10 is what got me off of Windows past 7 even in a VM. Windows itself will eventually be a subscription service even for the regular user. I know some that have done it just to be able to have Enterprise edition that they wouldn't otherwise be able to have. Ironically, I remember when Corel was actually using as a selling point that they still had a perpetual license when Adobe was doing what they were doing, I think it was just 2 short years later, Corel was really pushing their subs over perpetual.

The problem with software that's going on 40+ yrs old, it's hard to innovate. About the only innovation that is going on now is buying out tangentially related software and offering that up. Outside of that, there is little if any innovation going on and as such hard to get people to want to upgrade to the next version at that point.

I imagine at some point, the 2 big OSs (if the third is still around, a lot of things going on with it that's no bueno, but I digress) will probable just have enough software/firmware to bootstrap a server instance on the user's thin client and all of the programs will be installed on some server. Going back to dummy terminals (unfortunately, at least back in the day, everything was still on a local server versus what it's going to be now).