This reads like a big fat advertisement for CDN Connect more than it does a valid argument for ditching save for web in photo editing applications. "Save for web is redundant, use my paid product instead", I'll bite...
Considering photo editing applications like Photoshop serve many purposes; magazine photography, advertising, hobbyist and web user I don't see the reason to remove such a fundamentally and very relevant feature like, 'Save for Web'. Not everyone takes photos for display on the web and some people like control over the finer details of their imagery before saving them out (that includes for web).
Not once did Adam Bradley offer any sort of compelling argument here. His argument is that people upload large images and resize them in the browser, only developers who don't care about the end-user do this. CMS's like Wordpress handle image resizing out-of-the-box and for free too, who would have thought? Developers have been cutting out images at a fixed size since I can remember, why is it all of a sudden a problem we need to throw money at? Considering the file size difference between an image saved for web and an image saved for desktop use or for printing in a magazine can sometimes be tens of megabytes opposed to kilobytes, I'd rather save out web optimised versions of my images when I need them instead of relying on a paid product which is essentially doing what Photoshop or Fireworks would do in behind-the-scenes anyway.
CDN Connect sounds like an over-glorified and by the looks of it, expensive image resizing and content delivery network service, I'm not impressed.
Considering photo editing applications like Photoshop serve many purposes; magazine photography, advertising, hobbyist and web user I don't see the reason to remove such a fundamentally and very relevant feature like, 'Save for Web'. Not everyone takes photos for display on the web and some people like control over the finer details of their imagery before saving them out (that includes for web).
Not once did Adam Bradley offer any sort of compelling argument here. His argument is that people upload large images and resize them in the browser, only developers who don't care about the end-user do this. CMS's like Wordpress handle image resizing out-of-the-box and for free too, who would have thought? Developers have been cutting out images at a fixed size since I can remember, why is it all of a sudden a problem we need to throw money at? Considering the file size difference between an image saved for web and an image saved for desktop use or for printing in a magazine can sometimes be tens of megabytes opposed to kilobytes, I'd rather save out web optimised versions of my images when I need them instead of relying on a paid product which is essentially doing what Photoshop or Fireworks would do in behind-the-scenes anyway.
CDN Connect sounds like an over-glorified and by the looks of it, expensive image resizing and content delivery network service, I'm not impressed.