Comments

1. hitmouse

   
   Posted on: September 04, 2008 at 10:22AM  

   And where do folks from outside UK/EU/US buy it? Since it's just a download I don't see why I can't buy it from Australia using regular online credit-card controls.
2. Ceinach

   
   Posted on: September 04, 2008 at 10:51AM  

   Doesn't Picassa already do this for free? You can also do movies, slideshows, crop, and even upload them easily to share for free.

   Could you please explain what the differences are that would justify a $20 ($40 UK) purchase over already existing free software that does more?

   I'm confused.
3. Blair

   

   
   Posted on: September 04, 2008 at 12:48PM  

   I had the same thought about Picasa offering free collages. However, Auto Collage 2008 is far more powerful. Easy to use, hard to describe. You really ought to check it out.
4. Ceinach

   
   Posted on: September 04, 2008 at 3:16PM  

   You've still lost me. How is it more powerful?

   Can I make a movie with it? No.

   Can I just drag and dropinto the collage? No.

   Can I quickly grab a screenshot of a presentation to add? No.

   Does it watermark? No.

   Can I upload them and sync my albums? No.

   Is there a side-by-side feature comparison that would show us why Autocollage is more powerful or where it handles features and tasks that Picasa currently does not? The only reason I can see not to use Picassa is because it's associated with Google and Microsoft doesn't want anything to do with Google. That, however, is not a reason that I care about.
5. Brandon LeBlanc

   

   
   Posted on: September 04, 2008 at 3:50PM  

   Ceinach, you are free to try AutoCollage 2008 for 30 days and compare it to Picasa. I don't use Picasa so I can't compare. There is no side-by-side comparison I know of.

   AutoCollage 2008 is a powerful application designed simply to create collages. I've begun creating some fairly intense and large collages with this application which is pretty neat. Not sure I would want to use this application to grab a screenshot of a presentation or add a watermark as I can do that with other apps.

   I explained why this application is sold above. I will repeat here: by charging for this application - this allows the Cambridge incubation team to dedicate significant amount of work to making it rock for consumers. There is no revenue stream for this app such as with ads and what not. It also allows the team to invest in perhaps implementing the features (such as the ones you mention above) it doesn't have today in later versions.

   If you already use something that meets your needs than perhaps this app isn't for you. However others may find it extremely useful.

   - Brandon
6. Ceinach

   
   Posted on: September 04, 2008 at 4:19PM  

   Brandon,

   Nobody at Microsoft thought to perform a side-by-side feature comparison of the two products? Interesting.

   In any case, I have tried both. I've also watched the demos and I simply can't see any feature or reason to use AutoCollage over Picasa. From what I see, Picasa trumps Autocollage in every area for my needs and I don't have to pay for it. If there was a feature I'm missing that is better, I'm not seeing it and Microsoft isn't pointing it out to me either.
7. Brandon LeBlanc

   

   
   Posted on: September 04, 2008 at 4:55PM  

   Ceinach, not every product has a side-by-side comparison ;-) I actually am not sure what the thought process is with the folks who worked on AutoCollage 2008 on product marketing, I just blogged about the release and where to get it etc. I throw the product comparison feedback their way though.

   I just tried Picasa and for me AutoCollage 2008 handles taking in 50+ photos and making a collage much better than Picasa does. AutoCollage 2008 is faster and quality seems a lot better, but that's just my initial thoughts.

   - Brandon
8. freibooter

   
   Posted on: September 04, 2008 at 11:45PM  

   I'm a little confused.

   After almost two years we have yet to see a really useful Windows Ultimate Extra.

   Now an almost interesting piece of software that a lot of people thought might eventually become an Ultimate Extra is released ...

   Just NOT as an Ultimate Extra ...

   but at a very steep price tag (£19.90 = $35.00 in the UK!) for such a one trick pony ...

   with senseless regional restrictions on a digital distribution download, even if people were willing to pay for it ...

   and all that while Google's Picasa does almost the same thing for free and about a thousand other useful things at the same time.

   That sounds like a genius way to alienate existing customer even further.

   I really wonder who the target market for such an application might be.

   "I just tried Picasa and for me AutoCollage 2008 handles taking in 50+ photos and making a collage much better than Picasa does. AutoCollage 2008 is faster and quality seems a lot better, but that's just my initial thoughts."

   Have you tried Picasa 3 or the old 2.7?

   Honestly, I just compared the trial to Picasa 3 and I don't see a notable difference in quality. And while I'm sure your time is very valuable, is it really $35 faster?
9. hitmouse

   
   Posted on: September 05, 2008 at 4:08AM  

   Freibooter - Yes I agree that "senseless regional restrictions on a digital distribution download" shows that MS is still back in about 1970 as far as international commerce is involved. I deal with small retailers around the globe who can process my credit-card and ship me product. Microsoft can't even do it to ship me a product-key string.

   Brandon - a point to note is that AutoCollage may take in more than 25 pictures at a time, but won't generate a collage of more than 25 pictures.

   I'm also waiting for a useful Windows Ultimate Extra, as I'm not a polylingual poker-player.
10. Josh Fillson

    
    Posted on: September 05, 2008 at 9:39AM  

    I think $20 is too much for this tool. Brandon, you obviously have not used Autocollage as you state, otherwise you would know that your 50 picture example is bogus. The most you can collage with it is 25. Picasa does not have that limit, reduces red-eye, allows easy sharing, and a whole host of other features.

    I simply can't support what should be a free Ultimate Extra product for a team of researchers that are creating a product that already exists, is arguably better, and has no cost. Why would I donate $20 to a team who, as another poster stated above, can't even show us why we'd spend our money on their product in relationship to the other offerings or understands the market?