Originally posted by Lemon Bon BonThey'll find it alot harder to 'kill' Apple. And Apple are making it harder to do so. This isn't the same Apple of 1997.
And Steve Jobs has been making this abundently clear to Adobe and M$.
Aperture may not be a direct competitor to Photoshop for now.
But to me, it's more Photoshop than Photoshop for the Photographer.
Aperture is a clear signal from Apple that if Adobe won't do it. Apple will. And with more style, simplicity and elegance and Power.
Apple's Pro and Consumer software is generally excellent and has, in general, sawn the legs off the competition. It will be interesting to see where Aperture goes...
I think it makes interfaces from Adobe and M$ embarrassing to look at...
Lemon Bon Bon
PS. If Adobe or M$ were to pull the plug on Apple...I have no doubt that Apple would be there to answer the challenge. With Open Office for the Mac...and iWorks, it's clear Apple are on that track... And with Funhouse 'knocked up in Cocoa within a week' and Aperture...Apple is showing Adobe their monopolies are not invulnerable... Steve Jobs doesn't like being at the behest of others. The 'drop' Office threat and the '2nd place' attitude of Adobe to Macs... Personally, I think he's putting the pieces in Place from iPod to Aperture so he and Apple can do what they want...and teh finger to M$/Adobe and companies like them in the process... Just like Apple gave 'teh finger' to IBM. Apple just aren't going to be held to ransom or held down any more. I think that's a GOOD THING. TM.
PPS. Huh. Both M$ and Adobe seem to have forgotten where they have come from....
I'm not talking about killing Apple. But it surely would hurt.
Apple has shown no interest in either Star Office or Open Office.
iWork has a nice little program in Pages. But almost no one is buying it. It sits on the shelf, and Apple has shown no interest in doing anything with it to make it competitive.
It takes years to build a program up to the point where it can start to replace a "standard". Look to the competition between Adobe and Quark.
Even though Quark has been universally vilified over many years. And even though from the very beginning, inDesign has been heralded as the better program, the much better program with each new release. With that, Adobe is praised for good customer relations. And even though Quark has been slow getting new and useful releases out of the door. And even with their totally reviled lack of customer support, and the lack of respect many companies and individual users have felt radiating from Quark, most of the publishing industry is STILL standardized on Quark Express.
Why is that?
Because once Quark established itself, and many third party software companies wrote software to extend and support the program, and after companies built their workflow's around the Quark Publishing System, It became extremely difficult to extricate themselves from it. Even though many want to.
Even if we believe, as Mac users, that Aperture is the most wonderful program of its type ever conceived, and even if we think that after several upgrades, the program can, in someway, compete with PS, it will still have a LONG way to go before most others think that.
It is also hobbled most seriously by the very fact that is IS a Mac only program. Apple would have to do what Adobe does, and release it on Windows as well. Remember that with only 27% of PS users on the Mac, this can't make any headway against PS as a one platform solution.
Apple would also need a viable publishing program as well as a vector drawing program. Even if this does turn into an image manipulation program as PS is, it won't be enough.
I'm not convinced that Apple, no matter what we might think, is considering any of that. And believe me, it would be needed. Industry is moving away from the stand-alone program.
It started with the Office Suite. It moved to the Corel Suite for graphics. Others did the same thing, such as Macromedia.
Apple then bought and wrote programs to complete the FC Suite. Adobe had that with CS, and now CS2.
Apple would have to have their own publishing suite as well.
I actually thought that they might be interested in doing that at one time, but they have passed up every opportunity to pick up programs that would help them in any way, even in graphics.
When MetaCreations sold off their graphics programs, Apple was thought of as a natural buyer. But Corel bought them. Again, when Corel then sold them more recently, and with Apple's big push into software, they again failed to pick any up.
When the word was out that Macromedia might be up for sale, I thought that Apple had a great chance of really moving in and solidifying important areas of their offerings.
Flash, the most widely used standard of its type could have been owned by Apple. Apple would have acquired Freehand. A program they would need to compete with Adobe - if they wanted to. Director, a VERY important content creation as a counterpart to DVD Studio.
Other area's of endeavor that Macromedia is expert in would have helped Apple come up to speed quickly.
But Apple has been conspicuous by its absence.
I don't think that Apple is thinking of competing directly with Adobe.
And, I don't think that it matters in the slightest where MS and Adobe came from. You could say that about many of Apple's longtime developers who have slipped over to Windows support, or have left entirely.