or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Adobe may not deliver native Intel Mac support until 2007
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Adobe may not deliver native Intel Mac support until 2007 - Page 2

post #41 of 81
The statement from Adobe sounds like they are hurt and dont care about Mac platform.
Hurt : cause they didnt came out with a software as Aperture before Apple, thats why they keep pushing that App. Like they fell apple had surpassed their territory in some way and thats the way to defend it.
Careless: They now they have a huge amount of Photoshop users that will "still suporting" their suite for a while until they can charge $$$$$$$ them with a UniBin version of it.

I really dont know whats the deal with a lot of people moaning about Photoshop its not UniBin. WHO CARES ?
U moaners please tell me that your G5's are slow running Photoshop ? if its the case buy more memory. This moaning only shows a bunch of spoilered kids that want the last toy around. If your actual system works, have 110% support from Adobe and its paying your bill, why the rush ?
Another thing, maybe some people forget that the main focus of Apple is now the consumer, pros still being important to Apple but arent they the ones that will buy mac minis,iBooks, iMacs. Those machines are for consumers and the iMac its intended for gamers and prosumers. I dont get it. Want a pro machine? buy a G5 tower that's screaming fast, want an iMac ? buy the 20 inches G5 2.1 that is $200.00 cheaper rigth now.

Nobody its forcing anyone to buy the latest toy, by the time Adobe and others release their apps in UniBin we will have the Mac Pro tower and the iMac will be already pumped to 2.3 & 2.5 core duo and todays machine will be not as cool. screaming fast as they do now.
post #42 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by nagromme
I want native...Director

According to this FAQ Director isn't on the list of applications scheduled to make the transition.

From the FAQ:
Q. How does this affect Adobe's product development plans?
A. Adobe plans to support both Intel and PowerPC microprocessors in the next versions of its creative applications for the Mac OS. Our development teams are currently working on or evaluating transition plans for these and other products: Adobe Creative Suite, Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Illustrator, Adobe InDesign, Adobe GoLive, Adobe InCopy, Adobe Acrobat Professional, Adobe After Effects, Macromedia Studio, Dreamweaver, Flash Professional, Flash Basic, Fireworks, Contribute.
NOTICE: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information supplied herein, fahlman cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Unless otherwise indicated,...
Reply
NOTICE: While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information supplied herein, fahlman cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Unless otherwise indicated,...
Reply
post #43 of 81
I can't help but ask...did Apple need to transition to Intel 6 months ahead of schedule?

While progress is always good, it only makes sense to get major apps on board and ready to go with new hardware. Adobe, Microsoft, and Quark were noticibly absent at MacWorld (I don't count betas).

The confusion over dual platforms and uncertain release dates of UB apps is bad. Wouldn't a launch date in June with a slew of software apps ready to go, been better?
post #44 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by satchmo
I can't help but ask...did Apple need to transition to Intel 6 months ahead of schedule?

While progress is always good, it only makes sense to get major apps on board and ready to go with new hardware. Adobe, Microsoft, and Quark were noticibly absent at MacWorld (I don't count betas).

The confusion over dual platforms and uncertain release dates of UB apps is bad. Wouldn't a launch date in June with a slew of software apps ready to go, been better?

I think Apple were right to transition early. There are non-pro users looking to keep their systems for a few years that wouldn't want to buy a last gen PPC, and so they now have an iMac to buy. It also lets small developers get a system without signing up for the developer scheme. In addition, there are still plenty of PowerPC systems kicking around- the PowerMac will be here until at least June, and we might see it kept on for a few months after the intel introduction to keep all parties happy.
post #45 of 81
I think it made sense for Apple to come 6 moths ahead cause they are using now the same processor that the majority use and its good for Apple to deliver a product right away early than all the others (DELL, SONY, HP)
Its good cause that fact show how important is Apple in the computer world and confirm those rumors that Apple wanted to release before or be among the first to showcase the new intels.
Other thing, theres not such confussion about UniBin, come on !
Almost all PPC software will run on Rosetta emulation program. Only those apps/software that depends in PPC hardware and certain software instructions will not run ( virtual pc, APE, etc )
The fact that the iMac and the MacBook Pro are dual processors plus faster memory and decent FSB ensure that all programs will run faster than actual PPC models unless u have a dual processor or dual core/quad with lots of ram.

http://www.apple.com/universal/
post #46 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by msantti
Okay Apple, feel free to come out with your Photoshop app now.

Adobe does not want to play ball.

Screw 'em.

NEVA GONNA HAPPEN

Apple doesnt do windows software, and without a windows version, no place in their right mind would use it for production in the current PC marketplace.

Also, can Apple risk pissing off Adobe without facing increases in licensing fees for .pdf? you think Adobe cheared at the site of Preview.app and PDF printing out of the box? no but they were likely getting a license fee, and Apple will probably have to pay up at every magor release...so...dont bite the hand that controls the price on PDF
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #47 of 81
A lot of the comments in here sound like impatient children who need to wait to open their presents until Christmas.

Boo-hoo, you may have to use a super-fast G5 system for less than a year with CS2 (or CS1 if you didn't let Adobe pull the wool over your eyes thinking CS2 was an upgrade.. it wasn't except maybe for 'LiveTrace'). I hope taking their time will result in an actual upgrade... and maybe they will actually coordinate keyboard shortcuts and scroll-wheel modifiers across the suite.

I've been using a dual G4 1.4 Ghz for about three years now and have never had any complaints. Someone else in the office with a G5 doesn't get work done any faster than I do. The benchmarks I've seen for CoreDue v G5 don't make it sound any faster than my daul 1.4 g4 against that daul 2Ghz G5 (and that definately isn't enough to get my panties in a wad over just yet).

Also.. iMac and PowerBook (er.. MacBook) are adequate (and awesome), but not really first choice for producing real work. Especially since these are rev A. In case you are new to buying macs... Apple products almost always improve drastically in rev B or later. Sometimes new products based on existing hardware do okay, but I'd put money that Intel Macs will be way better by the time CS3 is around.
post #48 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by satchmo
I can't help but ask...did Apple need to transition to Intel 6 months ahead of schedule?

While progress is always good, it only makes sense to get major apps on board and ready to go with new hardware. Adobe, Microsoft, and Quark were noticibly absent at MacWorld (I don't count betas).

The confusion over dual platforms and uncertain release dates of UB apps is bad. Wouldn't a launch date in June with a slew of software apps ready to go, been better?

Apple is not transitioning early. The statements were "no later than" all the way back to WWDC. When someone bets the farm that an organization will not deliver sooner than a drop-dead date, that is a bad decision.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #49 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by a_greer
NEVA GONNA HAPPEN

Apple doesnt do windows software, and without a windows version, no place in their right mind would use it for production in the current PC marketplace.

Also, can Apple risk pissing off Adobe without facing increases in licensing fees for .pdf? you think Adobe cheared at the site of Preview.app and PDF printing out of the box? no but they were likely getting a license fee, and Apple will probably have to pay up at every magor release...so...dont bite the hand that controls the price on PDF

Actually, Adobe wouldn't give Apple what they considered a reasonable licensing price so Apple went with the open .pdf standard. It's for this reason that Preview won't let you click on links or data input into .pdf forms etc.
post #50 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by Rayz
Adobe's packages aren't just sitting there doing nothing!

Apple shifts to PowerPC. Adobe sticks with 'em.
Apple shifts to MacOSX. Adobe sticks with 'em.
Apple shifts to Intel. Adobe sticks with 'em.


Exactly. Considering the way Adobe handled the fist two of those three transitions, I don't understand why anybody is surprised or upset that they're handling the PPC-Intel transition in the same way. It's pretty much what i expected. You run Adobe apps? you need horsepower for them? a Quad 2.5 should tide you over. Really.

(and my dual 2.0 is still kicking as much ass as it did the day I bought it)

Do what you will, but harm none.

Reply

Do what you will, but harm none.

Reply
post #51 of 81
advice:
Get a Quad now and relax!
Wait for PowerMac Intel rev.B and you'll be just fine.

For laptop users, things don't look good!
MacPro 12 core
30" & 23" Apple Cinema HD Displays
PowerBook G4 550, MacBook Pro 2.2
Ipod 1G and 5G, Shuffle 2G, iPhone 3G
Reply
MacPro 12 core
30" & 23" Apple Cinema HD Displays
PowerBook G4 550, MacBook Pro 2.2
Ipod 1G and 5G, Shuffle 2G, iPhone 3G
Reply
post #52 of 81
I am not surprised by this information at all. As others have said, Adobe is in the midst of a merger and Apple came to the party early.

That being said, I use psd7 on my 20" iMac CD at home and on my Dual 2.5 G5 at work. The Intel iMac's performance is very nice, and I never feel like I'm on a slow machine. People are getting caught up in a lot of artificial benchmarks and filter tests, but no one is talking about the system's usability. Do you pixel pushers really run filters all day? Rosetta is NOT Classic. PhotoShop is extremely usable in this environment.

As much as I'd like UB apps from Adobe now, I will be very content to work on my iMac for the next 9months. The machine is very capable. Before raising hell about the schedule, those of you who are in need of new machines should go try one. If PMs are released in mid-summer, they will be using very fast Intel chips, which dwarf my iMac's performance.
post #53 of 81
I still have to wonder about the viability of Apple buying out Adobe and continuing development for both Mac and Windows platforms...

I mean, Apple DOES do Windows software now (Quicktime, iTunes).

Plus, it would be superb insurance. Microsoft can hold Office over Apple's head, and Apple can hold the whole of creation (Adobe/Macromedia/PDFs/Flash) over Microsoft's head.

Apple could incorporate the line into a very Apple-like suite of products (e.g., Photoshop Pro, Photoshop Express, Dreamweaver Pro, Dreamweaver Express, etc.), and leverage the technologies for consumer-level iLife apps.

I am guessing, however, that Apple would pretty much exhaust its reserves in such a purpose... I also have to believe that Apple execs way smarter than I am have analyzed this proposition and rejected it. It would be a mighty and risky move, but my lay opinion is that it could be an extremely important one.

THAT said, one cannot blame Adobe for holding off on Universalization. I am sure it is a huge task, and it makes total sense to wait until CS3. However, it would be NICE if they also worked, in the meantime, on a CS2 update that was optimized for Rosetta.
post #54 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by Keda
I am not surprised by this information at all. As others have said, Adobe is in the midst of a merger and Apple came to the party early.


I would even argue it's not information. It's the same line Adobe towed at the announcement. there's nothing new here, other than a named list and LightRoom information. Maybe they made a statement because some other site completely misinterpreted other information and said "Photoshop sooner than later?"
post #55 of 81
Given that Macromedia is gone and Apple isn't that crazy, the best hope for a Photoshop rival would be Quark.

I could see them, now that they seem to be fluent in Xcode, including a basic image editor with Quark that has 60-75% of Photoshop's features.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #56 of 81
Ahhhh TIFFany!!!

I remember back in 93 or 94 when Stan Jirman came to my office to try to compile TIFFany sources as a fat binary (or universal binary in today's jargon) for NeXTstep Intel X86 and Motorola 68k. I think he did it in a few hours in front of me :-)

BTW, around that time we were able to produce .apps universal binaries for 68k, X86, HP-PA-Risc, Dec alpha and even Sun Sparc if I remember well.

Wow after all these years Adobe will finally produce its flagship apps with Xcode!!! Finally.

As Steve, I learned to be patient for 15 years with that OS and wait for the world to recognize the beauty of NeXTstep/OSX. I can wait one more year and even suffer Mr Michael Dell to put in our faces benchmarks showing that his computers are 2-3 time more powerful for graphic designers than Macintel all throughout 2006!

Mehdi Aminian


Quote:
Originally posted by mdriftmeyer
http://www.shawcomputing.net/resourc...shots/ns40.jpg



http://www.shawcomputing.net/resourc...tiffany2-b.jpg


Apple has the resources to make a Photoshop Killer. When Adobe saw a preview of TIFFany 3 at WWDC 97 they quickly brought several top engineers to ask about how this and that are done. Some interesting parts of TIFFany have been attempted in Photoshop.

One of my favorite strengths of TIFFany is how layers can have an independent bit depth. One layer may be at 32bit, another at 2bit grayscale, so on and so forth.
post #57 of 81
I'd cut Adobe a break. They are a business, and transitioning their software well to a new *processor* will take some time.

In the meantime, I just (December) bought a 2.3 dual-core powermac, and am even more comfortable with that decision. It will take a little time for the software to catch up with the hardware. In the meantime Apple can talk to Adobe and try to get the most out of Rosetta for its new Pro users.

Buy those PPC powerbooks while you still can! (or sell me yours)

Brian
post #58 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by AllBrain
IMHO, Adobe can't be blamed for this. Apple were gearing towards this transition since OS X started development, Adobe didn't know until last year! It's a bit of a head start. Could all be another Steve Jobs master plan for world domination!

Well, he has been dissing how slow it was at the last two keynotes that he's used it.

Doesn't that fall into the Apple Product cycle early stage process of dissing something before releasing your own version?

post #59 of 81
Someone posted a comment recently (was it Cringely? ) about Apple buying Adobe allow Apple to take a hostage against Microsoft from dumping Office for OS X.

With this lukewarm announcement from Adobe, I would bet strategic analysts at Apple are cranking the numbers right now. Owned by Apple, Adobe would be told what their development priorities are and Apple would own the creative platform.
post #60 of 81
Oh well, paramount beat me to the punch on this . . . I think a strategic 20 or 30 percent shareholding with a couple of seats on the board would do the trick though.

I'm in rather a good position on this switchover though -- I don't depend heavily on the CS applications any longer, and the big application I really do need, Stata, is already in universal binary. Stata were in OS X in August 2001 and now they're one of the very first on UB as well.

And iLife is up to the point where it is actually usable in terms of features, and MS Office up to the point where the penalty imposed by emulation is not a serious problem.

On the creative side, this is a great opportunity for Quark to redeem themselves and I hope they make the most of it. It would be a shame for them to go on ceding the market to Adobe in the way that they have over the past few years.
post #61 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by JohnnyKrz
A lot of the comments in here sound like impatient children who need to wait to open their presents until Christmas.

That analogy is fitting for many topics on rumor sites, e.g. the ridiculous volume (in amount and loudness) of gotta-know-before-it's-announced pre-Keynote impatience.
post #62 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by Keda
People are getting caught up in a lot of artificial benchmarks and filter tests, but no one is talking about the system's usability. Do you pixel pushers really run filters all day? Rosetta is NOT Classic. PhotoShop is extremely usable in this environment.

And this seems like an opportunity for certain users who've chosen to be early Intel Mac adaptors to learn how to use Rosetta-translated PS more effectively.

People tend to forget that user (in)efficiency/performance sometimes has at least as much a factor in productivity as system/software (in)efficiency/performance. I can be more productive with certain tasks on my 600Mhz iBook G3 than some users on faster systems simply because of having skill at getting more from less.
post #63 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by bjewett
I'd cut Adobe a break. They are a business, and transitioning their software well to a new *processor* will take some time.

Brian

You mean the same processor their Windosw version of the software runs on. They already have the CPU optimized assembler code where they need it. This isn't about coding or even a transition to Xcode, because they are almost done with that too. it's about not wanting to do QA on reorganized and recompiled code. It's a major QA hassle, but with the way they already have platform neutral code, not that much new code to actually write.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #64 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by paramount57
Someone posted a comment recently (was it Cringely? ) about Apple buying Adobe allow Apple to take a hostage against Microsoft from dumping Office for OS X.

With this lukewarm announcement from Adobe, I would bet strategic analysts at Apple are cranking the numbers right now. Owned by Apple, Adobe would be told what their development priorities are and Apple would own the creative platform.

this is an intriguing notion: Apple could manipulate the release of features to favor their own OS, (kind of the reverse of what we see now) and optimize for their own hardware. Perhaps it would entice quite a few switchers. they probably have the cash to do it. 8)
go with the flow
Reply
go with the flow
Reply
post #65 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by plokoonpma
I really dont know whats the deal with a lot of people moaning about Photoshop its not UniBin. WHO CARES ?
U moaners please tell me that your G5's are slow running Photoshop ? if its the case buy more memory. This moaning only shows a bunch of spoilered kids that want the last toy around. If your actual system works, have 110% support from Adobe and its paying your bill, why the rush ?
Another thing, maybe some people forget that the main focus of Apple is now the consumer, pros still being important to Apple but arent they the ones that will buy mac minis,iBooks, iMacs. Those machines are for consumers and the iMac its intended for gamers and prosumers. I dont get it. Want a pro machine? buy a G5 tower that's screaming fast, want an iMac ? buy the 20 inches G5 2.1 that is $200.00 cheaper rigth now

Hardly any professional Photoshop user only uses Photoshop. I use Final Cut Pro, Motion, Soundtrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro, After Effects, Photoshop, Illustrator, and a few more programs almost every day.

In order to get Motion to run properly, you need a computer that is at least a year and a half old with a very high end video card. With the latest version of Final Cut Studio coming out soon, I am afraid I am either going to have to do one of the following when I find out my current g5 is not good enough to run the latest version of Motion:

A) Buy a new G5 Tower in the next few months to be able to run it.

B) Keep my current setup for at least another year until After Effects, Illustrator, and Photoshop are all updated to Universal and I can buy a MacPro. But not be able to utilize the latest features in Motion until i go buy a mactel... but I'll still have to buy Motion because the Studio is only sold together now and not separately.

C) Keep my current setup and go buy a macpro when they come out and have the two working between each other using external hard-drives. Which is just a waste of time and a hassle, along with the fact that i am still paying off student loans, isn't likely to happen.

All of these options just make the next year dealing with computer and software upgrades appear to be not very fun. This combined with the fact that whenever I do go and sell my G5, I won't get nearly what I would have gotten for a two year old machine a few years ago before the intel transition was announced, when everyone else begins dumping their G4 and G5s as well.

Apple is obviously a very strong company right now with all the ipods they are selling, you would think that with them going to intel they could at least afford to cut the price off all the mac machines as a whole, i very highly doubt the macpros are going to be cheaper than the current powermacs. This would also help in getting people to switch to a mac. The more that the realities of this intel transition come into focus, the more it seems that the loyal customers are the ones getting screwed.
post #66 of 81
Not to sound bitter or anything by 'moving to XCode...', why the hell did they leave it THIS late to make the transition.

How many have heard the repeated pleeding by Steve to move to Xcode? it seems to be like a mantra that each WWDC, there is a plead to move to XCode; programmers, if you're out there, if Apple says move to Xcode or what have you, there is normally a bloody good reason for it!
post #67 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by JohnnySmith
Hardly any professional Photoshop user only uses Photoshop. I use Final Cut Pro, Motion, Soundtrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro, After Effects, Photoshop, Illustrator, and a few more programs almost every day.

In order to get Motion to run properly, you need a computer that is at least a year and a half old with a very high end video card. With the latest version of Final Cut Studio coming out soon, I am afraid I am either going to have to do one of the following when I find out my current g5 is not good enough to run the latest version of Motion:

A) Buy a new G5 Tower in the next few months to be able to run it.

B) Keep my current setup for at least another year until After Effects, Illustrator, and Photoshop are all updated to Universal and I can buy a MacPro. But not be able to utilize the latest features in Motion until i go buy a mactel... but I'll still have to buy Motion because the Studio is only sold together now and not separately.

C) Keep my current setup and go buy a macpro when they come out and have the two working between each other using external hard-drives. Which is just a waste of time and a hassle, along with the fact that i am still paying off student loans, isn't likely to happen.

All of these options just make the next year dealing with computer and software upgrades appear to be not very fun. This combined with the fact that whenever I do go and sell my G5, I won't get nearly what I would have gotten for a two year old machine a few years ago before the intel transition was announced, when everyone else begins dumping their G4 and G5s as well.

Apple is obviously a very strong company right now with all the ipods they are selling, you would think that with them going to intel they could at least afford to cut the price off all the mac machines as a whole, i very highly doubt the macpros are going to be cheaper than the current powermacs. This would also help in getting people to switch to a mac. The more that the realities of this intel transition come into focus, the more it seems that the loyal customers are the ones getting screwed.

B)
go with the flow
Reply
go with the flow
Reply
post #68 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by JohnnySmith
Hardly any professional Photoshop user only uses Photoshop.

I do. I edit about 200-300 photographs a day, and use only Photoshop.
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #69 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by a_greer
NEVA GONNA HAPPEN

Apple doesnt do windows software, and without a windows version, no place in their right mind would use it for production in the current PC marketplace.

Also, can Apple risk pissing off Adobe without facing increases in licensing fees for .pdf? you think Adobe cheared at the site of Preview.app and PDF printing out of the box? no but they were likely getting a license fee, and Apple will probably have to pay up at every magor release...so...dont bite the hand that controls the price on PDF

Let me clear this licensing fee control issue up once and for all.

During the merger us NeXT folks were debating the surcharge tax that Display Postscript added on to Openstep ($10/copy). At that time the $799/user cost for Openstep and $4999 for Openstep Developer along with $25,000 for EOF and eventually $50,000 for WOF ObjC such a tax was negligible.

However, we were going to compete against Microsoft and when the cost of WOF was reduced to $699 and Developer was going to be FREE it became clear that $10/user to Adobe was a lot of money.

The decision to switch to Display PDF was quickly prototyped.

The fact that Adobe had released the specifications for PDF it was up to Apple to develop a Display PDF that complied with the latest publically released specifications.

Adobe keeps a competitive advantage by being one full revision ahead of these released specs.

When DisplayPDF came out it was PDF 1.4 compliant and Adobe was already using PDF 1.5. The current relationship is PDF 1.5 to PDF 1.6. This trend will continue.

Apple however pays NO LICENSING FEES. The advantages that PDF 1.6 concern issues of ECMAScript, DOM, SOAP, and some other non-pdf plugins.

http://partners.adobe.com/public/dev...reference.html

Apple has agreed to be 1 revision behind.

http://partners.adobe.com/public/dev...ary/index.html

The differences between the PDF Library SDK and that of the Acrobat Library SDK are clarified.

If Apple provided the extensibility of the Acrobat Professional SDK inside of Preview.app it would create a major rift between the two companies. This area of the market is not one Apple has a vested interest in other than being the OS platform provider.

This battle is for Quark and Adobe to beat each other into a pulp.

http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/pdf/

Note: PDF 1.5 Document Compatibility
Take advantage of PDF 1.5.

It's an amicable relationship that was hammered out during the Rhapsody -> OS X transition.
post #70 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by JohnnySmith
Hardly any professional Photoshop user only uses Photoshop. I use Final Cut Pro, Motion, Soundtrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro, After Effects, Photoshop, Illustrator, and a few more programs almost every day.

I use it for web design so most of those above are of no use to me. Photoshop and a good text editor is all I need. Thankfully the text editors are all universal now but that just leaves Photoshop/ImageReady as the app I MUST have. I could get by with Fireworks but I don't really like it and that's probably less likely to go Universal as soon as Photoshop as v8 was only out a couple of months ago.
post #71 of 81
Quote:
That analogy is fitting for many topics on rumor sites, e.g. the ridiculous volume (in amount and loudness) of gotta-know-before-it's-announced pre-Keynote impatience.

Very true, but I have to admit that I'm one of them. It's fun to anticipate and nature to explore new things. However, patience is a virtue, especially when you expect the perfection that you will never get.

My final word... At least we don't have to use Windows. (It's a scary thought, and imagine how impatient Windows users must be for Vista right now. Intel or PPC, OS X is all that really matters to me.)
post #72 of 81
Has anyone used InDesign on a new iMac Intel Duo? What is the performance like?

I am planning on picking up a notebook 15" (probably a duo model, hard to tell since we don't know Apple's plans) in May. It will be used to put together a new product catalog (hopefully using InDesign).

I wonder if it will perform OK?
Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #73 of 81
am i the only one old enough to recall that adobe's photoshop was the LAST major app to make an OS X compatible transition? remember when steve actually cited them BY NAME ON STAGE? this is hardly new. what confuses me is wasn't it chizen HIMSELF who asked steve tongue-in-cheek "what took you so long?" at the intel transition announcement? he made it sound like this was what adobe was WAITING for.

ah well, adobe is beginning to suffer from a microsoftian problem of being TOO big and having to incorporate too many other apps in any change to any single app, couple with backwards compatibility so as to not break previous files and workflows at production houses. compare this all to lightroom, which seems to be on the ball with new beta updates regularly, lower system requirements, etc. it's light on its feet because it isn't dragged down by so much legacy-handling. it's too young to realize it shouldn't be doing as well as it is (please note, i like aperture better from a user interface standpoint, but compare lightroom to adobe's other apps, and you'll start to see my point).

now they're going to try to spot-weld user interface elements from the adobe apps to macromedia and vice versa? they may as well codename creative suite 3 "it lives!" for the frakenstein it's going to resemble.
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
post #74 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by rok
am i the only one old enough to recall that adobe's photoshop was the LAST major app to make an OS X compatible transition?

I think you're thinking of Quark XPress.

Way to dig up old threads, btw
post #75 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
I think you're thinking of Quark XPress.

Way to dig up old threads, btw

okay, ONE of the last... steve still mentioned adobe by name during a keynote while everyone was waiting on a carbonized version of photoshop.

re: old thread, not even sure how i stumbled in here, but i thought i would throw in my ten cents (the first two are free).

heck, cut me some slack, i've been in the midst of an international move for the past month. i'm lucky i know what day it is anymore.
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
post #76 of 81
If Adobe was smart, they would come on stage during Steve's WWDC keynote and announce the immediate availabiliy of a public beta of CS3. It's the least they could do for their customers, since we not only have to wait another 8 months for the CS3 release, but have to pay for it too. Adobe has had over a year now to be working on Universal Binaries of their applications, and they don't have a single one out the door yet.
post #77 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by rok
am i the only one old enough to recall that adobe's photoshop was the LAST major app to make an OS X compatible transition? remember when steve actually cited them BY NAME ON STAGE? this is hardly new. what confuses me is wasn't it chizen HIMSELF who asked steve tongue-in-cheek "what took you so long?" at the intel transition announcement? he made it sound like this was what adobe was WAITING for.

They have a clear, published schedule when they deliver upgrades, and they are sticking to it. It's not their fault Apple decided to switch architectures while having full knowledge of Adobe's public shipping schedule beforehand. In the meantime, they're busy with the Adobe/Macromedia merger, and have very little extra resources they can throw at CS3:Universal.
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #78 of 81
They already have CS:3 Universal. They have shown it off at a few shows. Its just not finished yet. But I do agree, they should try their hand at a public beta ala Quark and MS. It would help Apple and frankly help Adobe get some sales they may not otherwise get until next year.
post #79 of 81
They need to announce that if you buy CS2 from September on, you'll get CS3 when it comes out.

Otherwise, Adobe's sales are going to tank between Fall '06 and Spring '07.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #80 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by Frank777
They need to announce that if you buy CS2 from September on, you'll get CS3 when it comes out.

Otherwise, Adobe's sales are going to tank between Fall '06 and Spring '07.

i agree, except that it seems like anyone who has needed any new features in the CS2 suite have already jumped on board. in other words, i'm not sure adobe would want to go through the trouble of managing the free upgrade path for what they would probably feel is a negligible number of users (comparatively speaking). might be helpful, though for some production studios who have been working with a few licenses up until now, and they could finish out there seats in one fell swoop, with the promise of upgrades.

p.s. um, everyone's throwing around this "CS3:Universal" like it's a shipping name. is it, or is it just something everyone thinks sounds good and that's what we're calling it now until we hear differently?
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Adobe may not deliver native Intel Mac support until 2007