or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Adobe Creative Suite 3.0 due in first quarter of 2007
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Adobe Creative Suite 3.0 due in first quarter of 2007

post #1 of 33
Thread Starter 
Exclusive: Adobe Systems plans to introduce its much-anticipated Creative Suite 3.0 software bundle towards the end of the first quarter of 2007, AppleInsider has learned.

People familiar with the software maker's plans say the suite is currently tracking for a release towards the end of March, ahead of the 2007 Photoshop World conference scheduled for April 4-6 at the John B. Hynes Convention Center in Boston, Mass.

The rumblings are contrary to comments from Adobe chief executive Bruce Chizen, who in a March 2006 interview with Forbes magazine said the San Jose-based company would not launch the next generation suite until the second quarter of 2007.

Mixing the best of both worlds

Code-named Banana Split, Creative Suite 3.0 will offer the first versions of popular applications like Photoshop and Illustrator that will run natively on both PowerPC- and Intel-based Macintosh systems from Apple Computer.

It will also mark the first formal integration of products Adobe acquired from rival Macromedia in its $3.4 billion acquisition of the company last year.

Image Ready booted for Fireworks

According to those people familiar with Adobe's plans, Macromedia's Dreamweaver will replace Adobe's GoLive as the suite's primary web development tool.

Similarly, those same people say that Adobe ImageReady, which has been packaged side-by-side with Photoshop since version 2.0, will get the boot in favor of Macromedia's Fireworks bitmap and vector image editor.

Multiple package bundles on tap

Company documents shown to AppleInsider also suggest that Adobe will market several different Creative Suite 3.0 bundles, each of which will include a different assortment of creative applications.

The current version of Adobe Creative Suite, version 2.3, is available in just two bundles: Standard and Premium.

CS3 adoption rate looks promising

In a recent poll conducted during the September Photoshop World conference, 87 percent of graphics professionals said there is a greater than 50 percent likelihood they will purchase Creative Suite 3.0 within 12 months of release.

The 2006 conference, which attracted approximately 3,000 attendees, was the largest yet in its history.
post #2 of 33
Hopefully one of those bundles will be a simple Photoshop+Dreamweaver package. I guess I'll start saving now.
post #3 of 33
While Fireworks does contain some rudimentary bitmap tools, it is far from a "bitmap graphics editor". The entire thing is based on vector editing, and that's the reason it is the best tool for designing web graphics. Hopefully they don't castrate Fireworks into some kind of bolt-on Photoshop tool and instead leave it as a stand-alone product.

I'm glad to see Adobe isn't just axing the competing MM products but is instead looking to keep the best of breed from both sides of the fence. While the loss of competition is alarming, at least it's not a total screwjob.
Anyone for pie?
Reply
Anyone for pie?
Reply
post #4 of 33
Flash and Director are also getting new versions (though maybe not in CS3).

A bundle of Photoshop, Illustrator/Freehand, Flash, Dreamweaver and Director would be very welcome With a big discount for those who already own old versions.

And don't force people to own a really recent version: some of us have been waiting for Universal and have kept apps 1-or-2 versions old at the time of the Intel announcement.

Let me dream
post #5 of 33
Man, i've missed Fireworks. Glad to see it getting the credit it deserves. Like ImageReady, I'm sure it will be treated as a seperate program.
post #6 of 33
They are trying to pull an apple...

Tell everyone they won't be releasing till 2nd quarter than surprising everyone in the 1st quarter... much like apple did with intel comps. We'll see. They are definitely welcome to release it earlier than expected!

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #7 of 33
Wow!!! As a webdeveloper that makes me extremely happy that adobe is booting imageready for fireworks! I've used fireworks since 1998. I've always loved it. I think it's much more intuitive and more powerful than imageready. I'll definitely welcome an intel native version. Now I see the light on Macromedia being purchased... kill flash and I'll be one happy dev.

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #8 of 33
Hope they can do something with the bad Dreamweaver interface. I've used GoLive since before it was an Adobe product but Dreamweaver confuses the hell out of me. Sad to see the end of Golive.
post #9 of 33
kerryb, agreed; emig647, ditto. Though, I'd way-still-dude prefer Adobe's interface over _any_ of the multitudinous incarnations of Macromedia interfaces.

Yeah.

It'll be good.
post #10 of 33
Yes, the demise of GoLive is a bit sad.

While I'm sure someone will point out that it isn't being completely killed, I doubt the app will get the attention it needs.

Rumour has it though, that Quark is planning to introduce a new product on October 26th.
I think the product might be a competitor either in the area of Image Editing or in Web Design.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
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 #11 of 33
what about freehand?
post #12 of 33
I am hoping for a mix of flash and Livemotion 8)
post #13 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777

Rumour has it though, that Quark is planning to introduce a new product on October 26th.
I think the product might be a competitor either in the area of Image Editing or in Web Design.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

that's actually quite sad. should be funny to see what it is though. i can't imagine even quark is arrogant enough to believe they can compete with photoshop.
post #14 of 33
Wonder how many CS3 versions they gonna ship. After doing 'an Apple', are they gonna do a 'Vista' by delivering 124 different versions of CS3 (Standard, Medium, Pro, Web, Animation, Whatever... ) ?
Adobe has so many software packages now ... That's not necessarily a bad thing, 'cause it gives you a choice. Do you want PS, AI, Acrobat, Flash and Director ? Or do you want to keep it simple with just AI, PS and Flash ? ...

I, for one, want it all. With the 'CS3 Godzilla Jumbo' version. Yeah !
post #15 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by emig647

Wow!!! As a webdeveloper that makes me extremely happy that adobe is booting imageready for fireworks! I've used fireworks since 1998. I've always loved it. I think it's much more intuitive and more powerful than imageready. I'll definitely welcome an intel native version. Now I see the light on Macromedia being purchased... kill flash and I'll be one happy dev.

Always thought the Fireworks interface was a bit crappy in comparison personally although that's mostly because I more regularly use Photoshop and all it's plugins. Fireworks v8 though was much nicer than previous incarnations, as was Dreamweaver 8. Before that they'd become very stale and full of cruft that needed pruning out.

It'll be interesting to see how well the merger goes so as to bring the best bits of Adobe and Macromedia together and not alienate long time users of either.

I also hope the stability is there. DW8 was terrible when it was first released. It took them a couple of updates to get some stability in there.
post #16 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777

Rumour has it though, that Quark is planning to introduce a new product on October 26th.
I think the product might be a competitor either in the area of Image Editing or in Web Design.

Judging by their previous attempts at putting Quark files on the web I do hope not. Back when I was publishing dead trees, our designer at the time did a conversion of a print layout to html using Quark's tools. What a mess!
post #17 of 33
</dream mode:on>
I would love it if Adobe would create a menu system of packaging CS3 where you can customize your package to fit your needs, with discounted pricing for future add-ons to package purchases.

Do it as a download only service, or for an additional fee they burn you a DVD and send it out.
</dream mode:off>
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
post #18 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdcfsu

Hopefully one of those bundles will be a simple Photoshop+Dreamweaver package. I guess I'll start saving now.

Me thinks we'll all be paying big time for any incarnation of CS3, be it upgrade or full version. Adobe knows professionals are salivating won't even bat an eye at paying a higher than normal price.
Time to load up on Adobe stock. 8)
post #19 of 33
YES!!!! YES!!!! YES!!!! NOW I CAN FINALLY GET MY INTEL-MAC!!!!!!!! I hope the next gen and chips will be available when this new CS3 comes out! TWO UPGRADES AT ONCE!!! Wouldn't that be great!!
post #20 of 33
I wonder what we will see as far as end user plugins: I really hope we see a light weight version of Adobe reader in stead of loading the entire app in a web window, kindof like what flash can do, a fast and seamless inline integration with the option to open the PDF in the full app if needed.
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 #21 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer

I wonder what we will see as far as end user plugins: I really hope we see a light weight version of Adobe reader in stead of loading the entire app in a web window, kindof like what flash can do, a fast and seamless inline integration with the option to open the PDF in the full app if needed.

ie. Like Preview already does? 95% of the time Preview works just fine for me, especially online. If Apple can add later PDF features to their PDF support (eg. forms support), I can't see anyone using Acrobat Reader by choice. Full Acrobat is a different story of course and you have to wonder if Apple isn't getting closer to replacing that too. I've replaced some tasks I was using Acrobat for with PDF workflows.

I wonder if there'll be some way of running PPC Photoshop plugins too, otherwise it's going to be an expensive upgrade upgrading to CS3 if you've also got to upgrade AlienSkin, Extensis/OnOne and all the other plugins that many people rely on.
post #22 of 33
1: Freehand? Freehand will be sold to Apple who will make it the best vector-editing app ever.

2: Steve Jobs is also gonna want to meet with me on a regular basis to find out what other business deals and design ideas I have for him.

3: CS3 will be out earlier then expected.

4: None of the above.
post #23 of 33
I can live without Word on a Mac Pro, at least for a while. But like everyone else who does design for a living, I crave the day when we have a bug free universal version of Dreamweaver on hand, along with Photoshop and siblings, including After Effects. The bug-free part of this equation is almost as great a concern to me as having Intel native apps themselves ... because in at least one obvious respect this will be the first iteration of the products. For those of you who are knowledgeable about recompiling software, are my concerns unfounded? ( I hope so.)
post #24 of 33
I repeat, I hope so.
post #25 of 33
I don't think it is a simple matter of recompile. I think for Office and these apps, all of which were likely made without Xcode it means transitioning their code to a new development environment and different compilers.

maybe someone else can talk about what is involved.

I wonder how much it complicates cross platform development for Adobe. Previously I would think they could do Mac and Win in something like Codewarrior, Now they can't, right? Can a developer speak to this?
post #26 of 33
I don't know, but six or seven years ago, they made a similar application compiling for both 680x0 and PowerPC processors. I don't know that this is necessarily more OS-based, or what, or if I'm simply talking out my um...
post #27 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by junkie

I don't think it is a simple matter of recompile. I think for Office and these apps, all of which were likely made without Xcode it means transitioning their code to a new development environment and different compilers.

maybe someone else can talk about what is involved.

I wonder how much it complicates cross platform development for Adobe. Previously I would think they could do Mac and Win in something like Codewarrior, Now they can't, right? Can a developer speak to this?

It can complicate things a lot if the applications were dependent on Codewarrior. I think the way that Codewarrior worked was it included its own set of interface libraries (GUI toolkit) like X11, Java AWT & Swing, Qt (not quicktime), Cocoa, Carbon (certain frameworks are more than just GUI toolkits) etc. GUI toolkits are good for cutting down the work of a programmer but they can make code harder to port if the APIs aren't there.

This is why it's easier for Apple to include the X11 app than get developers to port X11 apps to use Cocoa. With the lack of interface libraries in Codewarrior (not sure if that's through license restrictions or code incompatibility), this means that the Adobe software is going to have to undergo some sort of interface rewrite.

I suspect the biggest task at hand is getting new developments into CS3 to make it sellable on both platforms as well as optimizing it fully for both x86 and ppc architectures. The trouble here is that Codewarrior used the Motorola compilers which are better than the GCC that Xcode uses.

I don't think that's a huge issue because Adobe will now see that PPC is dead for Mac users so optimizing for it is not a priority and the Intel compilers will be able to plug into Xcode and they make better x86 code than GCC too.

The things that Adobe has on its plate right now are merging Macromedia's products with their own to make some really killer apps, optimizing these apps for x86 Mac and PC and probably looking at ways to take advantage of frameworks in OS X and Vista like hardware acceleration. It's not unreasonable to expect a few months of development for a major suite of apps like that.

It's just that they should've started sooner and Apple should've fixed Xcode quicker. It was pretty bad at the beginning. The difference between Xcode and Codewarrior was like OS 9 and OS X in terms of snappiness.
post #28 of 33
Ok so this is what I figured. It sounds like a *lot* of work. And think of what it does to their workflow. If they could make both Windows and OSX PPC in CW and now must use Xcode for Mac Universal and CW for Windows, it just does not sound very good. I bet we will start to see some differences come in between the Mac and Win apps - which would suck.

Seems like more than a few months of work. Sounds like up to a year. i doubt these ship as soon as people hope and it will take a while for them to settle down - if they ever really do. Willing to bet we see a differentiation start in the same way we do for MS Office.
post #29 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by junkie

Ok so this is what I figured. It sounds like a *lot* of work. And think of what it does to their workflow. If they could make both Windows and OSX PPC in CW and now must use Xcode for Mac Universal and CW for Windows, it just does not sound very good. I bet we will start to see some differences come in between the Mac and Win apps - which would suck.

Seems like more than a few months of work. Sounds like up to a year. i doubt these ship as soon as people hope and it will take a while for them to settle down - if they ever really do. Willing to bet we see a differentiation start in the same way we do for MS Office.

The key for Apple is to continue innovating, to continue receiving high marks in customer satisfaction, to continue as a platform for the creative individual / office, to continue to release cutting edge hardware, and to continue the slow but (I think) inevitable march toward greater market share. When Apple-generated apps like Keynote so vastly — and simply — trump the stuff produced by Redmond, people take note and often make the switch. The folks at Adobe know that the Mac market is big and will likely grow. As long as Apple continues to flourish, Adobe will be loathe to allow for much product differentiation.
post #30 of 33
The other problem for Adobe is they've got Windows Vista to contend with at the same time as moving development to XCode on OSX.

Adobe's applications generally use very, very little of the operating system's capabilities. On Windows XP and previous, this didn't really matter as it was technically limited with very few graphics APIs that would be useful for things like Photoshop and Illustrator (No, DirectX isn't useful).

On OSX, we've seen gradual improvements in the graphics API such that you can do realtime effects with the OS now.

Adobe's applications, using the CPU to do everything were looking like they belonged to the previous century on OSX.

With Windows Vista, they've got similar graphics functionality in the OS now as in OSX. It remains to be seen if Adobe use it.

With the user interfaces diverging from the classic Adobe style in both Windows and OSX it'll also be interesting to see if they keep their own UI library and maintain cross platform similarity or use more OS specific features and design.

Of course, we might just see them ship a warmed over CS2. Most people can't tell the difference between Photoshop 7 and CS2 so they'd be changing a habit of a lifetime.

Same goes for Microsoft and Office too.

Both need to step up to the plate and use the OS functionality instead of the slow compatibility frameworks they've relied on in the past.
post #31 of 33
So Adobe has to:

1. add new features, since CS3 is a major update
2. integrate the newly bought apps in CS
3. build universal apps of all their apps, incl. Macromedia's, and optimising for Vista as well.

It wouldn't surpirse me if this will be the most buggy upgrade since Adobe's exsitence, and if it wasn't: hats off.
post #32 of 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegisdesign

The other problem for Adobe is they've got Windows Vista to contend with at the same time as moving development to XCode on OSX.

Adobe's applications generally use very, very little of the operating system's capabilities. On Windows XP and previous, this didn't really matter as it was technically limited with very few graphics APIs that would be useful for things like Photoshop and Illustrator (No, DirectX isn't useful).

On OSX, we've seen gradual improvements in the graphics API such that you can do realtime effects with the OS now.

Adobe's applications, using the CPU to do everything were looking like they belonged to the previous century on OSX.

With Windows Vista, they've got similar graphics functionality in the OS now as in OSX. It remains to be seen if Adobe use it.

With the user interfaces diverging from the classic Adobe style in both Windows and OSX it'll also be interesting to see if they keep their own UI library and maintain cross platform similarity or use more OS specific features and design.

Of course, we might just see them ship a warmed over CS2. Most people can't tell the difference between Photoshop 7 and CS2 so they'd be changing a habit of a lifetime.

Same goes for Microsoft and Office too.

Both need to step up to the plate and use the OS functionality instead of the slow compatibility frameworks they've relied on in the past.

Does the move to 64 bit platforms add any significant problems to Adobe's development cycle?

How about the move to dual core processors?

Just wondering if maybe we are seeing a lot stuff come at the software developers all at once coupled with consumers who expect it all to work instanteously.

And besides, isn't Adobe's product dev cycle usually 18 months?
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
post #33 of 33
64bit and multi threading is the least of their issues and they were expecting that long before the Intel switch anyway.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Adobe Creative Suite 3.0 due in first quarter of 2007