Originally Posted by hmurchison
This was in response to Adobe jacking up Postscript licensing fees. Apple was content to feed Adobe the licensing fees and happily co-exist but when Adobe got greedy Appel was like "The hell with you guys we can create True Type and Quickdraw GX" and that's what they did. Apple killed off Quickdraw GX and Adobe is fairly lucky because it was cleaner in structure than Postscript and had some nice features. It could have grown into something nice.
The fees were not cheap, but for the professional environment they were intended for, they weren't bad. At any rate, they didn't effect either Apple or MS, they simply wanted to break Adobe's lock.
Quickdraw wasn't a competitor to Postscript, it was a competitor to Open GL. It was much superior to Open GL, but at the time, Apple was rapidly going downhill, and so it received little support anywhere.
I think Adobe needs competition in a few areas. I'm not afraid that they will get pissed and leave. Look what happned in Digital Video. Adobe leaves the platform...Apple rakes in the cash with Final Cut Pro and friend and looky here. Adobe's coming back. Avid came back. It is Apple's job to create a viable ecosystem for Macs. If they do well...Adobe does well. Imagine that.
That's partly correct. Adobe came back with Premiere because it now has a product to compete, which it didn't have before, as Premiere was intended for amateurs, and just slid into the pro market by accident.
You are correct to a certain extent about a strong Apple market, but even there, Adobe can be ambivalent. As long as MS doesn't come out with its suite that it's been showing around for almost two years now, Adobe doesn't really need Apple.
If Apple disappeared tomorrow, all of Adobe's customers would go wherever the program is selling. Adobe could move to Linux as well, and take many of its former Apple customers with it, as well as a number of its Windows customers. The ones who wouldn't leave would be those who NEED Office, and some other Windows compatible programs.
Adobe would like Apple to remain around to protect themselves from that possible threat from MS, but that's about all. It would be cheaper for them to not have to develop for OS X as well.
At this point in time I don't know of ANY competing product that will be able to match Adobes CS Suite. Back in the day you had Macromedia Xres, TIFFany and Live Picture as Photoshop competitiors. Today you have GIMP
Yes. that's my opinion as well.
Apple IMO only needs to work on a solid Image Editor ala Photoshop. They need to target %10 of the image vertical market. This keeps the pressure on Adobe and allows Apple to further OS X API in support of ALL image programs. Adobe will never be able to create the perfect Mac application IMO. They have to have a fairly neutral codebase.
Apple's program needs to have a certain new look towards image editing. It should support Core technolgies in OS X. Toss in support for HDRI and wavelet compression. Launch a new painting technology (or buy Painter code). I wish I could articulate what needs to happen so much better. I'm not a graphics pro but I realize one thing.
Again, you seem to think that it will just take one good program. It's far more than that. PS is no longer just one good program. Any support for its own tech that Apple utilizes can be utilized by Adobe as well, if they find that it has a real advantage.
I agree about Painter. It is one of the various programs that Apple had the opportunity to buy over the years as it was sold, and then again, resold. It's also one of the reasons why I don't think Apple is interested. If Apple had bought all of the programs it could have, it would have had a competitor years ago, when there would have been a better chance. With Adobe now controlling Flash, it will make it even harder. Another thing Apple could have done. With Macromedia, Apple would have been in a much stronger position in graphics, program creation, and in web graphics standards with the ownership of Flash, the most used web graphics standard of all. But, again, Apple chose not to compete.
If you attempt to learn a second language the ceiling to your potential is the point in which you yourself cannot tell where you are saying a word slightly different.
In turn...if Photoshop "feels" like the perfect application to you then you have locked yourself away from the possibility of finding out new ways to edit/create images. That's what is scary to me about monopolies.
Final Cut Pro teaches us slightly different ways to edit and produce video content. I'm glad that for this as Avid's way is Avid's way but there are other ways that may be more suitable.
I get what you are saying, I just don't think it's enough. If FCP wasn't such a good program out of the box, when it first came out, it wouldn't have mattered. Now it's a suite.
Having used PS from the beginning, as well as a slew of others, I can say that it isn't the perfect program, but it is by far, the best program (for its purpose).
And despite the meanderings of some detractors we pull in here from time to time, no pro I have known over the years would trade it in for anything else. And the new, useful, and sometimes revolutionary, features, just keep on coming.
The program now is much easier to use for beginners, who will get good results without even trying, than much simpler versions were in the past. Adobe keeps looking at users at both ends of the user curve.