Of course, those who hate Apple will say that Samsung had it first and that Apple is just copying them but they won't realize that Apple will add it to the entire line not just one product in a category.
Could they stoop any lower? The NERVE of those people!
Apple is going to add it to the entire line. That means that Samsung was NOT first. Apple is NOT copying them.
1) Wacom is the definitive leader in this category;
2) If Apple were to produce an iPad with digitizing i.e. pressure sensitivity, I would expect them to do it right, therefor licensing Wacom's patents;
3) yes the Wacom tablets, and most of all the pens are patented up the Ying-to-the-Yang....so;
4) how is Samesung getting around those patents??? Are they?...
5)....and finally, if Apple were to do a pressure-sensative iPad, how long do you think it would take before they were sued by Wacom? 3-2-1... in seconds.
RE: Adobe and PS for iPad
1) just lame! As is the entire CS these days, mostly due to their insistence on using AIR as their installer engine. They can't even make that consistent between their assorted mess of software, updates, etc.
2) even sloppier than MS... and that's a pretty hard bar to reach!
RE: Apple "missing the boat", "losing", "Doomed"....etc.
JP Morgan's hardware analyst Mark Moskowitz has laid bare exactly how huge Apple has become lately, calling the company an actual "sector," not just a company any more. Of course, on paper, Apple is competing with other computer and device manufacturers like Dell and Samsung, but the numbers just don't make that comparison meaningful any more, says Moskowitz. Apple's stock is by far the largest single stock in the S&P 500 index, and when you compare the company's income to other tech sectors like Pharmaceuticals and Software as a whole, Apple's take actually lines up within the top 10.
3) yes the Wacom tablets, and most of all the pens are patented up the Ying-to-the-Yang....so;
4) how is Samesung getting around those patents??? Are they?...
5)....and finally, if Apple were to do a pressure-sensative iPad, how long do you think it would take before they were sued by Wacom? 3-2-1... in seconds.
1) Isn't Ying-to-the-Yang a subsidiary of Proview?
2) I assumed Wacom licensed their digitizer tech to Samsung.
1) just lame! As is the entire CS these days, mostly due to their insistence on using AIR as their installer engine. They can't even make that consistent between their assorted mess of software, updates, etc.
AIR is required only if you have an older Mac not on a current Mac running Lion. AIR is the fall back position. What would you rather, that Adobe acted like Apple and just said sorry you can't install CS on an older Mac?
EDIT: Actually you are correct that it does use AIR. My mistake. On our newer machines, it did not ask to install AIR because CS4 already installed it so upgrading to 5.5 it did not ask. On the older machines which we were upgrading from CS3 to CS5.5 skipping CS4 it asked to install AIR first. In any case I have not experienced any difficulty with any of their installers.
I'm not an english-native speaker, but I thought my 'if only' implied I already know/expect it to not have it
Actually I think your doubts about it happening soon did come across in your post. I was more getting at the why of the matter i.e. not as many people need /want it but some other posters (Soli and I believe Prof Peabody) indicate we may be able to get the best of both worlds at some point. Which would be great.
I'll take a wild ass guess and say- auf wiedersehen
So... if Apple "would" consider this idea, they "would" be second to the plate... uhm tablet, and the Fandroids would be correct in stating so.
Curious what Wacom would want from Apple for licensing/costs as opposed to Samsung???
I could live with it though I've been using a Wacom since ~1995 and have rarely if ever used a mouse for the last 10 years or so. I do like trackpads as an alternative though.
So... if Apple "would" consider this idea, they "would" be second to the plate... uhm tablet, and the Fandroids would be correct in stating so.
Curious what Wacom would want from Apple for licensing/costs as opposed to Samsung???
I could live with it though I've been using a Wacom since ~1995 and have rarely if ever used a mouse for the last 10 years or so. I do like trackpads as an alternative though.
I wonder about the cost to usability. Samsung has two(?) Galaxy Note sizes that have the Wacom digitizer but it's not in every Samsung tablet or phone.
For Apple to do this they'd have to put it in every iPad. For 2012 that's about 80-100 million units. Is that really needed? I don't think so unless Apple has a "killer app" that would make this very useful to more than just a niche market.
Of course they could create a special tablet that has the digitizer but that typically isn't how Apple releases products.
If Apple drops the ball most people call them out on it. FCPX is a great example of this.
Note the most popular product by Apple is the iPhone 4S which has an 8Mpx camera. That's a resolution of 3264x2448 yet this app can only edit images that are 1600x1600. That's less than 1/3 the number of pixels of the iPhone 4S.
But wait, it gets worse. Even images from the iPhone 4 can't be used because it shoots at 5Mpx which is 2592x1936 resolution. That's a problem because I can see many customers who want to edit images on their iPad are likely to be using an iPhone.
Uhuh there goes my excitement about a photoshopish App for the iPad. Your calculations are disheartening. I really do hope Adobe add's a bit more effort in doing this properly. 1600 X 1600 may be enough to create some OK looking invitation cards, but actual artistic content needs a lot more resolution. Not even an amateur photographer wants to be limited by this poor resolution.
1) Wacom is the definitive leader in this category;
2) If Apple were to produce an iPad with digitizing i.e. pressure sensitivity, I would expect them to do it right, therefor licensing Wacom's patents;
3) yes the Wacom tablets, and most of all the pens are patented up the Ying-to-the-Yang....so;
4) how is Samesung getting around those patents??? Are they?...
5)....and finally, if Apple were to do a pressure-sensative iPad, how long do you think it would take before they were sued by Wacom? 3-2-1... in seconds.
RE: Adobe and PS for iPad
1) just lame! As is the entire CS these days, mostly due to their insistence on using AIR as their installer engine. They can't even make that consistent between their assorted mess of software, updates, etc.
2) even sloppier than MS... and that's a pretty hard bar to reach!
RE: Apple "missing the boat", "losing", "Doomed"....etc.
Why Not putting Wacom on Apples easter shopping list? As far as I know they have no parallel projects running. This could be purely complementary and thus very lucrative.
Uhuh there goes my excitement about a photoshopish App for the iPad. Your calculations are disheartening. I really do hope Adobe add's a bit more effort in doing this properly. 1600 X 1600 may be enough to create some OK looking invitation cards, but actual artistic content needs a lot more resolution. Not even an amateur photographer wants to be limited by this poor resolution.
Well it is not like 1600 was all they could muster out of the code. Clearly it was a deliberate decision to only offer that resolution. Wonder why that was? Uh, maybe they are positioning it as an entry level version not to compete with their main platform. Remind you of any other company?
Well it is not like 1600 was all they could muster out of the code. Clearly it was a deliberate decision to only offer that resolution. Wonder why that was? Uh, maybe they are positioning it as an entry level version not to compete with their main platform. Remind you of any other company?
But when Apple limits something they typically do it to simply things between HW, SW and services, not complicate them. For instance, I expect that we get word of a 1080p AppleTV or 1080p content on iTunes Store the other will get updated aright about the same time. Also, when Apple's AirPort routers get 802.11ac or MBPs get 802.11ac I will expect the other to get updated around the same time.
I just don't get where these 2.5Mpx images would be coming from if even amateurs with camera phones are likely well above the maximum limit. Now if that is the maximum resolution for RAW images then the data size starts to make since but then I wonder why wouldn't they just limit the image to their file size instead of their resolution.
Oh and you can open up any resolution you just can't save it at more then 1600. Which is more then fine for the iPhone 4S if anyone has concerns. I mean my printer is only 1200dpi which is what this program is for, printing.
Erm, the 1,600 is pixel dimensions, not dpi. A 1,600 pixel image is good for lots of things. But at 72 dpi printing is not one of them.
But when Apple limits something they typically do it to simply things between HW, SW and services, not complicate them. For instance, I expect that we get word of a 1080p AppleTV or 1080p content on iTunes Store the other will get updated aright about the same time. Also, when Apple's AirPort routers get 802.11ac or MBPs get 802.11ac I will expect the other to get updated around the same time.
I was thinking of several other instances such as Lion not running on older Macs when hackers were able to do a workaround. Siri not on older phones when hackers were able to do a workaround. Where iBooks Author not able to run on older Macs when hackers were able to make a workaround. ML will only work on even newer Macs, where iPods have been crippled to make you upgrade to the next more expensive version, original iPad excluded for arbitrary reasons from certain software, and many, many other instances where arguably they are all designed to make you buy a new computer or device.
Not saying it isn't a good business move, only that Adobe limiting the resolution to 1600 doesn't seem to be out of character with that type of business model. Yet I still think that 8 MP is overkill for a phone, however Apple had to do it since the competition offered it first. I also stand by my original position that most iPhone pictures need to be cropped anyway which puts them closer to the range of the new PS app and also it is much more common for phone images to be used on the web and not as often in a high-res printing scenarios. If you need the full 8 MP from an image, that image can be saved and exported to some other editing application, but that in itself does not invalidate the new PS features and capabilities.
Even so you are speculating about iPhone photos not iPad which is the platform the PS software is running on. I can't remember the actual resolution of the iPad camera but I think it is really pretty low. So it could be argued that the 1600 limitation is in keeping with the resolution of the device it is running on and one of the unique features is using the device's camera to fill an area of the working composition.
I won't be crazy and say cs 5.5, but you would think there would be an app that is at least better than elements for the iPad. Nothing even gets close. One day...but not yet. If you want anything past amateur looking editing- desktop/laptops are still the only choice.
Well it is not like 1600 was all they could muster out of the code. Clearly it was a deliberate decision to only offer that resolution. Wonder why that was? Uh, maybe they are positioning it as an entry level version not to compete with their main platform. Remind you of any other company?
Yes I understand, it must be deliberate. I am afraid, that the reason is, that everything becomes too sluggish if the resolution is higher, what brings us back to the question, whether the code is good enough. It might also be the problem of only 1/2 a GB RAM. I don't know how well the flash drive can be used as scratch drive, since people (like me) use to fill their iPads up to 90% with content.
Comments
Their software is bloated, clunky and over priced.
Jobs pulled their pants down over Flash.
So...true to form they've written their software in Air not in a native iOS environment?
Lemon Bon Bon.
Adobe is to design, what Jay Leno is to comedy.
They're both dinosaurs.
I'd like to see Apple deliver 'MacPaint Retina' for the iPad 3.
Off topic a bit but 'MacDraw Retina' too please
Of course, those who hate Apple will say that Samsung had it first and that Apple is just copying them but they won't realize that Apple will add it to the entire line not just one product in a category.
Could they stoop any lower? The NERVE of those people!
Apple is going to add it to the entire line. That means that Samsung was NOT first. Apple is NOT copying them.
1) Wacom is the definitive leader in this category;
2) If Apple were to produce an iPad with digitizing i.e. pressure sensitivity, I would expect them to do it right, therefor licensing Wacom's patents;
3) yes the Wacom tablets, and most of all the pens are patented up the Ying-to-the-Yang....so;
4) how is Samesung getting around those patents??? Are they?...
5)....and finally, if Apple were to do a pressure-sensative iPad, how long do you think it would take before they were sued by Wacom? 3-2-1... in seconds.
RE: Adobe and PS for iPad
1) just lame! As is the entire CS these days, mostly due to their insistence on using AIR as their installer engine. They can't even make that consistent between their assorted mess of software, updates, etc.
2) even sloppier than MS... and that's a pretty hard bar to reach!
RE: Apple "missing the boat", "losing", "Doomed"....etc.
This just in:
JP Morgan: Apple is a sector unto itself
JP Morgan's hardware analyst Mark Moskowitz has laid bare exactly how huge Apple has become lately, calling the company an actual "sector," not just a company any more. Of course, on paper, Apple is competing with other computer and device manufacturers like Dell and Samsung, but the numbers just don't make that comparison meaningful any more, says Moskowitz. Apple's stock is by far the largest single stock in the S&P 500 index, and when you compare the company's income to other tech sectors like Pharmaceuticals and Software as a whole, Apple's take actually lines up within the top 10.
3) yes the Wacom tablets, and most of all the pens are patented up the Ying-to-the-Yang....so;
4) how is Samesung getting around those patents??? Are they?...
5)....and finally, if Apple were to do a pressure-sensative iPad, how long do you think it would take before they were sued by Wacom? 3-2-1... in seconds.
1) Isn't Ying-to-the-Yang a subsidiary of Proview?
2) I assumed Wacom licensed their digitizer tech to Samsung.
1) just lame! As is the entire CS these days, mostly due to their insistence on using AIR as their installer engine. They can't even make that consistent between their assorted mess of software, updates, etc.
AIR is required only if you have an older Mac not on a current Mac running Lion. AIR is the fall back position. What would you rather, that Adobe acted like Apple and just said sorry you can't install CS on an older Mac?
EDIT: Actually you are correct that it does use AIR. My mistake. On our newer machines, it did not ask to install AIR because CS4 already installed it so upgrading to 5.5 it did not ask. On the older machines which we were upgrading from CS3 to CS5.5 skipping CS4 it asked to install AIR first. In any case I have not experienced any difficulty with any of their installers.
I'm not an english-native speaker, but I thought my 'if only' implied I already know/expect it to not have it
Actually I think your doubts about it happening soon did come across in your post. I was more getting at the why of the matter i.e. not as many people need /want it but some other posters (Soli and I believe Prof Peabody) indicate we may be able to get the best of both worlds at some point. Which would be great.
I'll take a wild ass guess and say- auf wiedersehen
1) Isn't Ying-to-the-Yang a subsidiary of Proview?
No doubt
2) I assumed Wacom licensed their digitizer tech to Samsung.
Yeah! Yeah!... I should do my research first, because it is licensed by Samsung:
Samsung Galaxy Note uses a Wacom digitizer for precision stylus tracking
So... if Apple "would" consider this idea, they "would" be second to the plate... uhm tablet, and the Fandroids would be correct in stating so.
Curious what Wacom would want from Apple for licensing/costs as opposed to Samsung???
I could live with it though
Yeah! Yeah!... I should do my research first, because it is licensed by Samsung:
Samsung Galaxy Note uses a Wacom digitizer for precision stylus tracking
So... if Apple "would" consider this idea, they "would" be second to the plate... uhm tablet, and the Fandroids would be correct in stating so.
Curious what Wacom would want from Apple for licensing/costs as opposed to Samsung???
I could live with it though
I wonder about the cost to usability. Samsung has two(?) Galaxy Note sizes that have the Wacom digitizer but it's not in every Samsung tablet or phone.
For Apple to do this they'd have to put it in every iPad. For 2012 that's about 80-100 million units. Is that really needed? I don't think so unless Apple has a "killer app" that would make this very useful to more than just a niche market.
Of course they could create a special tablet that has the digitizer but that typically isn't how Apple releases products.
If Apple drops the ball most people call them out on it. FCPX is a great example of this.
Note the most popular product by Apple is the iPhone 4S which has an 8Mpx camera. That's a resolution of 3264x2448 yet this app can only edit images that are 1600x1600. That's less than 1/3 the number of pixels of the iPhone 4S.
But wait, it gets worse. Even images from the iPhone 4 can't be used because it shoots at 5Mpx which is 2592x1936 resolution. That's a problem because I can see many customers who want to edit images on their iPad are likely to be using an iPhone.
Uhuh there goes my excitement about a photoshopish App for the iPad. Your calculations are disheartening. I really do hope Adobe add's a bit more effort in doing this properly. 1600 X 1600 may be enough to create some OK looking invitation cards, but actual artistic content needs a lot more resolution. Not even an amateur photographer wants to be limited by this poor resolution.
RE: Digitizer capabilities
1) Wacom is the definitive leader in this category;
2) If Apple were to produce an iPad with digitizing i.e. pressure sensitivity, I would expect them to do it right, therefor licensing Wacom's patents;
3) yes the Wacom tablets, and most of all the pens are patented up the Ying-to-the-Yang....so;
4) how is Samesung getting around those patents??? Are they?...
5)....and finally, if Apple were to do a pressure-sensative iPad, how long do you think it would take before they were sued by Wacom? 3-2-1... in seconds.
RE: Adobe and PS for iPad
1) just lame! As is the entire CS these days, mostly due to their insistence on using AIR as their installer engine. They can't even make that consistent between their assorted mess of software, updates, etc.
2) even sloppier than MS... and that's a pretty hard bar to reach!
RE: Apple "missing the boat", "losing", "Doomed"....etc.
This just in:
JP Morgan: Apple is a sector unto itself
Why Not putting Wacom on Apples easter shopping list? As far as I know they have no parallel projects running. This could be purely complementary and thus very lucrative.
Just a thought.
Leno is the #1 ranked late night television comedian so your analogy is a bit flawed.
Actually works rather well since despite all it's flaws Photoshop is the #1 image editing program.
Uhuh there goes my excitement about a photoshopish App for the iPad. Your calculations are disheartening. I really do hope Adobe add's a bit more effort in doing this properly. 1600 X 1600 may be enough to create some OK looking invitation cards, but actual artistic content needs a lot more resolution. Not even an amateur photographer wants to be limited by this poor resolution.
Well it is not like 1600 was all they could muster out of the code. Clearly it was a deliberate decision to only offer that resolution. Wonder why that was? Uh, maybe they are positioning it as an entry level version not to compete with their main platform. Remind you of any other company?
Well it is not like 1600 was all they could muster out of the code. Clearly it was a deliberate decision to only offer that resolution. Wonder why that was? Uh, maybe they are positioning it as an entry level version not to compete with their main platform. Remind you of any other company?
But when Apple limits something they typically do it to simply things between HW, SW and services, not complicate them. For instance, I expect that we get word of a 1080p AppleTV or 1080p content on iTunes Store the other will get updated aright about the same time. Also, when Apple's AirPort routers get 802.11ac or MBPs get 802.11ac I will expect the other to get updated around the same time.
I just don't get where these 2.5Mpx images would be coming from if even amateurs with camera phones are likely well above the maximum limit. Now if that is the maximum resolution for RAW images then the data size starts to make since but then I wonder why wouldn't they just limit the image to their file size instead of their resolution.
1. Photoshop Lite Lite for the iPad - GREAT!!!
2. iPad 2 Only - Eh???
3. 1600px*1600px - WTF??
Oh and you can open up any resolution you just can't save it at more then 1600. Which is more then fine for the iPhone 4S if anyone has concerns. I mean my printer is only 1200dpi which is what this program is for, printing.
Erm, the 1,600 is pixel dimensions, not dpi. A 1,600 pixel image is good for lots of things. But at 72 dpi printing is not one of them.
But when Apple limits something they typically do it to simply things between HW, SW and services, not complicate them. For instance, I expect that we get word of a 1080p AppleTV or 1080p content on iTunes Store the other will get updated aright about the same time. Also, when Apple's AirPort routers get 802.11ac or MBPs get 802.11ac I will expect the other to get updated around the same time.
I was thinking of several other instances such as Lion not running on older Macs when hackers were able to do a workaround. Siri not on older phones when hackers were able to do a workaround. Where iBooks Author not able to run on older Macs when hackers were able to make a workaround. ML will only work on even newer Macs, where iPods have been crippled to make you upgrade to the next more expensive version, original iPad excluded for arbitrary reasons from certain software, and many, many other instances where arguably they are all designed to make you buy a new computer or device.
Not saying it isn't a good business move, only that Adobe limiting the resolution to 1600 doesn't seem to be out of character with that type of business model. Yet I still think that 8 MP is overkill for a phone, however Apple had to do it since the competition offered it first. I also stand by my original position that most iPhone pictures need to be cropped anyway which puts them closer to the range of the new PS app and also it is much more common for phone images to be used on the web and not as often in a high-res printing scenarios. If you need the full 8 MP from an image, that image can be saved and exported to some other editing application, but that in itself does not invalidate the new PS features and capabilities.
Even so you are speculating about iPhone photos not iPad which is the platform the PS software is running on. I can't remember the actual resolution of the iPad camera but I think it is really pretty low. So it could be argued that the 1600 limitation is in keeping with the resolution of the device it is running on and one of the unique features is using the device's camera to fill an area of the working composition.
Well it is not like 1600 was all they could muster out of the code. Clearly it was a deliberate decision to only offer that resolution. Wonder why that was? Uh, maybe they are positioning it as an entry level version not to compete with their main platform. Remind you of any other company?
Yes I understand, it must be deliberate. I am afraid, that the reason is, that everything becomes too sluggish if the resolution is higher, what brings us back to the question, whether the code is good enough. It might also be the problem of only 1/2 a GB RAM. I don't know how well the flash drive can be used as scratch drive, since people (like me) use to fill their iPads up to 90% with content.
It might also be the problem of only 1/2 a GB RAM.
Gee, you think so?