Good question. I'd like to hear from people who would be affected by an Adobe defection.
If Adobe dropped Photoshop for MacOS it would be the last nail in the coffin for us mac users at the college where I teach. We are the largest employer in the country and the ONLY reason we have macs at all is the (outdated and ill informed) view of our managers and IT committees that macs are for "arty types". For them image making = Photoshop and Image making = Mac. If Photoshop goes I believe that inside 24 months every mac we have (over 200 now) would be replaced with PCs.
Can we really afford to go down the line of having to use apple only software? One of the biggest myths that PC people put forward is "Oh macs, yeah, well you just can't get the software for them".
IMO apple can't even optimise their own software properly or better test their system updates. I shudder at the thought of them attempting a PS Killer.
Adobe's execution of Premiere for Mac has already hurt us. How do we now work with Filmstrip files? via FCP?
No. the relationship (as perceived) is tighter than people are willing to admit. If Adobe pulls PS, the mac dies.
If Adobe dropped Photoshop for MacOS it would be the last nail in the coffin for us mac users at the college where I teach. We are the largest employer in the country and the ONLY reason we have macs at all is the (outdated and ill informed) view of our managers and IT committees that macs are for "arty types". For them image making = Photoshop and Image making = Mac. If Photoshop goes I believe that inside 24 months every mac we have (over 200 now) would be replaced with PCs
Apple loses either way. Adobe is making it known that PCs are every bit as good as Macs. Apple will eventually get caught with it's pants down. Not much stopping your school from moving to PC during the next tech refresh other than some Mac only plugins and other ancillary apps. Apples situation is precarious at best. I agree with Amorph, Adobes unified interface pretty much makes the switch easy from a useablility standpoint.
Quote:
Can we really afford to go down the line of having to use apple only software? One of the biggest myths that PC people put forward is "Oh macs, yeah, well you just can't get the software for them".
Can Apple afford not to? Adobe's eyes are firmly planted in growing PC sales. Apple cannot hope to continue to hope that suprise hits like the iPod will rescue them. I've seen what a programs like Final Cut Pro, OSX and others can do to invigorate the platform. Apple can't afford to have the best apps be cross platform if they hope to maintain their premium pricing.
Quote:
No. the relationship (as perceived) is tighter than people are willing to admit. If Adobe pulls PS, the mac dies.
Its that simple
"That that does not kill you makes you stronger"
I have a hard time fathoming how Adobe going kills anything.
Photoshop is really the only app without a decent competitor. The funny thing is everything in life requires balance. There is always an "North" for every "South" always and "Up" for every "down".
My point is for Adobe to be able to kill Apple. They have to be the ones to provide life to the platform. That clearly is not the case. Microsoft is in the same boat. They complained last year about disappointing Office sales. What that means to me is
1. People don't see the value and therefore do not purchase.
2. Bootlegging.
Apple's weakness is the entrenchment of Adobe and Microsoft apps and formats. The way to defeat both companies is to defeat their "Standards". That's the battle. Whether Apple is up for the challenge or not remains to be seen.
hmurchison... ok now I can see where you're from, in a consumer standpoint... but what you don't understand is adobe is deeply entrenched in the business market for media, internet content. While you can say that Photoshop is their big boy... PDF's and acrobat aren't far behind. EVERY publication uses PDF's now pretty much. As with Photoshop there isn't an alternative... look at any major pubs, billboards, and look at their submission requirements if you get ahold of and they mention pdf's made out of ONLY distiller.. with placed images of 172 dpi or higher out of quark or photoshop. Try sending something from something else and they will know.. because they use adobe prepress (I believe its under a different name now)... which tells them what programs I used...
Adobe is important to the mac platform. I can't stress it enough.
How many Mac-based designers upgrade their version of PS every year anyhow? I know support is an issue, but it's not that big of a deal on the Mac OS (seldom have problems, but I guess they're more frequent if one's working with insanely huge image files and gross publications like mags/newspapers). I've talked to a lot of professional photogs and graphic designers who have just stuck to Photoshop 4.01 and OS 9 because it works (that's many-a-pragmatic photog's saying - figure out what works, and don't change it unless you have to). These newer versions of Photoshop since 4 are compelling to those who are truly wizards with the program, but for the most part they're not compelling enough to individual business owners to upgrade frequently (however, I would have to say that the freely-modifiable text in PS 7 is very welcome).
Apple COULD and WOULD do better if forced to. And as someone above mentioned, their "lifeblood" is slowly shifting from graphics pros to consumers/music/digital video -- albeit again SLOWLY.
1) Apple re-creating Photoshop IS NOT a simple process. If you believe this then you underestimate the amount of time that goes into an application the size of Photoshop. Apple would be further ahead to purchase Adobe!
2) If Adobe quit selling Photoshop for Mac you underestimate the response from large graphics/design companies. I can tell you first hand that one of the largest graphics companies in the country would be PISSED at Adobe. This would be enough for management to find ANY solution other then an Adobe solution. This would be your decision: Replace hundreds of workstations/retrain employees or deal with the current installed version of Photoshop for a couple years until something is out to replace Photoshop on Mac (which would happen).
3) There are still work-flow issues when designing on Windows. While I will readily admit that Adobe has its own interface we can not forget the work-flow issues outside of Adobe apps.
The G5 is the key at this time. If the G5 continues to scale and perfom better you WILL see people migrate to OS X. Heck, I just purchased two dual G5's...one for one of my guys and another to throw into our database cluster for testing.
If you would have told me 1 year ago that I would be testing an OSX box in my database cluster I would have laughed. The Virginia Tech Cluster is THE BEST ad that Apple could have at this time to corporate IT. I still can not believe that I am going to have a G5 tower sitting-in with my Dell 1750's, 2600's and 2650's!
2) If Adobe quit selling Photoshop for Mac you underestimate the response from large graphics/design companies. I can tell you first hand that one of the largest graphics companies in the country would be PISSED at Adobe. This would be enough for management to find ANY solution other then an Adobe solution. This would be your decision: Replace hundreds of workstations/retrain employees or deal with the current installed version of Photoshop for a couple years until something is out to replace Photoshop on Mac (which would happen).
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Adobe would be persona non grata with myself and many photographers. I would possibly consider the Corel Photopaint app before moving back to PCs.
hmurchison... ok now I can see where you're from, in a consumer standpoint... but what you don't understand is adobe is deeply entrenched in the business market for media, internet content.
Yes I understand. I don't underestimate Adobes sway in these markests but the say is "A Dollar everyday beats 10 now and then" The consumer market is a force to be reckoned with as the iPod and iTMS so succinctly prove. I respect the graphics market but their power to affect the Mac platform is diminishing, giving way to the thousands of new Mac consumers every year. Apple simply cannot let itself or it's platform be disgraced by a any Vendor.
Quote:
1) Apple re-creating Photoshop IS NOT a simple process. If you believe this then you underestimate the amount of time that goes into an application the size of Photoshop. Apple would be further ahead to purchase Adobe!
You are perpetuating a fallacy that has endured far too long. I hear people wax poetic about the "Man Years" of code Adobe has. But you need only look to recent history. I proposed Apple create their own browser and was told that it was to "labor intensive". Less than a year later Safari comes. Keynote come from nowhere and already is in Powerpoints review mirror and gaining. Apple purchases Astarte and Spruce Tech and DVD SP 2.0 the child of both code comes. Yes creating an app from scratch would be difficult but Apple has access to code if they want it. TIFFany's developers work for Apple and it's code could form a nice framework. Apple wouldn't be starting from ground zero and given their recent fast moves I believe that it would take 3-5 years to reach parity with photoshop. The only reason why some feel Photoshop is the king of the hill is because they have nothing else to base their opinions on.
Many of us don't want to admit it but the truth is closer to Apple needs some sort of image editor. What I propose they do is create a small editor that is bundled with Final Cut Pro 5, ala Live Type and Soundtrack. This app would only come with FCP and would not have Print functions like PS. It would be primarily for using editing video frames, using layers and everything PS does as it's bread n butter tasks. Apple should not be beholden to abdicate image editing to pacify Adobe. They need to developer their own unique persona within the context of their pro apps.
Remember as cool as OSX is BeOS had the same potential but failed because it didn't have apps. Apple has the power and codebase ensure that they are never in a situation that Be was.
Apple is certainly developping a photoshop like software secretly, in case where Adobe decided to leave the mac market.
If Adobe do that, Apple will release it. Apple will loose some customers who will switch for the PC, but Adobe will loose also customers who will switch for the Apple software. In case of success, Apple can even sell his software for PC users to broke the Adobe's monopoly.
Quark use to be arrogant thinking that nobody can threaten them, Adobe clearly demonstrated, that it was not the case. Adobe certainly know this lesson, and should be cautious before leaving the mac market.
You are perpetuating a fallacy that has endured far too long. I hear people wax poetic about the "Man Years" of code Adobe has. But you need only look to recent history. I proposed Apple create their own browser and was told that it was to "labor intensive". Less than a year later Safari comes. Keynote come from nowhere and already is in Powerpoints review mirror and gaining. Apple purchases Astarte and Spruce Tech and DVD SP 2.0 the child of both code comes. Yes creating an app from scratch would be difficult but Apple has access to code if they want it. TIFFany's developers work for Apple and it's code could form a nice framework. Apple wouldn't be starting from ground zero and given their recent fast moves I believe that it would take 3-5 years to reach parity with photoshop. The only reason why some feel Photoshop is the king of the hill is because they have nothing else to base their opinions on.
I don't think I am perpetuating a fallacy. We are speaking of two different things...
1. Re-creating Photoshop from scratch (many years for core functionality)
2. Re-creating Photoshop based on a subset of pre-programmed functionality. (~1 year maybe 2 for core functionality)
Big difference! I would also propose that anyone not using the full breadth of Photoshop functionality would think that re-producing it would be simple. There are very few people even here that use the full functionality of Photoshop...just ask Deek (Some of you should know who I am talking about!)
Also, web browser != Photoshop, Keynote != Photoshop ... HUGE difference in the depth of functionality. Unless you are talking basic image editing (Photoshop LE or whatever it is called now).
2. Re-creating Photoshop based on a subset of pre-programmed functionality. (~1 year maybe 2 for core functionality)
Big difference!
I have one word for you (or four if you like):
GIMP.
The interface is "eh" and it lacks some important technologies like ColorSync (and CMYK, etc), but a good bulk of the code is there.
Yes, I can already hear the "but GIMP doesn't begin to compare with Photoshop" whines. I'll point those people squarely at Safari. Apple has done a damn fine job there.
Adding to the point about the difficulty of creating a graphics/raster platform, remember that TIFFany had two developers to write the whole thing. They actualy rewrote it completely for version 3 in time for the OS X developer previews. Again, it certainly had its probems, but the point is with modular and extensible Cocoa APIs, Quartz doing its fair share of heavy lifting, and with fairly independent standard graphics file formats (TIFFany's file format was simply encapsulated TIFF files), it's more a matter of money, time and some damn good marketing to create a viable competitor to PS.
There's no doubt that Photoshop is a significant app. that a majority of print and web designers know and use daily (me included). However, I believe that Adobe's market capitalization is too rich for an Apple aquisition (not without exposing Apple to takeover by removing their $4B "safety" account). Macromedia is a much more "digestible" company from Apple's perspective -- and if you'll recall, Apple purchased what became Final Cut Pro from Macromedia. There've been numerous rumors that indicate Microsoft's interest in aquiring Macromedia's products -- primarily Flash (talk about screwing Adobe...AND Apple). It seems to me that Apple should be seriously considering aquiring Macromedia (maybe then we'll get a snappy version of Dreamweaver! But I digress...). The one thing that keeps Apple from making such a move is the immediate loss of Adobe products on the Mac. If you've ever been to Seybold or a similar event, you know that both of these companies' cultures (Adobe and Macromedia) are infused with hate and annoyance at one another. If Apple acquired Macromedia, Adobe would (rightly?) see Apple as one of its mortal enemies. I think this is driving Adobe's strategy (along with the well-reasoned arguments by Amorph) as much as their annoyance with the iApps -- this, I believe, is the "uncertainty" Apple presents. I'm torn, myself, as to whether Apple should grab Macromedia (Flash, web market, viable alternatives to PSD and Illustrator) while they can to keep it out of Microsoft's clutches -- and piss off Adobe big time -- or if they should do what they can to keep Photoshop and Illustrator available to the creative market that uses Apples. It would be a risky move -- the "tea leaves" tell me it's a real possibility and that some of the things we're discussing here are factors in this scenario. Would this make Apple a stronger company?
don't even mention haha GIMP... god that app doesn't even pale in comparison to Photoshop.
There isn't an alternative for me... yes adobe probably lives on the rich enthusiats who buy photoshop to mess with but with its full functionality its difficult to find an alternative, in the pro market, there is only one and I can't recall its name had to mess with it in college made by SGI and i can't remember it now. As with photoshop you can't get the in depth of control in your colorspaces, layer functionality and blending, color control. CYMK, RBG, Lab, and HSB control, as well as now 16bit color depth. Trust me apple would make something for consumers and it'd piss off 85% of its business user base because of it. I can't tell how much some big corporations have invested in adobe on mac, for their core of their business. It'd literally strike a huge crack in the foundationn of apple. It'd be worser than microsoft just stopped developing office for mac. There just isn't a plethora (vocab tapes ) of alternatives for graphics editing like word processors.
don't even mention haha GIMP... god that app doesn't even pale in comparison to Photoshop.
Next time, read the post before firing off some dumbass reply.
Quote:
Originally posted by kraig911
Trust me apple would make something for consumers and it'd piss off 85% of its business user base because of it.
Yeah, Apple just SUCKS. That's why you use the platform, right? I mean, DVD Studio Pro, Final Cut Pro, A/G BLAST, Logic, XCode and Shake... they are all crappy consumer oriented products made by Apple.
Comments
It would be funny if this was all stirred up by Adobe honestly seeking a better Mac installer (from cheaper labor in India, natch).
Originally posted by Amorph
There seems to be a lot of anxiety around the state of the Apple/Adobe relationship, and this is far from the first time it's bubbled up.
It would be funny if this was all stirred up by Adobe honestly seeking a better Mac installer (from cheaper labor in India, natch).
Soooo true!
Originally posted by pensieve
Good question. I'd like to hear from people who would be affected by an Adobe defection.
If Adobe dropped Photoshop for MacOS it would be the last nail in the coffin for us mac users at the college where I teach. We are the largest employer in the country and the ONLY reason we have macs at all is the (outdated and ill informed) view of our managers and IT committees that macs are for "arty types". For them image making = Photoshop and Image making = Mac. If Photoshop goes I believe that inside 24 months every mac we have (over 200 now) would be replaced with PCs.
Can we really afford to go down the line of having to use apple only software? One of the biggest myths that PC people put forward is "Oh macs, yeah, well you just can't get the software for them".
IMO apple can't even optimise their own software properly or better test their system updates. I shudder at the thought of them attempting a PS Killer.
Adobe's execution of Premiere for Mac has already hurt us. How do we now work with Filmstrip files? via FCP?
No. the relationship (as perceived) is tighter than people are willing to admit. If Adobe pulls PS, the mac dies.
Its that simple
That would make sense
If Adobe dropped Photoshop for MacOS it would be the last nail in the coffin for us mac users at the college where I teach. We are the largest employer in the country and the ONLY reason we have macs at all is the (outdated and ill informed) view of our managers and IT committees that macs are for "arty types". For them image making = Photoshop and Image making = Mac. If Photoshop goes I believe that inside 24 months every mac we have (over 200 now) would be replaced with PCs
Apple loses either way. Adobe is making it known that PCs are every bit as good as Macs. Apple will eventually get caught with it's pants down. Not much stopping your school from moving to PC during the next tech refresh other than some Mac only plugins and other ancillary apps. Apples situation is precarious at best. I agree with Amorph, Adobes unified interface pretty much makes the switch easy from a useablility standpoint.
Can we really afford to go down the line of having to use apple only software? One of the biggest myths that PC people put forward is "Oh macs, yeah, well you just can't get the software for them".
Can Apple afford not to? Adobe's eyes are firmly planted in growing PC sales. Apple cannot hope to continue to hope that suprise hits like the iPod will rescue them. I've seen what a programs like Final Cut Pro, OSX and others can do to invigorate the platform. Apple can't afford to have the best apps be cross platform if they hope to maintain their premium pricing.
No. the relationship (as perceived) is tighter than people are willing to admit. If Adobe pulls PS, the mac dies.
Its that simple
"That that does not kill you makes you stronger"
I have a hard time fathoming how Adobe going kills anything.
Photoshop is really the only app without a decent competitor. The funny thing is everything in life requires balance. There is always an "North" for every "South" always and "Up" for every "down".
My point is for Adobe to be able to kill Apple. They have to be the ones to provide life to the platform. That clearly is not the case. Microsoft is in the same boat. They complained last year about disappointing Office sales. What that means to me is
1. People don't see the value and therefore do not purchase.
2. Bootlegging.
Apple's weakness is the entrenchment of Adobe and Microsoft apps and formats. The way to defeat both companies is to defeat their "Standards". That's the battle. Whether Apple is up for the challenge or not remains to be seen.
Adobe is important to the mac platform. I can't stress it enough.
I'd rather Adobe not f*** up in the first place... BUT Internet Explorer is dead and we've survived. Necessity is the mother of invention.
Barto
Apple COULD and WOULD do better if forced to. And as someone above mentioned, their "lifeblood" is slowly shifting from graphics pros to consumers/music/digital video -- albeit again SLOWLY.
1) Apple re-creating Photoshop IS NOT a simple process. If you believe this then you underestimate the amount of time that goes into an application the size of Photoshop. Apple would be further ahead to purchase Adobe!
2) If Adobe quit selling Photoshop for Mac you underestimate the response from large graphics/design companies. I can tell you first hand that one of the largest graphics companies in the country would be PISSED at Adobe. This would be enough for management to find ANY solution other then an Adobe solution. This would be your decision: Replace hundreds of workstations/retrain employees or deal with the current installed version of Photoshop for a couple years until something is out to replace Photoshop on Mac (which would happen).
3) There are still work-flow issues when designing on Windows. While I will readily admit that Adobe has its own interface we can not forget the work-flow issues outside of Adobe apps.
The G5 is the key at this time. If the G5 continues to scale and perfom better you WILL see people migrate to OS X. Heck, I just purchased two dual G5's...one for one of my guys and another to throw into our database cluster for testing.
If you would have told me 1 year ago that I would be testing an OSX box in my database cluster I would have laughed. The Virginia Tech Cluster is THE BEST ad that Apple could have at this time to corporate IT. I still can not believe that I am going to have a G5 tower sitting-in with my Dell 1750's, 2600's and 2650's!
It's actually going to be fun
2) If Adobe quit selling Photoshop for Mac you underestimate the response from large graphics/design companies. I can tell you first hand that one of the largest graphics companies in the country would be PISSED at Adobe. This would be enough for management to find ANY solution other then an Adobe solution. This would be your decision: Replace hundreds of workstations/retrain employees or deal with the current installed version of Photoshop for a couple years until something is out to replace Photoshop on Mac (which would happen).
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Adobe would be persona non grata with myself and many photographers. I would possibly consider the Corel Photopaint app before moving back to PCs.
hmurchison... ok now I can see where you're from, in a consumer standpoint... but what you don't understand is adobe is deeply entrenched in the business market for media, internet content.
Yes I understand. I don't underestimate Adobes sway in these markests but the say is "A Dollar everyday beats 10 now and then" The consumer market is a force to be reckoned with as the iPod and iTMS so succinctly prove. I respect the graphics market but their power to affect the Mac platform is diminishing, giving way to the thousands of new Mac consumers every year. Apple simply cannot let itself or it's platform be disgraced by a any Vendor.
1) Apple re-creating Photoshop IS NOT a simple process. If you believe this then you underestimate the amount of time that goes into an application the size of Photoshop. Apple would be further ahead to purchase Adobe!
You are perpetuating a fallacy that has endured far too long. I hear people wax poetic about the "Man Years" of code Adobe has. But you need only look to recent history. I proposed Apple create their own browser and was told that it was to "labor intensive". Less than a year later Safari comes. Keynote come from nowhere and already is in Powerpoints review mirror and gaining. Apple purchases Astarte and Spruce Tech and DVD SP 2.0 the child of both code comes. Yes creating an app from scratch would be difficult but Apple has access to code if they want it. TIFFany's developers work for Apple and it's code could form a nice framework. Apple wouldn't be starting from ground zero and given their recent fast moves I believe that it would take 3-5 years to reach parity with photoshop. The only reason why some feel Photoshop is the king of the hill is because they have nothing else to base their opinions on.
Many of us don't want to admit it but the truth is closer to Apple needs some sort of image editor. What I propose they do is create a small editor that is bundled with Final Cut Pro 5, ala Live Type and Soundtrack. This app would only come with FCP and would not have Print functions like PS. It would be primarily for using editing video frames, using layers and everything PS does as it's bread n butter tasks. Apple should not be beholden to abdicate image editing to pacify Adobe. They need to developer their own unique persona within the context of their pro apps.
Remember as cool as OSX is BeOS had the same potential but failed because it didn't have apps. Apple has the power and codebase ensure that they are never in a situation that Be was.
If Adobe do that, Apple will release it. Apple will loose some customers who will switch for the PC, but Adobe will loose also customers who will switch for the Apple software. In case of success, Apple can even sell his software for PC users to broke the Adobe's monopoly.
Quark use to be arrogant thinking that nobody can threaten them, Adobe clearly demonstrated, that it was not the case. Adobe certainly know this lesson, and should be cautious before leaving the mac market.
Originally posted by hmurchison
You are perpetuating a fallacy that has endured far too long. I hear people wax poetic about the "Man Years" of code Adobe has. But you need only look to recent history. I proposed Apple create their own browser and was told that it was to "labor intensive". Less than a year later Safari comes. Keynote come from nowhere and already is in Powerpoints review mirror and gaining. Apple purchases Astarte and Spruce Tech and DVD SP 2.0 the child of both code comes. Yes creating an app from scratch would be difficult but Apple has access to code if they want it. TIFFany's developers work for Apple and it's code could form a nice framework. Apple wouldn't be starting from ground zero and given their recent fast moves I believe that it would take 3-5 years to reach parity with photoshop. The only reason why some feel Photoshop is the king of the hill is because they have nothing else to base their opinions on.
I don't think I am perpetuating a fallacy. We are speaking of two different things...
1. Re-creating Photoshop from scratch (many years for core functionality)
2. Re-creating Photoshop based on a subset of pre-programmed functionality. (~1 year maybe 2 for core functionality)
Big difference! I would also propose that anyone not using the full breadth of Photoshop functionality would think that re-producing it would be simple. There are very few people even here that use the full functionality of Photoshop...just ask Deek (Some of you should know who I am talking about!)
Also, web browser != Photoshop, Keynote != Photoshop ... HUGE difference in the depth of functionality. Unless you are talking basic image editing (Photoshop LE or whatever it is called now).
Originally posted by Mike
2. Re-creating Photoshop based on a subset of pre-programmed functionality. (~1 year maybe 2 for core functionality)
Big difference!
I have one word for you (or four if you like):
GIMP.
The interface is "eh" and it lacks some important technologies like ColorSync (and CMYK, etc), but a good bulk of the code is there.
Yes, I can already hear the "but GIMP doesn't begin to compare with Photoshop" whines. I'll point those people squarely at Safari. Apple has done a damn fine job there.
Originally posted by Brad
I have one word for you (or four if you like):
GIMP.
I was thinking the same thing while I was posting. It has been a while since I have played with GIMP...maybe a year now!
There isn't an alternative for me... yes adobe probably lives on the rich enthusiats who buy photoshop to mess with but with its full functionality its difficult to find an alternative, in the pro market, there is only one and I can't recall its name had to mess with it in college made by SGI and i can't remember it now. As with photoshop you can't get the in depth of control in your colorspaces, layer functionality and blending, color control. CYMK, RBG, Lab, and HSB control, as well as now 16bit color depth. Trust me apple would make something for consumers and it'd piss off 85% of its business user base because of it. I can't tell how much some big corporations have invested in adobe on mac, for their core of their business. It'd literally strike a huge crack in the foundationn of apple. It'd be worser than microsoft just stopped developing office for mac. There just isn't a plethora (vocab tapes
Originally posted by kraig911
don't even mention haha GIMP... god that app doesn't even pale in comparison to Photoshop.
Next time, read the post before firing off some dumbass reply.
Originally posted by kraig911
Trust me apple would make something for consumers and it'd piss off 85% of its business user base because of it.
Yeah, Apple just SUCKS. That's why you use the platform, right? I mean, DVD Studio Pro, Final Cut Pro, A/G BLAST, Logic, XCode and Shake... they are all crappy consumer oriented products made by Apple.
Wait, that's right... You're wrong!
Barto