Adobe may not deliver native Intel Mac support until 2007

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 80
    fahlmanfahlman Posts: 696member
    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.
  • Reply 42 of 80
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member
    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?
  • Reply 43 of 80
    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.
  • Reply 44 of 80
    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/
  • Reply 45 of 80
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    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
  • Reply 46 of 80
    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.
  • Reply 47 of 80
    hirohiro Posts: 2,663member
    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 48 of 80
    pbg4 dudepbg4 dude Posts: 1,611member
    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.
  • Reply 49 of 80
    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)
  • Reply 50 of 80
    gugygugy Posts: 794member
    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!
  • Reply 51 of 80
    kedakeda Posts: 722member
    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.
  • Reply 52 of 80
    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.
  • Reply 53 of 80
    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?"
  • Reply 54 of 80
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,796member
    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.
  • Reply 55 of 80
    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.




  • Reply 56 of 80
    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
  • Reply 57 of 80
    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?



  • Reply 58 of 80
    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.
  • Reply 59 of 80
    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.
  • Reply 60 of 80
    sjksjk Posts: 603member
    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.