Analyst rumor: Adobe to launch Creative Suite 3 in May

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 48
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:

    Not really. I can tell you from the perspective of one in the industry that few were jumping ship.



    What was happening was that many new start-ups, or individual users, went with Windows from the beginning.



    I'm sure their were die hard Mac fans who wouldn't give up until the last moment.



    You are right that much of Windows growth was in people purchasing their first computers.



    Apple's largest developers were in a flurry of porting apps over to Windows. Some in preparation to abandon the Mac altogether. I don't have hard numbers but without a doubt a looking at evidence of what was going on significant number of Mac users switched to Windows.



    Anecdotally I'm hearing many stories of people who say they used to use a Mac and are now either buying their first Mac in 10 years or really interested in buying one.
  • Reply 42 of 48
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell


    I'm sure their were die hard Mac fans who wouldn't give up until the last moment.



    You are right that much of Windows growth was in people purchasing their first computers.



    Apple's largest developers were in a flurry of porting apps over to Windows. Some in preparation to abandon the Mac altogether. I don't have hard numbers but without a doubt a looking at evidence of what was going on significant number of Mac users switched to Windows.



    Anecdotally I'm hearing many stories of people who say they used to use a Mac and are now either buying their first Mac in 10 years or really interested in buying one.



    I'm not talking about die hard Mac fans. I'm talking about businesses, and professionals. You don't switch your business over so easily. There's a tremendous amount of expense involved, including training, and finding equivalent apps and hardware. Few businesses in the publishing, graphics, or photo industries switched. But, as I said new ones simply started on Windows.
  • Reply 43 of 48
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,839member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Allen Wicks


    Adobe still owns the (old) graphics editing space and no new app, including Aperture, is attacking it in any meaningful way. Adobe is not "surrendering Photoshop's market to Apple."



    Um, yeah. Which is why I said:



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Frank777


    I do find it hard to believe, though, that Adobe would just surrender Photoshop's market to Apple.



  • Reply 44 of 48
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross


    Your statement is about as absurd as his.



    According to you then, Adobe should have had CS3 available in about 3 months.



    Give me a break!



    Calling something absurd, and putting false statements in someone else's mouth does not constitute a rebuttal (although I'd call it "fair and balanced" ). In programming, it is often easier to work from a well defined algorithm / tight HLL piece of code than to translate from one final implementation to another. To translate from one assembler optimisation of an algorithm to another functionally identical assembler optimisation is notoriously difficult. Add to that the sheer size of the photoshop codebase and the regression testing alone blows out to an unreasonably long period of time. As I said previously, it's integration, not individual features that is the difficult part. On the commercial side, adobe probably ships more copies of photoshop et al by delaying the CS3 version, simply because that by the time it comes around, all the intel mac crowd will have bought CS2 mac, CS2 windows, and then CS3. There is money to be made by screwing your customers.



    -t
  • Reply 45 of 48
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tag Me Back


    Calling something absurd, and putting false statements in someone else's mouth does not constitute a rebuttal (although I'd call it "fair and balanced" ). In programming, it is often easier to work from a well defined algorithm / tight HLL piece of code than to translate from one final implementation to another. To translate from one assembler optimisation of an algorithm to another functionally identical assembler optimisation is notoriously difficult. Add to that the sheer size of the photoshop codebase and the regression testing alone blows out to an unreasonably long period of time. As I said previously, it's integration, not individual features that is the difficult part. On the commercial side, adobe probably ships more copies of photoshop et al by delaying the CS3 version, simply because that by the time it comes around, all the intel mac crowd will have bought CS2 mac, CS2 windows, and then CS3. There is money to be made by screwing your customers.



    -t





    I haven't programmed for ten years, but I still understand a thing or two about it.



    Massive programs such as PS and its integration into the CS is not a matter of programming each bit by itself. Large turnover of code is often required, which then results in problems that must be resolved. It's an iterative process.



    There is good reason why it takes Adobe 18 months to two years to come out with a full upgrade to these products over their lifetime. This wait we are undergoing now is not a result of Adobe stalling, or being careless about its Mac customer base. The wait is no longer than the average has ever been.



    In fact, considering that they have had to move their entire code base from Metroworks to Xcode, they seem to be proceeding at a very good pace to match their usual upgrade transition time.



    They are hardly "screwing" their customers. PS sales are slow because of this as well as the sales of the suite. But, they are doing the right thing.
  • Reply 46 of 48
    Red Pill is the code name for the next version of Photoshop not Creative Suite. Adobe sneaked it (ie Red Pill) working on MacTel for about 5 seconds at the recent PhotoshopWorld. The thing about rumor sites like this is oh, I dunno, they don't bother to do any research of their own?
  • Reply 47 of 48
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross


    Massive programs such as PS and its integration into the CS is not a matter of programming each bit by itself. Large turnover of code is often required, which then results in problems that must be resolved. It's an iterative process.



    There's a term for this. It's called regression testing. You appear to be repeating, not rebutting my last post.
  • Reply 48 of 48
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tag Me Back


    There's a term for this. It's called regression testing. You appear to be repeating, not rebutting my last post.



    I wasn't rebutting your last post. I was adding to it.
Sign In or Register to comment.