Mel, given that Microsoft is about to unleash an assault on Adobe's graphics turf on Windows, I'd say that Adobe needs Apple now far more than is generally recognized.
With low end graphics work on both platforms going to other vendors, Adobe has only the high end to count on right now. If Redmond starts to cut seriously into the Windows high end over the next 18-36 months, Apple may be forced to respond with their own suite of graphics apps.
I seriously doubt Adobe could fight on both fronts simultaneously, even with the Macromedia acquisition.
I did mention that.
But, MS has been showing that suite around for almost three years now. Maybe now that Vista is here (almost), they will dust it off.
from what I've seen, it has some new features, such as auto almost everything, but done from a pro's point of view.. Integration with the Office suite is a point as well.
But, the other features don't compete.
MS might have the same problem Apple would have in competing, except for the Office compatibility.
We don't know what Adobe has up its sleeve. Even those of us who have been working with Adobe for a long while aren't let into most of what they are doing, though sometimes we will be hit with some ideas.
What I think is that we will see what happens when CS3 actually does come out. If Apple's Mac Pro sales take off, from that, then Adobe might be more inclined to see that as something good for them as well.
But, if the sales are just replacements, then it will be a different story.
The bleeding from Apple's long time supporters must stop and be reversed quickly.
Adobe can't, nor should they, attempt to move users to the Mac. That's up to Apple. The days of major programs being exclusively on the Mac platform are over. The computers, and OS must sell itself.
Apple must do more for its pro customers. They are worse than the PC companies at that. Apple has to stop thinking that those users will gravitate towards Apple just because they are. They have to LISTEN. That's something that Apple, particularly with Jobs, fails to do.
When the users come, Adobe can have the excuse to be more supportive. Don't forget that version 3 of PS Elements for Mac was supposed to be the last. When enough people cried out for it, they relented. They can be moved.
But, they need sales.
If the sales aren't there, neither is the support.
The days of major programs being exclusively on the Mac platform are over. The computers, and OS must sell itself.
That's fine. But the problem with Adobe has long been that their offerings don't take advantage of the platforms they are on. Adobe's lateness in embracing the Mac's Firewire port got Premiere run off the platform.
It's all well and good to say you'll add a feature when it's on both platforms, but it does leave you vulnerable to attack. I would agree that 64-bit isn't a key feature at this point, but I think this anxiety Mac users are beginning to show with Adobe has a lot of parallels with what happened to Quark.
CS3 will do well in sales simply because it offers new Intel functionality and many pro users will jump in the first half of 2007. That doesn't mean they will convert the whole shop, but every major pro house will have a machine running Leopard and CS3 within three months of launch.
We have Sawtooth machines here still running InDesign 2. There were hardly any reasons to upgrade InDesign in the last two revisions. The performance benefits of the Intel jump, along with sufficiently new functionality (for us, CS2+CS3) will make the case for most pros who didn't invest in Dual or Quad G5s.
That's fine. But the problem with Adobe has long been that their offerings don't take advantage of the platforms they are on. Adobe's lateness in embracing the Mac's Firewire port got Premiere run off the platform.
It's all well and good to say you'll add a feature when it's on both platforms, but it does leave you vulnerable to attack. I would agree that 64-bit isn't a key feature at this point, but I think this anxiety Mac users are beginning to show with Adobe has a lot of parallels with what happened to Quark.
CS3 will do well in sales simply because it offers new Intel functionality and many pro users will jump in the first half of 2007. That doesn't mean they will convert the whole shop, but every major pro house will have a machine running Leopard and CS3 within three months of launch.
We have Sawtooth machines here still running InDesign 2. There were hardly any reasons to upgrade InDesign in the last two revisions. The performance benefits of the Intel jump, along with sufficiently new functionality (for us, CS2+CS3) will make the case for most pros who didn't invest in Dual or Quad G5s.
That was part of the point I was making. It's simply too expensive to try that. It also gets other customers angry.
Rather than take their anger out on Apple or MS for not having the features to support, they take it out on the software houses who are stuck in the middle. Damned if they do, and damned if they don't.
What happened to Quark? They still have about two thirds of the installations, and that won't change soon. And I don't know anyone who likes the company.
Sure, most houses will try one machine with 10.5, and pop CS3 on it as well. But it will take a year or more before enough are running 10.5 to matter. Most CS3 installs will be running on 10.4, with some on 10.3 until then.
Home users will be the first to use 10.5. That's as it always is. Same with MS. All of the home machines will have Vista. No way to get anything else for it. But corporate will still insist on their new machines coming with XP for as long as two years from now.
InDesign is a good program. Ver. 2 made a difference, but I do find major improvements in 3. I'm sure the same will be found for 4. Depends on the work you do. Any feature that saves time is required. Any feature that allows you to do something you couldn't do before, means you must upgrade to keep up with the competition.
You just know your client will ask you to do for them, what that other client your competitor has, had done for them.
I was aware of v4, but I don't know where to look to confirm that they didn't intend to make a fourth version. The only thing I was aware of was that it was delayed several months relative to the Windows version. Maybe that was before the time I started paying attention to Mac news, or I just missed it.
I was aware of v4, but I don't know where to look to confirm that they didn't intend to make a fourth version. The only thing I was aware of was that it was delayed several months relative to the Windows version. Maybe that was before the time I started paying attention to Mac news, or I just missed it.
They said that ver. 3 was to be the final Mac version. They were persuaded to continue.
Comments
Mel, given that Microsoft is about to unleash an assault on Adobe's graphics turf on Windows, I'd say that Adobe needs Apple now far more than is generally recognized.
With low end graphics work on both platforms going to other vendors, Adobe has only the high end to count on right now. If Redmond starts to cut seriously into the Windows high end over the next 18-36 months, Apple may be forced to respond with their own suite of graphics apps.
I seriously doubt Adobe could fight on both fronts simultaneously, even with the Macromedia acquisition.
I did mention that.
But, MS has been showing that suite around for almost three years now. Maybe now that Vista is here (almost), they will dust it off.
from what I've seen, it has some new features, such as auto almost everything, but done from a pro's point of view.. Integration with the Office suite is a point as well.
But, the other features don't compete.
MS might have the same problem Apple would have in competing, except for the Office compatibility.
We don't know what Adobe has up its sleeve. Even those of us who have been working with Adobe for a long while aren't let into most of what they are doing, though sometimes we will be hit with some ideas.
What I think is that we will see what happens when CS3 actually does come out. If Apple's Mac Pro sales take off, from that, then Adobe might be more inclined to see that as something good for them as well.
But, if the sales are just replacements, then it will be a different story.
The bleeding from Apple's long time supporters must stop and be reversed quickly.
Adobe can't, nor should they, attempt to move users to the Mac. That's up to Apple. The days of major programs being exclusively on the Mac platform are over. The computers, and OS must sell itself.
Apple must do more for its pro customers. They are worse than the PC companies at that. Apple has to stop thinking that those users will gravitate towards Apple just because they are. They have to LISTEN. That's something that Apple, particularly with Jobs, fails to do.
When the users come, Adobe can have the excuse to be more supportive. Don't forget that version 3 of PS Elements for Mac was supposed to be the last. When enough people cried out for it, they relented. They can be moved.
But, they need sales.
If the sales aren't there, neither is the support.
Don't forget that version 3 of PS Elements for Mac was supposed to be the last. When enough people cried out for it, they relented. They can be moved.
Was that confirmed?
The days of major programs being exclusively on the Mac platform are over. The computers, and OS must sell itself.
That's fine. But the problem with Adobe has long been that their offerings don't take advantage of the platforms they are on. Adobe's lateness in embracing the Mac's Firewire port got Premiere run off the platform.
It's all well and good to say you'll add a feature when it's on both platforms, but it does leave you vulnerable to attack. I would agree that 64-bit isn't a key feature at this point, but I think this anxiety Mac users are beginning to show with Adobe has a lot of parallels with what happened to Quark.
CS3 will do well in sales simply because it offers new Intel functionality and many pro users will jump in the first half of 2007. That doesn't mean they will convert the whole shop, but every major pro house will have a machine running Leopard and CS3 within three months of launch.
We have Sawtooth machines here still running InDesign 2. There were hardly any reasons to upgrade InDesign in the last two revisions. The performance benefits of the Intel jump, along with sufficiently new functionality (for us, CS2+CS3) will make the case for most pros who didn't invest in Dual or Quad G5s.
Was that confirmed?
Sure.
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshopelmac/
That's fine. But the problem with Adobe has long been that their offerings don't take advantage of the platforms they are on. Adobe's lateness in embracing the Mac's Firewire port got Premiere run off the platform.
It's all well and good to say you'll add a feature when it's on both platforms, but it does leave you vulnerable to attack. I would agree that 64-bit isn't a key feature at this point, but I think this anxiety Mac users are beginning to show with Adobe has a lot of parallels with what happened to Quark.
CS3 will do well in sales simply because it offers new Intel functionality and many pro users will jump in the first half of 2007. That doesn't mean they will convert the whole shop, but every major pro house will have a machine running Leopard and CS3 within three months of launch.
We have Sawtooth machines here still running InDesign 2. There were hardly any reasons to upgrade InDesign in the last two revisions. The performance benefits of the Intel jump, along with sufficiently new functionality (for us, CS2+CS3) will make the case for most pros who didn't invest in Dual or Quad G5s.
That was part of the point I was making. It's simply too expensive to try that. It also gets other customers angry.
Rather than take their anger out on Apple or MS for not having the features to support, they take it out on the software houses who are stuck in the middle. Damned if they do, and damned if they don't.
What happened to Quark? They still have about two thirds of the installations, and that won't change soon. And I don't know anyone who likes the company.
Sure, most houses will try one machine with 10.5, and pop CS3 on it as well. But it will take a year or more before enough are running 10.5 to matter. Most CS3 installs will be running on 10.4, with some on 10.3 until then.
Home users will be the first to use 10.5. That's as it always is. Same with MS. All of the home machines will have Vista. No way to get anything else for it. But corporate will still insist on their new machines coming with XP for as long as two years from now.
InDesign is a good program. Ver. 2 made a difference, but I do find major improvements in 3. I'm sure the same will be found for 4. Depends on the work you do. Any feature that saves time is required. Any feature that allows you to do something you couldn't do before, means you must upgrade to keep up with the competition.
You just know your client will ask you to do for them, what that other client your competitor has, had done for them.
Sure.
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshopelmac/
I was aware of v4, but I don't know where to look to confirm that they didn't intend to make a fourth version. The only thing I was aware of was that it was delayed several months relative to the Windows version. Maybe that was before the time I started paying attention to Mac news, or I just missed it.
I was aware of v4, but I don't know where to look to confirm that they didn't intend to make a fourth version. The only thing I was aware of was that it was delayed several months relative to the Windows version. Maybe that was before the time I started paying attention to Mac news, or I just missed it.
They said that ver. 3 was to be the final Mac version. They were persuaded to continue.