If you have any memory of the recent evolution of OS X, Adobe has bent over backwards for this platform:
2000 - 2002: Migration of suite from OS 9 to OS X, a completely new OS.
2005-2006: Migration from PPC/Codeweaver to Universal/Xcode. This required changing not just their code base, but their entire development process, using a yet unproven tool: XCode. They even helped Apple improve XCode during this process.
2008- Sorry, Adobe, we changed our mind: no 64-bit Carbon. This forced Adobe to move their entire suite to Cocoa for CS5.
Actually news of Apple's dropping 64-bit Carbon came out as early as Jun 12, 2007. IIRC Carbon was mainly to make going from OS9 to OS x easier so depending on the Carbon when even a non programmer like why self could see that it future was gloomy was just stupid.
The bottom line here is that Adobe gives each version of Creative Suite about an 18 to 24-month shelf life. That's how it's priced. And Adobe's customers, by and large, do the same.
Since there are many Pro customers who bought CS3 less than a year ago, they are rightly upset that support for the latest OS is being withdrawn.
Given that the bugs involved would seem to be fairly minor and easily remedied, Adobe has shot itself in the foot with their position. It reminds everyone of Quark's former arrogance.
Pixelmator is improving fast and GraphicConverter's makeover will likely be done by early 2010.
A year from now, someone at Adobe will look back at this and regret that they annoyed the Mac CS3 customer base for no apparent reason.
Pixelmator is improving fast and GraphicConverter's makeover will likely be done by early 2010.
A year from now, someone at Adobe will look back at this and regret that they annoyed the Mac CS3 customer base for no apparent reason.
For the everyday people that do basic photo editing, maybe if they dont want to buy Elements moving forward. No one is going to take Photoshop out of the Pro spotlight. Pro Tools is industry standard in audio, Photoshop is industry standard in graphics. Nothing is going to change that, period.
Meh. Just one of the many ways Apple rips off it's users. But look at it this way... at least they're products don't explode, catch fire, or get viruses.... Oh, wait a second....
For the everyday people that do basic photo editing, maybe if they dont want to buy Elements moving forward. No one is going to take Photoshop out of the Pro spotlight. Pro Tools is industry standard in audio, Photoshop is industry standard in graphics. Nothing is going to change that, period.
That's exactly what they said about Quark, circa 1999.
Your customers must love that you give them free support when they choose to upgrade, do you factor in buying new software to facilitate this free support of customer's new hardware requirements into the original price you charge? I wonder how that'd make those customers who don't choose to upgrade their sites feel that they've paid extra for no reason?
Not sure I'd feel comfortable working with a business plan that had such an uncertain future? but good luck to you.
Cool. Nothing personal of course if we won't work together. Neither will apple and adobe.
Other companies will update their apps for 10.6 tho. I don't think epson would let the drivers get stale on a printer you bought 18 months ago... Meaning you probably would not have to buy a new printer... although that could be much cheaper than an upgrade to cs4!
btw tho, still haven't heard exactly how buggy cs 3 will be on 10.6.
I think I may have a solution, albeit an inconvenient, cumbersome one. Install Leopard on one partition and install Snow Leopard on a second one. When you have software that is buggy running under Snow Leopard, boot up under Leopard.
I make this proposal because right now I have a copy of Leopard running on my Mini's hard drive, plus Vista under Bootcamp. In addition most of the time I run another copy of Leopard mounted on an external harddrive hooked up via firewire. It would be relatively easy to upgrade the version of Leopard on the Mini's drive to Snow Leopard and being as I now have a netbook running XP, the Vista on the Mini is pretty much pointless.
Another observation is that if Adobe were interested in serving their customers appropriately, they should offer a significant upgrade discount, even if for a limited time, for anyone providing proof of having purchased Snow Leopard. This would generate more cash in any event because without that discount, with the next CS mere months away, who is going to buy the thing? Since this is a situation that doesn't come up all the time, Adobe's regular pricing model would be unaffected by this gesture. It's win-win as far as I can tell.
Apple has released a Snow Leopard update for Aperture 2.x. There is no Snow Leopard update for Aperture 1.x, which supports compatibility with Mac OS X v10.5.
Frank, aren't we just talking about the difference between 12 months ago and 18 months ago? Perhaps 6 months is a bigger difference to you than to me. I'd consider both Apple and Adobe to be in the same ballpark when it comes to drawing the line on which software will support Snow Leopard. If I want to run the most up-to-date OS, then I should be willing to use the most up-to-date applications.
Frank, aren't we just talking about the difference between 12 months ago and 18 months ago? Perhaps 6 months is a bigger difference to you than to me. I'd consider both Apple and Adobe to be in the same ballpark when it comes to drawing the line on which software will support Snow Leopard. If I want to run the most up-to-date OS, then I should be willing to use the most up-to-date applications.
The difference is in the upgrade costs. Aperture is a sub-$100. upgrade, hence the lack of complaints.
I don't believe there is a single CS4 component that can be upgraded for $100. or less. That should buy more than a year of support.
What I don't understand is people's attitude that it's Adobe's job to support a user's choice to upgrade their OS?
They sold you software to work on Leopard, they still support that without complaining that you don't upgrade to the latest version of their software, yet you complain when you upgrade your OS immediately a new version is available??
I don't know of any company that charges for bug fixes, but then most stop fixing bugs caused by OS upgrades at a certain point; this seems like a fair businesses model to me, but others feel that Adobe should go on fixing bugs caused by their choice to upgrade to new OSs, then when questioned whether that's really Adobe' responsibility the point is made that it's not really a new OS, just a little upgrade, which people don't have a problem paying Apple for, so why should people not expect to pay for an upgraded Adobe product? Especially a previous generation product update.
I love free stuff; but I can't get my head around how some people expect free stuff, and then bleat when they don't get it!?
I think the bigger issue with CS# is that Adobe has forced us into buying the suites. Unfortunately for us we need the Master Collection because you can't mix and match. I would much rather have the individual apps but that would cost thousands more. I have absolutely no need for half the stuff in the Master Collection but what I do need is:
InDesign
Photoshop
Illustrator
Acrobat Pro
Flash Professional
Dreamweaver
You would have to buy the Web and the Design Suites and buy After Effects separately, which is what we did until CS4 when I just gave up. Now I'm considering returning to upgrading the single apps on an as needed basis, but it is a no win situation.
Dude. Have you heard of Adobe CS3 Design Premium? It includes exactly those apps and no more -- except naturally of course... Bridge and Version Cue. Do us a favour and do some research before you go out and buy stuff. I apologise if somebody already replied to this explaining the same thing.
If you're really a professional, and you've got a workstation (or several), then there's no reason your business is going to have to shut down because you can't upgrade to Snow Leopard. If you aren't on CS4 yet then you aren't concerned about being on the bleeding edge so there's NO reason for you to upgrade to Snow Leopard. Your business is functioning just as well today as it was last week. Get over it.
Some people are saying "Well I'm going to look at alternatives". What are you people talking about? If you're making a living from Adobe software, then nothing has changed from last week. You've still got a workstation that runs Adobe software (and I guess CS3 is fine for your purposes), and you can continue making a living just as well as you did last week. Is anyone actually saying that if Apple had delayed Snow Leopard by six months that their business would have collapsed because they couldn't run Snow Leopard with CS3? No, I think everyone would have been just fine running CS3 on Leopard, and there's nothing wrong with continuing to do that now.
By the way, as the owner of a $12,000 Apple Xserve RAID, and the manager of a business with several others, I can say I know EXACTLY how it feels to be abandoned by a vendor in a business critical situation. This doesn't even come close.
Comments
If you have any memory of the recent evolution of OS X, Adobe has bent over backwards for this platform:
2000 - 2002: Migration of suite from OS 9 to OS X, a completely new OS.
2005-2006: Migration from PPC/Codeweaver to Universal/Xcode. This required changing not just their code base, but their entire development process, using a yet unproven tool: XCode. They even helped Apple improve XCode during this process.
2008- Sorry, Adobe, we changed our mind: no 64-bit Carbon. This forced Adobe to move their entire suite to Cocoa for CS5.
Actually news of Apple's dropping 64-bit Carbon came out as early as Jun 12, 2007. IIRC Carbon was mainly to make going from OS9 to OS x easier so depending on the Carbon when even a non programmer like why self could see that it future was gloomy was just stupid.
Since there are many Pro customers who bought CS3 less than a year ago, they are rightly upset that support for the latest OS is being withdrawn.
Given that the bugs involved would seem to be fairly minor and easily remedied, Adobe has shot itself in the foot with their position. It reminds everyone of Quark's former arrogance.
Pixelmator is improving fast and GraphicConverter's makeover will likely be done by early 2010.
A year from now, someone at Adobe will look back at this and regret that they annoyed the Mac CS3 customer base for no apparent reason.
Pixelmator is improving fast and GraphicConverter's makeover will likely be done by early 2010.
A year from now, someone at Adobe will look back at this and regret that they annoyed the Mac CS3 customer base for no apparent reason.
For the everyday people that do basic photo editing, maybe if they dont want to buy Elements moving forward. No one is going to take Photoshop out of the Pro spotlight. Pro Tools is industry standard in audio, Photoshop is industry standard in graphics. Nothing is going to change that, period.
For the everyday people that do basic photo editing, maybe if they dont want to buy Elements moving forward. No one is going to take Photoshop out of the Pro spotlight. Pro Tools is industry standard in audio, Photoshop is industry standard in graphics. Nothing is going to change that, period.
That's exactly what they said about Quark, circa 1999.
I don't entirly agree.
Your customers must love that you give them free support when they choose to upgrade, do you factor in buying new software to facilitate this free support of customer's new hardware requirements into the original price you charge? I wonder how that'd make those customers who don't choose to upgrade their sites feel that they've paid extra for no reason?
Not sure I'd feel comfortable working with a business plan that had such an uncertain future? but good luck to you.
Cool. Nothing personal of course if we won't work together. Neither will apple and adobe.
Other companies will update their apps for 10.6 tho. I don't think epson would let the drivers get stale on a printer you bought 18 months ago... Meaning you probably would not have to buy a new printer... although that could be much cheaper than an upgrade to cs4!
btw tho, still haven't heard exactly how buggy cs 3 will be on 10.6.
I make this proposal because right now I have a copy of Leopard running on my Mini's hard drive, plus Vista under Bootcamp. In addition most of the time I run another copy of Leopard mounted on an external harddrive hooked up via firewire. It would be relatively easy to upgrade the version of Leopard on the Mini's drive to Snow Leopard and being as I now have a netbook running XP, the Vista on the Mini is pretty much pointless.
Another observation is that if Adobe were interested in serving their customers appropriately, they should offer a significant upgrade discount, even if for a limited time, for anyone providing proof of having purchased Snow Leopard. This would generate more cash in any event because without that discount, with the next CS mere months away, who is going to buy the thing? Since this is a situation that doesn't come up all the time, Adobe's regular pricing model would be unaffected by this gesture. It's win-win as far as I can tell.
But note how I managed to fend off all these angry little posts without calling anyone a douchebag. Until. Just. Now.
Well then, perhaps it's because my list of three career options for you were too far out of your reach.
I could lower the bar for you if it would make you feel better.
Note: People say CS3 works on Snow Leopard, so YMMV.
A Better Note: "Works" and "Works Well" are too very different statements.
Apple has released a Snow Leopard update for Aperture 2.x. There is no Snow Leopard update for Aperture 1.x, which supports compatibility with Mac OS X v10.5.
http://www.apple.com/aperture/download/
I'm sure that somehow this, too, is Adobe's fault.
Feel free to discuss among yourselves.
Adobe was selling CS3 right up to September 2008. That's less than a year ago.
Big difference.
Frank, aren't we just talking about the difference between 12 months ago and 18 months ago? Perhaps 6 months is a bigger difference to you than to me. I'd consider both Apple and Adobe to be in the same ballpark when it comes to drawing the line on which software will support Snow Leopard. If I want to run the most up-to-date OS, then I should be willing to use the most up-to-date applications.
The difference is in the upgrade costs. Aperture is a sub-$100. upgrade, hence the lack of complaints.
I don't believe there is a single CS4 component that can be upgraded for $100. or less. That should buy more than a year of support.
...That should buy more than a year of support.
What I don't understand is people's attitude that it's Adobe's job to support a user's choice to upgrade their OS?
They sold you software to work on Leopard, they still support that without complaining that you don't upgrade to the latest version of their software, yet you complain when you upgrade your OS immediately a new version is available??
That's 'you' the user, nobody specific.
Even Apple acknowledges that with the $35. upgrade price.
No one expects Adobe to throw in any whiz bang features in an OS update.
But it's not much to ask to do some minor bug fixes to keep CS3 users happy.
Again, Quark learned this stuff the hard way. Apparently, Adobe will too.
...No one expects Adobe to throw in any whiz bang features in an OS update.
But it's not much to ask to do some minor bug fixes to keep CS3 users happy...
So how much do you think Adobe should charge for these minor bug fixes?
So how much do you think Adobe should charge for these minor bug fixes?
Who charges for minor bug fixes?
Who charges for minor bug fixes?
I don't know of any company that charges for bug fixes, but then most stop fixing bugs caused by OS upgrades at a certain point; this seems like a fair businesses model to me, but others feel that Adobe should go on fixing bugs caused by their choice to upgrade to new OSs, then when questioned whether that's really Adobe' responsibility the point is made that it's not really a new OS, just a little upgrade, which people don't have a problem paying Apple for, so why should people not expect to pay for an upgraded Adobe product? Especially a previous generation product update.
I love free stuff; but I can't get my head around how some people expect free stuff, and then bleat when they don't get it!?
I think the bigger issue with CS# is that Adobe has forced us into buying the suites. Unfortunately for us we need the Master Collection because you can't mix and match. I would much rather have the individual apps but that would cost thousands more. I have absolutely no need for half the stuff in the Master Collection but what I do need is:
InDesign
Photoshop
Illustrator
Acrobat Pro
Flash Professional
Dreamweaver
You would have to buy the Web and the Design Suites and buy After Effects separately, which is what we did until CS4 when I just gave up. Now I'm considering returning to upgrading the single apps on an as needed basis, but it is a no win situation.
Dude. Have you heard of Adobe CS3 Design Premium? It includes exactly those apps and no more -- except naturally of course... Bridge and Version Cue. Do us a favour and do some research before you go out and buy stuff. I apologise if somebody already replied to this explaining the same thing.
Some people are saying "Well I'm going to look at alternatives". What are you people talking about? If you're making a living from Adobe software, then nothing has changed from last week. You've still got a workstation that runs Adobe software (and I guess CS3 is fine for your purposes), and you can continue making a living just as well as you did last week. Is anyone actually saying that if Apple had delayed Snow Leopard by six months that their business would have collapsed because they couldn't run Snow Leopard with CS3? No, I think everyone would have been just fine running CS3 on Leopard, and there's nothing wrong with continuing to do that now.
By the way, as the owner of a $12,000 Apple Xserve RAID, and the manager of a business with several others, I can say I know EXACTLY how it feels to be abandoned by a vendor in a business critical situation. This doesn't even come close.