Adobe going OS X only this year?

outsideroutsider
Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
<a href="http://www.thinksecret.com/news/adobemacos9.html"; target="_blank">http://www.thinksecret.com/news/adobemacos9.html</a>;



If this is true then all future upgrades will be for OS X ONLY and people who boot OS 9 will have to make a difficult decision. Embrace OS X... or not. I for one hope this is the kick in the pants other developers need and more importantly users to go OS X only.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 6
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    From the sounds of it, Quark, MS (they alreadyhave really), and Adobe are all going X-only in their next releases. That's pretty close to critical mass, especially considering who we're talking about. So I wouldn't be surprised if it convinces more Classic developers to make the final transition.



    All of a sudden, people's perception of OS X's speed looks to improve without Apple having to do much themselves. (At least in the cases of MS and Adobe who have 1 generation of Carbon behind them.)
  • Reply 2 of 6
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    I think this is great news. It forces Apple to keep improving the speed/performance of OS X if they know that eventually EVERYONE kinda has to use it, plus these major players (Adobe, Microsoft, Quark, etc.) going this route sends a signal to the smaller guys that whoever is on the fence or lagging should really kick it into gear if they want to keep making stuff for the Mac.



    I see this as a good move. This will spur those last remaining stragglers to get their ducks in a row. Or, perhaps, to go elsewhere.



    In which case, we don't really need them anyway, right?



    I really only use one "major league" app (something that I wouldn't want to be without and would hate to see go away) and that's Illustrator.



    Apple themselves (various iApps, Mail, Safari, AppleWorks, Sherlock, etc.) and smaller companies making cool, niche software (Transmit, SnapzPro, Art Directors Toolkit, etc.) more than meet my needs for what I do on my Mac.



    Hell, if worse came to worse, I'm certain I could even find a nice little Cocoa vector illustration app that is 1/10 the price (and bloat) of Illustrator.



  • Reply 3 of 6
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    Well, Illustrator is already there, it just leaves room for improvement. If Adobe's going X-only, they might be able to drop all that bloat in the graphics engines that the Mac versions doesn't need thanks to Quartz, et al., but the Windows versions depend on. That'll improve things tremendously right off the bat.



    Let's face it, the small guys are either extremely recalcitrant or extremely enthusiastic about X. They will either remain as Classic-Os "squatters" or have already moved much faster to X than the big developers. To see big developers getting their intertia behind X means the hardest and most important part is getting done.



    BTW, yes, you can find a bout half a dozen alternatives X-native apps like Illustrator that are 1/10-1/4 the price with 80-95% of the functionality.
  • Reply 4 of 6
    ebbyebby Posts: 3,110member
    I specifically bought Photoshop 7 last week for that reason.
  • Reply 5 of 6
    cowerdcowerd Posts: 579member
    It will be a miracle if Adobe makes the necessary improvements required by Illustrator. I have taken to running v8.0 in Classic--performance of v10 with large files can be 4-8 times slower. BTW the article notes that Illustrator may be one of the remaining apps to run in both OS9 and OSX, so I hold out little hope for a major improvement in performance.
  • Reply 6 of 6
    bigbluebigblue Posts: 341member
    Fine. Let them develop OSX only. Great. At least they can concentrate on apps like Illustrator 10 then, wich is a DOG. Half the speed of AI 9. Unbelievable. I don't undertstand what they did with it. It feels like they put led in it or something <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" />
Sign In or Register to comment.