So. if Apple can find a way to improve my experience with my Apple equipment, more power to Apple.
What are you going to do in the meantime?
Like always, I find alternatives, it is tough, but it is doable. The extra amount of work I do to go around these problems is the reason why I think there must be a better way.
That is why when it comes to software, I support standards, so that there is greater compatibility irrespective of the source. To an extent, this is what is happening with the bulk of the scripts that govern the basics of the internet.
It is when companies, like Microsoft, in their desire to achieve dominance, forks the development of internet standards, If you are developing website templates and CMS, for example, so much effort has to be done by web designers and developers to ensure that unique scripts in the Internet Explorer be made compatible with standards used by other browsers.
In regard Adobe Flash, it has a tendency to slow my internet experience to the extent that it may freeze my old computer when I multitask (which is almost all the time), so the sooner Adobe Flash disappears, the better for me.
I don't think we should automatically assume Apple has the upper-hand here. If Adobe's CS Suite wasn't available for the Mac platform, I bet a lot less people would be using the platform.
As I mentioned elsewhere, the last figures I've seen put the Photoshop installed base at something like 50% Mac. Of course, that's people who already own Adobe software, but how many platform agnostic people are buying brand new copies of CS?
Sure, they could gut it out by simply forcing anyone who wants to use their stuff to get a PC, but that would a) be a PR disaster the likes of which we have rarely seen in the software industry and b) represent a a near and mid term gutting of sales.
It's just not going to happen, no matter how pissed some people at Adobe might be at Apple's mobile strategies. All withdrawing CS from the Mac does is fuck up your desktop sales to go along with your mobile problems, because such a move certainly isn't going to force Apple to back down. Yes, it arguably hurts Apple more than Adobe in the long run, but that would be what is known as "cutting off your nose to spite your face."
If I read the reviews correctly, many of those that migrated to the Mac computer, previously coming from the PC side did so because they had the security that they can still run the MS-centric softwares in the latest versions of Mac computers.
"The Mac is also a PC." Wasn;t that one of the focus of one of the "Get a Mac" commercials?
I read several first hand experience from "journalists" and other "prominent" techies or bloggers, who tried to try the Mac. Once they get acquainted with the Mac, soon preferred the Mac way. This trend, among those who gave the Mac a chance, has been corroborated by a number of posters here, who were also previously PC-users.
Adobe (and before Macromedia) has been flogging buggy versions of Flash player and equally buggy development tools to Mac users for years. They have always had a strong bias towards Windows and treated Mac users like second class citizens. I think it's great that Apple is standing up and saying F**k You we don't want your crap software anyway.
I've been using Flex Builder for a long time and I've got to say it works quite well. I also can use Flex Builder on Windows machines and the same projects can be just copied from machine to machine. That's what I call multiplatform support.
I also make apps for iPhone, in C/C++/Objective C and OpenGL ES. I have to say Apple's move is making me consider dropping our support for Apple's platform. Things might get even worse. One company shouldn't be allowed to do such things.
I'm actually rather ambivalent about this development as I can already play Flash 1 and 2 on an iPhone/iPad, which is just perfect to annoy the hell out of you Adobe haters with animated ads that you can't block.
Just curious, Many criticize Apple because of their :vertical integration - derisively called "Walled Garden". Many would not buy the latest Apple products because they are not open source, and would rather use Android.
If the opposition to Apple's latest products is about its being not open source, why the championing of products, like Flash from Adobe, which does not even work very well for Apple products?
Those who oppose propriety products must not be supporters of Adobe Flash, or many of Adobe products. But, not all those, especially perhaps many Mac users, who prefer proprietary products may support Adobe products.
To be frank, I am in principle all for open source. In fact, I use open source CMS to create websites. Until now though, after so many years, even after paying templates for the open source CMS, the best of these open source softwares cannot even match what professional news-magazine sites can achieve.
The same is true with Linux. I had high hopes for it for the Mac. Red Hat had made billions based on Linux. There is a vast pool of developers for the Linux. But, and this is the big but, where is the Linux GUI, that would be as easy to use as that one developed by Apple?
It took me less than an hour to learn how to use the first Mac I ever bought. If I spend a week or two to learn the Linux for the Mac, and get acquainted with its GUI (is there one already?), what it would cost me, in terms of my time and effort would be more than the cost of a Mac computer or two.
I understand Apple wants to get everyone to play nice together. It is the amount of control that Apple seems to take to protect us all that has me scared to death. First they seem to have an arbitrary selection process for there apps store. Second they seem to have one set of APIs for them to develop apps and another APIs for everyone else. This creates a situation that allows them to take over any market some other developer creates. This is very similar to what MS did. The power that the apps store and APIs give Apple will be hard to not abuse.
Where did you get this impression?
Apple is very active in the standardization of scripts used for the internet and mobile computing. As a predominantly hardware company, having software technology standards is crucial for Apple. It need not be marginalized even if it market share is in the minority, as has happened in the portable computer segment. [Now that Apple has made the game-changing products for mobile computing and consumer products, it has greater interest to have its say in the starndards for the industry,]
Apple -- even before its ascension as the most innovative in mobile computing -- has spearheaded development of these technologies, especially in mobile computing. Apple even contributed some of its proprietary technologies Iwithout charging royalties) to become the basis of these standards. This is not all altruistic though.
The more Apple could influence the standards, the more say it could in shaping the softwaare technology that would run the internet and mobile computing. Other companies, like Google, Microsoft, IBM, etc., have the same goals.
Quadra - Thanks for the link about Pixelmator. I never knew about this package! I bought PSE a few months ago to work on a quickie graphic update on a client's website because I didn't have time to wait for CS5 and put off choking on the huge price tag I was going to pay. I've spent quite a bit of time reviewing Pixelmator and I was really impressed with it. Since it is compatible with .PSD formats, I think it's a done deal.
And with the arrogance that Adobe has been showing of late, I think now I will gladly remove my PSE package and go with Pixelmator. The price is certainly agreeable as well!
Thanks for the recommendation. I look forward to trying it out in more detail!
Apple doesn't NEED to work with them. everything they need is in the API. Adobe's programmers just need to read the documentations in xCode.
Or you are saying that Apple should send a team of teachers over, and teach them how to program?
Actually Adobe can just send some of their programmers over to Standford to take the iPhone programming class, it's pretty comprehensive.
Adobe doesn't want to invest the money in a marginal platform (OS X). Lets face it, OS X is less than 10% of the installed base world wide, why should they invest more than 10% of their development resources. This is why the Flash plug-in for OS X sucks.
The problem with Adobes 'Logic' is that while OS X is 10% of the installed desktop/server/notebook market, OS X, as iOS, is becoming the dominant mobile OS.
The second problem is, Adobe wants access into the kernel for video optimization that Apple will not allow. If Adobe would optimize flash to use Open GL, or similar, there wouldn't be a problem. But that would require Adobe to re-write a huge part of Flash, which isn't going to happen.
So, to sum up:
Apple says: Your product is substandard on our operating systems, fix it using the tools we have made available.
Adobe says: You are too small of a fish for us to spend the developer resources on.
Apple says: Until you fix your product, we're not allowing your product to compromise our end users mobile experience
I certainly wouldn't say 100% share. Don't forget people are still using CorelDraw, Paint Shop Pro, and Pixelmator is rapidly becoming one to watch in the design market.
Photoshop isn't the be all and end all paint app at all and when you look at what Pixelmator is doing using Apple's APIs then you realise that if it can match Photoshop in terms of features then Photoshop will become dead in the water. Who's going to buy Photoshop then when they can get an app that screams on the Mac, can read and write Photoshop files, and has the same feature set and yet costs $100(NZ) as opposed to $1,449.95(NZ)?
That's a joke right? Pixelmator is like a dumb down version for someone who doesn't have time to learn photoshop. It's a shabby version of elements, but to compare it with photoshop is like comparing an ipod shuffle with a touch.
I am an Apple fan and Mac programmer. And I am looking forward to watching Adobe's bones being nailed to the roof of Apple's headquarters so that they may slowly bleach in the sun.
Adobe has refused to work with Apple on improving Flash for Mac OS X and iPhone OS. For years now. This may, of course, be a reaction against Apple bundling Preview with Mac OS X, which effectively killed off 99% of the Mac market for Acrobat (a textbook example of "bloatware".) And Adobe is probably still sore about Aperture effectively replacing Photoshop and Lightroom for many amateur and professional photographers.
So what did Adobe do? Well, instead of improving their Mac software and competing against Apple through the merits of their own products, Adobe has gone the passive-aggressive route. They are giving Apple the cold shoulder, refusing to improve the quality of their Mac software, and thus giving creative professionals more than just a little nudge toward the Windows versions of Adobe software.
So when that Adobe evangelist/clown says "We are not looking to kill anything or anyone," he's really saying "We are looking to hurt Apple for developing products that compete against ours."
And frankly, the whole idea behind cross-compilers is to cut corners. Save a few weeks here and there and avoid hiring Mac-specific and Windows-specific programmers for the different versions of your products. What you end up with is the lowest common denominator. Some tech companies are fine with that. Apple isn't.
I've been using Flex Builder for a long time and I've got to say it works quite well. I also can use Flex Builder on Windows machines and the same projects can be just copied from machine to machine. That's what I call multiplatform support.
I also make apps for iPhone, in C/C++/Objective C and OpenGL ES. I have to say Apple's move is making me consider dropping our support for Apple's platform. Things might get even worse. One company shouldn't be allowed to do such things.
You are free to leave. The iPhone is not an open platform. You are not required to produce software for it. I don't here a lot of people complaining that C#/ VB.Net are not available development environments for the Apple Platform.
That is what it boils down to. Why should Apple invest $1 to improve Adobes bottom line? Why should Apple allow privileged access to the OS Kernel? Especially in light of how BAD their software is currently? Adobe admits that it's software on OS X is lacking. It should either fix it, or shut up.
MAYBE if they produced a product for OS X that was stable, Apple would let them into the iPhone OS sandbox.
This isn't about preventing low quality apps from entering the iPhone app store. They already have quality control standards in place.
The new licensing allows Apple to deny an app because of how it was developed, even if it qualified in every other regard. This doesn't help users or developers. It has forced me, and many other independent developers out of Apple's market, and thousands of titles already in the app store violate this license.
Who will this help? Large companies that can afford dedicated iPhone development teams. Sure, this hurts Adobe, but this hurts many independent developers, and iPhone users who want to play their games.
I think we get that Photoshop is a mature program. I remember it being good at Version 4. But these days... bloated and slow. And hasn't supported GPU acceleration for years when it could have done.
Pixelmator is off to a good start. There's a few omissions like Twain Aquire. But the feature list is impressive, it has GPU acceleration and a gorgeous interface. And it's only on version 1.5.
Photoshop needs to go to the gym and work off some of its fat ass.
... and lurking in the shadows, unnoticed by the raging mobs of nerds - Quark was rubbing his hands together in an evil like manner "excellent.... yeees... excellent... "
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post
So. if Apple can find a way to improve my experience with my Apple equipment, more power to Apple.
What are you going to do in the meantime?
Like always, I find alternatives, it is tough, but it is doable. The extra amount of work I do to go around these problems is the reason why I think there must be a better way.
That is why when it comes to software, I support standards, so that there is greater compatibility irrespective of the source. To an extent, this is what is happening with the bulk of the scripts that govern the basics of the internet.
It is when companies, like Microsoft, in their desire to achieve dominance, forks the development of internet standards, If you are developing website templates and CMS, for example, so much effort has to be done by web designers and developers to ensure that unique scripts in the Internet Explorer be made compatible with standards used by other browsers.
In regard Adobe Flash, it has a tendency to slow my internet experience to the extent that it may freeze my old computer when I multitask (which is almost all the time), so the sooner Adobe Flash disappears, the better for me.
CGC
I'd say so, if this small company can keep it together.
The demo version is useable (apparently, fully functional) for 30 days. I'm no Photoshop jock, but it looks very good.
If you don't need the full Photoshop, you can get PS Elements ($80) which covers what most people need and uses a lot of the plugins also.
Guy Kawasaki was an Apple Evangelist for many years.
He has also written several excellent books which should be required reading for Apple Developers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
I don't think we should automatically assume Apple has the upper-hand here. If Adobe's CS Suite wasn't available for the Mac platform, I bet a lot less people would be using the platform.
As I mentioned elsewhere, the last figures I've seen put the Photoshop installed base at something like 50% Mac. Of course, that's people who already own Adobe software, but how many platform agnostic people are buying brand new copies of CS?
Sure, they could gut it out by simply forcing anyone who wants to use their stuff to get a PC, but that would a) be a PR disaster the likes of which we have rarely seen in the software industry and b) represent a a near and mid term gutting of sales.
It's just not going to happen, no matter how pissed some people at Adobe might be at Apple's mobile strategies. All withdrawing CS from the Mac does is fuck up your desktop sales to go along with your mobile problems, because such a move certainly isn't going to force Apple to back down. Yes, it arguably hurts Apple more than Adobe in the long run, but that would be what is known as "cutting off your nose to spite your face."
If I read the reviews correctly, many of those that migrated to the Mac computer, previously coming from the PC side did so because they had the security that they can still run the MS-centric softwares in the latest versions of Mac computers.
"The Mac is also a PC." Wasn;t that one of the focus of one of the "Get a Mac" commercials?
I read several first hand experience from "journalists" and other "prominent" techies or bloggers, who tried to try the Mac. Once they get acquainted with the Mac, soon preferred the Mac way. This trend, among those who gave the Mac a chance, has been corroborated by a number of posters here, who were also previously PC-users.
CGC
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/0...e-flash-myths/
Adobe (and before Macromedia) has been flogging buggy versions of Flash player and equally buggy development tools to Mac users for years. They have always had a strong bias towards Windows and treated Mac users like second class citizens. I think it's great that Apple is standing up and saying F**k You we don't want your crap software anyway.
I've been using Flex Builder for a long time and I've got to say it works quite well. I also can use Flex Builder on Windows machines and the same projects can be just copied from machine to machine. That's what I call multiplatform support.
I also make apps for iPhone, in C/C++/Objective C and OpenGL ES. I have to say Apple's move is making me consider dropping our support for Apple's platform. Things might get even worse. One company shouldn't be allowed to do such things.
Interesting take here:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/0...e-flash-myths/
It is. Thank you.
I'm actually rather ambivalent about this development as I can already play Flash 1 and 2 on an iPhone/iPad, which is just perfect to annoy the hell out of you Adobe haters with animated ads that you can't block.
Just curious, Many criticize Apple because of their :vertical integration - derisively called "Walled Garden". Many would not buy the latest Apple products because they are not open source, and would rather use Android.
If the opposition to Apple's latest products is about its being not open source, why the championing of products, like Flash from Adobe, which does not even work very well for Apple products?
Those who oppose propriety products must not be supporters of Adobe Flash, or many of Adobe products. But, not all those, especially perhaps many Mac users, who prefer proprietary products may support Adobe products.
To be frank, I am in principle all for open source. In fact, I use open source CMS to create websites. Until now though, after so many years, even after paying templates for the open source CMS, the best of these open source softwares cannot even match what professional news-magazine sites can achieve.
The same is true with Linux. I had high hopes for it for the Mac. Red Hat had made billions based on Linux. There is a vast pool of developers for the Linux. But, and this is the big but, where is the Linux GUI, that would be as easy to use as that one developed by Apple?
It took me less than an hour to learn how to use the first Mac I ever bought. If I spend a week or two to learn the Linux for the Mac, and get acquainted with its GUI (is there one already?), what it would cost me, in terms of my time and effort would be more than the cost of a Mac computer or two.
CGC
Adobe After Effects are used on nearly 90% macs for tv and film. If Adobe pulled the plug, Apple would for sure HEAR ABOUT IT.
If AE died on Mac, users could styill run the Win version on their Macs or use FCP.
I understand Apple wants to get everyone to play nice together. It is the amount of control that Apple seems to take to protect us all that has me scared to death. First they seem to have an arbitrary selection process for there apps store. Second they seem to have one set of APIs for them to develop apps and another APIs for everyone else. This creates a situation that allows them to take over any market some other developer creates. This is very similar to what MS did. The power that the apps store and APIs give Apple will be hard to not abuse.
Where did you get this impression?
Apple is very active in the standardization of scripts used for the internet and mobile computing. As a predominantly hardware company, having software technology standards is crucial for Apple. It need not be marginalized even if it market share is in the minority, as has happened in the portable computer segment. [Now that Apple has made the game-changing products for mobile computing and consumer products, it has greater interest to have its say in the starndards for the industry,]
Apple -- even before its ascension as the most innovative in mobile computing -- has spearheaded development of these technologies, especially in mobile computing. Apple even contributed some of its proprietary technologies Iwithout charging royalties) to become the basis of these standards. This is not all altruistic though.
The more Apple could influence the standards, the more say it could in shaping the softwaare technology that would run the internet and mobile computing. Other companies, like Google, Microsoft, IBM, etc., have the same goals.
CGC
Look at how far Pixelmator has come already:
http://www.pixelmator.com/
And it's just a few guys working on it.
Quadra - Thanks for the link about Pixelmator. I never knew about this package! I bought PSE a few months ago to work on a quickie graphic update on a client's website because I didn't have time to wait for CS5 and put off choking on the huge price tag I was going to pay. I've spent quite a bit of time reviewing Pixelmator and I was really impressed with it. Since it is compatible with .PSD formats, I think it's a done deal.
And with the arrogance that Adobe has been showing of late, I think now I will gladly remove my PSE package and go with Pixelmator. The price is certainly agreeable as well!
Thanks for the recommendation. I look forward to trying it out in more detail!
Apple doesn't NEED to work with them. everything they need is in the API. Adobe's programmers just need to read the documentations in xCode.
Or you are saying that Apple should send a team of teachers over, and teach them how to program?
Actually Adobe can just send some of their programmers over to Standford to take the iPhone programming class, it's pretty comprehensive.
Adobe doesn't want to invest the money in a marginal platform (OS X). Lets face it, OS X is less than 10% of the installed base world wide, why should they invest more than 10% of their development resources. This is why the Flash plug-in for OS X sucks.
The problem with Adobes 'Logic' is that while OS X is 10% of the installed desktop/server/notebook market, OS X, as iOS, is becoming the dominant mobile OS.
The second problem is, Adobe wants access into the kernel for video optimization that Apple will not allow. If Adobe would optimize flash to use Open GL, or similar, there wouldn't be a problem. But that would require Adobe to re-write a huge part of Flash, which isn't going to happen.
So, to sum up:
Apple says: Your product is substandard on our operating systems, fix it using the tools we have made available.
Adobe says: You are too small of a fish for us to spend the developer resources on.
Apple says: Until you fix your product, we're not allowing your product to compromise our end users mobile experience
Adobe says: But Flash runs the internet.
Apple says: Screw you.
Adobe says: "Go Screw Yourself."
I certainly wouldn't say 100% share. Don't forget people are still using CorelDraw, Paint Shop Pro, and Pixelmator is rapidly becoming one to watch in the design market.
Photoshop isn't the be all and end all paint app at all and when you look at what Pixelmator is doing using Apple's APIs then you realise that if it can match Photoshop in terms of features then Photoshop will become dead in the water. Who's going to buy Photoshop then when they can get an app that screams on the Mac, can read and write Photoshop files, and has the same feature set and yet costs $100(NZ) as opposed to $1,449.95(NZ)?
That's a joke right? Pixelmator is like a dumb down version for someone who doesn't have time to learn photoshop. It's a shabby version of elements, but to compare it with photoshop is like comparing an ipod shuffle with a touch.
Adobe has refused to work with Apple on improving Flash for Mac OS X and iPhone OS. For years now. This may, of course, be a reaction against Apple bundling Preview with Mac OS X, which effectively killed off 99% of the Mac market for Acrobat (a textbook example of "bloatware".) And Adobe is probably still sore about Aperture effectively replacing Photoshop and Lightroom for many amateur and professional photographers.
So what did Adobe do? Well, instead of improving their Mac software and competing against Apple through the merits of their own products, Adobe has gone the passive-aggressive route. They are giving Apple the cold shoulder, refusing to improve the quality of their Mac software, and thus giving creative professionals more than just a little nudge toward the Windows versions of Adobe software.
So when that Adobe evangelist/clown says "We are not looking to kill anything or anyone," he's really saying "We are looking to hurt Apple for developing products that compete against ours."
And frankly, the whole idea behind cross-compilers is to cut corners. Save a few weeks here and there and avoid hiring Mac-specific and Windows-specific programmers for the different versions of your products. What you end up with is the lowest common denominator. Some tech companies are fine with that. Apple isn't.
I've been using Flex Builder for a long time and I've got to say it works quite well. I also can use Flex Builder on Windows machines and the same projects can be just copied from machine to machine. That's what I call multiplatform support.
I also make apps for iPhone, in C/C++/Objective C and OpenGL ES. I have to say Apple's move is making me consider dropping our support for Apple's platform. Things might get even worse. One company shouldn't be allowed to do such things.
You are free to leave. The iPhone is not an open platform. You are not required to produce software for it. I don't here a lot of people complaining that C#/ VB.Net are not available development environments for the Apple Platform.
That is what it boils down to. Why should Apple invest $1 to improve Adobes bottom line? Why should Apple allow privileged access to the OS Kernel? Especially in light of how BAD their software is currently? Adobe admits that it's software on OS X is lacking. It should either fix it, or shut up.
MAYBE if they produced a product for OS X that was stable, Apple would let them into the iPhone OS sandbox.
Quadra. Thanks for the links. I'm checking them out.
Lemon Bon Bon.
The new licensing allows Apple to deny an app because of how it was developed, even if it qualified in every other regard. This doesn't help users or developers. It has forced me, and many other independent developers out of Apple's market, and thousands of titles already in the app store violate this license.
Who will this help? Large companies that can afford dedicated iPhone development teams. Sure, this hurts Adobe, but this hurts many independent developers, and iPhone users who want to play their games.
Pixelmator is like a dumb down
I think we get that Photoshop is a mature program. I remember it being good at Version 4. But these days... bloated and slow. And hasn't supported GPU acceleration for years when it could have done.
Pixelmator is off to a good start. There's a few omissions like Twain Aquire. But the feature list is impressive, it has GPU acceleration and a gorgeous interface. And it's only on version 1.5.
Photoshop needs to go to the gym and work off some of its fat ass.
Lemon Bon Bon.