Windows-only Adobe apps - alarming trend?
The increasing number of Windows-only software products from Adobe is starting to become alarming. To name a few...
Adobe Atmosphere
Adobe Atmosphere Player
Adobe Encore DVD
Adobe Premiere Pro
Adobe Audition
Adobe Acrobat Elements
Some of these are no great loss. Yes, demos of Encore DVD are laughable, and I really won't miss Premiere. However, every major application that is "Windows only" threatens to marginalize the platform in some users' eyes.
Of course, while it is preaching to the choir to say in a forum like this that a Mac running OS X, FCP, and DVDSP is such a dominant player in its product category that what competitve product Adobe does or doesn't release is irrelevant...but a potential switcher and lifelong Premiere user might have second thoughts.
Adobe Atmosphere
Adobe Atmosphere Player
Adobe Encore DVD
Adobe Premiere Pro
Adobe Audition
Adobe Acrobat Elements
Some of these are no great loss. Yes, demos of Encore DVD are laughable, and I really won't miss Premiere. However, every major application that is "Windows only" threatens to marginalize the platform in some users' eyes.
Of course, while it is preaching to the choir to say in a forum like this that a Mac running OS X, FCP, and DVDSP is such a dominant player in its product category that what competitve product Adobe does or doesn't release is irrelevant...but a potential switcher and lifelong Premiere user might have second thoughts.
Comments
What both companies are saying is "we're not sure we like the idea of having to compete against a well developed competitor".
MSIE has issues with stability and speed to start with and the idea of the Mac Business Unit having to pull their collective finger out and create a competitive product to Safari was more than they could bare, especially as it would have shown their past efforts in very poor light.
Adobe's reasoning is just as hazy, and started with the infamous speed-test of earlier this year. Adobe knows that it would be playing catch-up with FCP and would be regarded as a "me too" company on Apple, by going Windows only it can be seen as an innovator in that market where the standards of what can be called innovation are so low that even I could pass them.
Let's hope a stream of faster 970s, and the 980 and the 990 to come don't increase Apple's marketshare too much otherwise there are going to be a lot of disgruntled Adobe shareholders.
Adobe has focused on growing marketshare and revenue by focusing on the PC Platform as well. They have to...sales to Macs are finite.
The computer industry isn't growing like gangbusters anymore. Developers are encroaching into other areas to increase profits. I don't think it's too much to worry about.
On the one hand, I like a lot of Apple's software, but on the other, I worry that they are discouraging development on their platform. If the current trend continues, Mac users will be in an Apple controlled ghetto.
Here's an example of a conversation that could be taking place at a computer store in 2007.
CUSTOMER: I'm looking to get a computer.
SALESMAN: Have you looked at an Apple?
CUSTOMER: Yeah, they are pretty, but they don't have any of the software I need to run my work.
SALESMAN: It might surprise you, but the Mac has the same software, or the equivalent for 90% of the software you want?
CUSTOMER: Oh yeah, does it have Office?
SALESMAN: Well, it has AppleOffice. It's just like Microsoft Office, and it can import almost 100% of Word and Excel files and export them into a format you can read at work.
CUSTOMER: That sounds confusing. What about Photoshop?
SALESMAN: Well, there's not Photoshop, but there's Apple PhotoStudio Pro. A lot of people say it's even better than Photoshop. And, it can import and export Photoshop files almost perfectly, with only a few exceptions. So...how about this iMac G6 here?
CUSTOMER: Uhh, let me think about it. Could you show me to the PC aisle?
Originally posted by Gizzmonic
The Mac is a pretty small platform, and when Apple (which controls the OS) already makes an excellent and (and sometimes free) competitor to your application, what sense does it make to compete with them?
Like you, I sometimes wonder about Apple doing too much, but iDVD is a great example of how the rest of the industry is just lazy. iDVD only works with built in drives so there's a market for a third party piece of software. There's also a huge gap between iDVD & DVDSP. So, some company like Adobe could make an iDVD killer that's not in the $1000 market and fill a gap.
Unfortunately no company is willing to fill in the gap. I'm sure lots of iDVD users that max out its potential would even be willing to 'upgrade' to a better application but no company has made one in how many years? Kind of sad.
Adobe flat out isn't competing like they should. They've grown arrogant and lazy in many ways. Premiere was
1. Falling behind regardless of Platform.
2. Version 6 was extremely buggy.
I'm for the Macintosh having the best products and if Apple has to run Adobe or other laggards out because they want to charge $$$$$$$$ without providing a complete product then sobeit. There's no fear in losing Photoshop. Adobe answers to their shareholders and as long as Photoshop sells this keeps them happy and their plugin developers happy as well.
It's not so much that Windows Premiere is a terrible product, it's just that you have these X factors when you're working with Windows Premiere:
1)Version of Premiere. (sometimes this is a customized version that only works with your video capture hardware).
2)Video Capture hardware
3)Video Capture hardware driver version
4)Relevant video/audio codecs.
5)Version of Windows
6)3rd-party plugins.
7)The manufacturer of your computer (and if you built your computer, every manu from the RAM to the motherboard, etc).
Now, each one of these steps means a different company to call for tech support, if you're having a problem.
Compare this to the X factors on the Apple side, using FCP.
1)Macintosh*
*gross oversimplification.
The point is, like everyone else says, is that stuff "just works" on the Mac. It's a headache to get a bunch of disparate hardware to work together under Windows. People always crow about the "freedom" to mix-and-match PC parts, but it leads to complexity and big headaches in this particular field.
That's why Premiere on Windows won't be able to touch the Mac, ever. Adobe will be crying its way back in a few years, or maybe even cutting Premiere from its lineup. Look what happened to AVID when they told Mac users to take a flying leap...they are now begging for Mac users with Xpress DV. We'll see how well Adobe fares with its new "PC preferred" strategy.
Apple, for a variety of reasons both of their own making and due to outside factors, is becoming more like the Amiga, and will at some point provide about 90% of the software that's used on the Mac. Question is, can they stay afloat like that, will they drop hardware eventually a la NeXT, how will all this pan out?
Originally posted by BuonRotto
Adobe will drop Macs ASAP. For Photoshop and Illustrator, it will take several years, probably at least 3 more upgrades. But it will happen.
Hmm, I think your dislike for Adobe is showing through. That doesn't make much sense.
Why on earth would Adobe drop support for software that accounts for well over a third of their creative professional sales?
I don't see the rise of Windows-only Adobe applications to be *that* alarming. They've only chosen to do Windows-only when
a) Apple is pushing hard with their own either free or superior apps in the same market.
b) OS X has the features built-in anyway.
(In the same logic, I wouldn't be too surprised to see Adobe Reader drop out for the Mac at some point too. But what does it matter, if Apple is creating a better, free Preview?)
Anyway, I agree that Adobe's reasons are hazy because they're not quite honest -- they're definitely irritated at Final Cut Pro's success, and decided to leave the Mac video market over to Apple, and instead focus on making their Windows video products better. Fine. Their choice. But I don't see how it threatens Photoshop, Illustrator, or any other professional Adobe product unless Apple brings out a series of free digital imaging applications -- which would be insulting, difficult, and pointless.
We might just get lucky and witness the rise of a company which capitalizes on the 64-bit operating systems from ground zero with ports for all 64-bit platforms, but none optimized for 32-bit.
Originally posted by BuonRotto
Adobe just needs to know that Mac Photoshop users will follow the app, not the platform. Theoretically, if Adobe had the nads, they would cancel PS 8 for Macs, and you can bet that many Mac PS users would understandably have to move to PCs.
Holy conspiracy theories, Batman. Sorry, fella, this just looks like FUD.
Where do you see this loathing for Apple in Adobe? I see instead an often close, often rather fiesty relationship.
Just because Adobe plans a (sometimes somewhat depressingly) consistent UI across platforms means they have some kind of sinister "follow the app, not the platform" plan in league with Microsoft?
that's adobe premiere.
Just to postulate a bit. I wonder just what Apple's course of action would be.
1. Develop a Photoshop competitor from scratch?
2. Purchase the code. Hmmmm Xres still has to be sitting in Macromedias vault somewhere. What about Live Picture Code...someone owns it. Or TIFFany 3.
3. Bend over and let Adobe screw them
Somehow I don't think it's 3. I say create the MONSTER of all Editing Apps. Here's my Conspiracy Theory.
Apple knows they must not have any Major gaps in Software. but they don't like to kowtow to Developers.
1. Adobe is becoming very dangerous with their desire to increase their marketshare for the PC. Apple realizes that as long as their are cross platform products selling well it will diminish the value of a Macintosh.
2. How would Apple ensure that they have a contingency plan should Adobe screw the Mac Platform in lieu of Windows ?
3. Roxio
Purchasing Roxio accomplishes a few things for Apple that many are not aware of.
1. Give them control over the Napster name which could be rolled into iTMS and an auxillary site(Unsigned Artists?)
2. Give Apple access to Roxios Toast and CD Creator software . This would help Apple create a compelling iTunes App for both Platforms.
3. The hidden thing that no one has mentioned. When Live Picture filed for Bankruptcy..their Assets were purchased by MGI Software..who inturn was purchased by none other than Roxio. Y
Yes friends. Apple normally wouldn't be excited about purchasing Roxio but they simply have the "intangibles" that could make the deal come to fruition. Live Picture Sourcecode is owned by Roxio and Apple would purchase Roxio and nary a person would even think that Apple in the process would be purchasing IP that could be resurrected from the Dead to compete with Photoshop again in the future! You heard it here first people. Roxio WILL be purchased by Apple for the reasons stated above. HM
Originally posted by BuonRotto
Have any info on LivePicture? I'm not familiar with it.
Live Picture was essentially an image editing app based on proxies. you would edit a low-res proxy of an image, while the app maintained a list of actions you performed. once done, the actions were performed on the full res image.
quite handy in the days of 690x0 and early PPC machines.
it also featured nifty compositing effects before photoshop had any useful layer features.
Originally posted by BuonRotto
Have any info on LivePicture? I'm not familiar with it.
Live Picture
1. Resolution Independence. It used a format called FITS. What you would is edit the lowrez screen image. The app would keep a small Database of sorts which would detail your changes. Upon finishing your editing you would "Render" your final output at the desired Resolution. Since it wasn't a pixel based editor like PS you didn't have and destructive editing and errors from combining pixels yadda yadda yadda. If you ever messed around with Macromedia Xres back in the day you know what i'm talking about.
2. Speed. Since you're only working on a lowrez screen display image the speed was great. I had it running on a 7200/75 and it was useable unlike PS. I'm sure even in today's market the speed would be handy for working on HUGE files.
3. Masking tools at that time where pretty handy. I went through a few tutorials and I liked the ease at which some things were done.
4. 48bit color. I don't think PS still can match LP's Color offerings.
Now the negatives.
1. Confusing UI. Photoshop is still functional even though you might only use basic features. Livepicture had two modes that you would switch between and it got confusing fast.
2. Plugins. LivePicture didn't have anywhere near the 3rd party support.
3. Layers. You had a few layers but PS had a huge advantage here.
4. Buggy. LivePicture crashed a little too often.
Death:
LivePicture was killed by the company. Sculley(yes the same former Apple CEO) decided to focus LivePicture the Company as a Web Graphics Developer pushing their Flashpix format. Livepicture the Editing app died a horrible neglected Death.
The underlying code was solid. The fundamentals were there but competing against Photoshop is a no no unless you are ready to throw as much resources as possible. LivePicture was initially $4000 and then started dropping in price until it could be had for $199. Still ..they couldn't market it right. It's interesting to think that if Apple purchased Roxio ..they'd have access to LivePicture Sourcecode. Imagine if Apple.
1. Stripped LivePicture down to it's basic architecture. Rebuilt it using Cocoa and current API. Added Applescript and a decent plugin infrastructure.
2. Beefed up it's integration with Final Cut Pro and Shake.
3. Expanded more on their "work" with Wavelet Compression ala Pixlet.
You just might find a kick ass product that would be a safety net should Adobe start getting flaky with PS.
http://web.archive.org/web/199805300...lp26/lp26.html
If running Classic wasn't such a pain Illustrator 8 and PS5.5 would still be on my HD right now, and Adobe wouldn't see any of my money until they earned it.