Adobe Universal Binaries on the Way

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
Adobe Universal Binaries on the Way

Authored by Aaron Freedman at 1:12 PM

Category | Software

Despite the fact that Adobe could easily be the largest company besides Microsoft not yet to roll out Universal versions of their software, they're still working on it according to an interview with Adobe Photoshop Product Manager John Nack by Inside Mac Radio.



Nack: "We recognize that to really address the way the market's been changing around digital photography it wasn't going to be good enough to just keep doing incremental additions to our existing code. What we really need is to start with a fresh slate. So in the case of Lightroom, because they did that, it's been a lot quicker for them to move to Mactel.

With some of the more mature apps, like Photoshop, Illustrator, it's a really big project, and there's a lot of work to move the code from Code Warrior over into Xcode, get that compiling, and then get that compiling on Mactel. So it's something where it's a long process. I wish we could do it faster. But Apple's been really great in supporting that. There've been Apple folks on site all the time over at Adobe answering questions, bouncing ideas back and forth. . . Both companies really want to see this happen, just like users do. We'll have it out as soon as we can, with the obvious qualifier that we want to right. We don't want to just rush it out there and have it not work well. So it'll take some time, but we're definitely working closely on it.



As we work with Apple we want to make sure that our applications keep evolving and taking really good advantage of all the new innovations they've got. They came out with the dual processor, dual core G5's. They're making some really great changes around the graphics architecture, like with the new MacBook--much faster memory systems with their GPU. And so I think that this evolution will help us stay really current and take good advantage of that. And of course every time a new system comes out one of the key benchmarks is how fast does it run Photoshop. And so it's in everybody's interest to make sure that our apps really shine on the new boxes."
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 67
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,318member
    Piss on Adobe. They've had 9 years to move their crap to Cocoa aware APIs and get off Codewarrior. Pathetic. I wonder how much of their code will be using Qt Frameworks? For sure they've made it clear they don't want to go to Cocoa.



    Either Adobe bites the bullet or will soon see their applications falling farther behind.



    Trolltech's not interested in catering to Adobe and making it a fortune.
  • Reply 2 of 67
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,230moderator
    I sometimes want to criticise Adobe too but in all fairness, Apple have made some pretty major changes in their products over the past 6 years. First the change to a unix-based machine and now to a new architecture.



    It's not just a case of why don't they hurry up and change the code. I'm sure they don't want to alienate their old user bases. So, they'd have to maintain 3 builds - OS 9, OS X and OS X Intel.



    Changing IDE for such a huge product isn't trivial either. XCode still isn't as fast as Codewarrior and a C/C++ codebase of about 300,000 lines of code can take half an hour to compile on a fast G4. I would reckon PS might have over 1,000,000 lines of code.



    It's also the complexity of the code. I'm willing to bet PS is one of the most highly optimized apps around with quite a few parts written in altivec code. That doesn't compile for Intel architectures.



    I don't think Adobe are just being a nuisance. I imagine they know more than anyone that they would make a decent amount of cash from Mactel purchases and they will be trying hard to get products ready. But this is a tough time with the upcoming Vista too.
  • Reply 3 of 67
    kim kap solkim kap sol Posts: 2,987member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Marvin

    I sometimes want to criticise Adobe too but in all fairness, Apple have made some pretty major changes in their products over the past 6 years. First the change to a unix-based machine and now to a new architecture.



    It's not just a case of why don't they hurry up and change the code. I'm sure they don't want to alienate their old user bases. So, they'd have to maintain 3 builds - OS 9, OS X and OS X Intel.



    Changing IDE for such a huge product isn't trivial either. XCode still isn't as fast as Codewarrior and a C/C++ codebase of about 300,000 lines of code can take half an hour to compile on a fast G4. I would reckon PS might have over 1,000,000 lines of code.



    It's also the complexity of the code. I'm willing to bet PS is one of the most highly optimized apps around with quite a few parts written in altivec code. That doesn't compile for Intel architectures.



    I don't think Adobe are just being a nuisance. I imagine they know more than anyone that they would make a decent amount of cash from Mactel purchases and they will be trying hard to get products ready. But this is a tough time with the upcoming Vista too.




    Horseshit. Apple has made clear to *everyone* that the future is Cocoa. Had Adobe heeded the warning 5 years ago, they'd have their Xcode code ready to compile on x86 chips 8 months ago.



    It's not trivial to do all this, we know this...but choosing to lug around a 16 year old code base around and planning another 10 years around it is extremely stupid.



    If apps don't follow OS developments and work WITH IT, they become a separate platform with their own idiosyncrasies that have nothing to do with the platform. You might as well be running Photoshop as your OS then because who the fuck cares about the OS underneath it.



    If Adobe wants to play that game, they should just make their suite a full blown OS and see where it takes them.



    Every year they keep adding to their crusty old code base will make it harder for them to wipe the slate clean and rewrite their app...eventually, it'll be impossible for Adobe to make the necessary changes to run on modern OSes because Adobe's apps will have a shitload of legacy API code.



    I'm sorry but if Adobe doesn't do something quick, they'll never be able to keep up with MS and Apple OS development. I hope Metro murders Adobe in its sleep. I hope a Photoshop Mac competitor is in the works by someone out there. It won't take much to tip the scale. Write an app with CoreImage...throw in plugin support...build a community around your product. In no time, this app will have lots of plugins and every capability Photoshop has. 4-5 years down the road, this app will probably supplant Photoshop on Mac.



    Adobe had 7 years to *start* porting Photoshop to Xcode. They could have done this in parallel with the Metroworks code. They could have worked the bugs out of Xcode during those 7 years with Apple. Once they were satisfied with the performance of gcc, they would already have the code ready to compile.



    Fuck'em...7 years to port to Xcode and they've only begun a few months ago.



    Adobe doesn't care about you. In fact, Adobe hates you. They'll take your money and laugh all the way to the bank. They'll keep pushing their loyal fan base around as long as this fan base is dumb enough to take it.
  • Reply 4 of 67
    xoolxool Posts: 2,460member
    Knowing Adobe, it doesn't surprise that it'll take ages to see the Macintel versions of Photoshop. Especially true that they'll wair for a new version so they can charge you and arm and a leg for the privilege.



    That said, I'd expect Apple to improve and add hooks to Rosetta to help PowerPC Photoshop run on the intel boxes. There's probably some other laggard "pro" apps out there and Apple will do its best to get those apps running smoothley for their Pro customers.
  • Reply 5 of 67
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kim kap sol

    It's not trivial to do all this, we know this...but choosing to lug around a 16 year old code base around and planning another 10 years around it is extremely stupid.





    What the fuck is BSD/UNIX, and GNU-Linux? what the fuck is OSX (see open step, see nextstep), they are all spinoffs clones or variants of the Bell Labs UNIX large scale computer opperating system what is the forthcoming windows vista, and the current desktop king (like it or not), XP, just the reved versions of NT 3.5





    In many cases, old code is proven code, when you ajust levels in Photoshop, you KNOW that it works the way it appears to, it has to, that kind of reliability is crucial for the pros that use it, you dont get that by fiddling with every wiz-bang-doo-dad along the way untill it becomes a proven bedrock technology.



    With a pakage like adobe CS, and the expectations that people have, expecting a 6-month turn around is pretty nuts...they found out about the intel thing the same time we all did
  • Reply 6 of 67
    gene cleangene clean Posts: 3,481member
    Quote:

    It's not trivial to do all this, we know this...but choosing to lug around a 16 year old code base around and planning another 10 years around it is extremely stupid.



    The OS you run is at least 30 years old.
  • Reply 7 of 67
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kim kap sol

    Fuck'em...7 years to port to Xcode and they've only begun a few months ago.



    Before the intel switch, what was the advantage of using the Apple IDE when you have millions of lines in Code warrior, as far as adobe knew, code warior was stil good, no one knew the intel switch was coming, no one wanted to beleiv it anyway. When folks mentioned that the IBM G5 was the last gasp of a dying platform, no one seemed to agree except the Apple engeneers before last July...
  • Reply 8 of 67
    the cool gutthe cool gut Posts: 1,714member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by a_greer

    In many cases, old code is proven code, when you ajust levels in Photoshop, you KNOW that it works the way it appears to, it has to, that kind of reliability is crucial for the pros that use it, you dont get that by fiddling with every wiz-bang-doo-dad along the way untill it becomes a proven bedrock technology.



    With a pakage like adobe CS, and the expectations that people have, expecting a 6-month turn around is pretty nuts...they found out about the intel thing the same time we all did




    Well, Photoshop is not far from falling behind, as it was mentioned, the App simply isn't ready for the digital camera workflow revolution.



    They may have found out about Intel the same time we did, but Apple has been evangalizing Xcode for more than 5 years now.



    There is no surprise that Adobe is just full of fuckups - I use their shit bloated Creative Suite everyday. Like taking 6 years to stop illustrator from "quitting unexpectidly", peice of shit PDF code which always has problems after sending it to the printers, that peice of garbage they call Bridge.



    Hey, Adobe - don't even bother porting your shit applications, 'cause they just aren't worth the effort.
  • Reply 9 of 67
    placeboplacebo Posts: 5,767member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gene Clean

    The OS you run is at least 30 years old.



    The basic concepts are the same, but it's been tweaked, built upon, optimized, and rewritten quite a few times since Bell Labs had the bright idea.
  • Reply 10 of 67
    4fx4fx Posts: 258member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by the cool gut

    Well, Photoshop is not far from falling behind, the App simply isn't ready for the digital camera workflow revolution.



    I would like you to show me an app that is... Everything I have seen so far has so many missing features that I dont even bother. I think Apple is headed in the right direction with Aperature, but there is much to be done before I am satisfied with a workflow that works for me.





    Quote:

    Originally posted by the cool gut

    There is no surprise that Adobe is just full of fuckups - I use their shit bloated Creative Suite everyday. Like taking 6 years to stop illustrator from "quitting unexpectidly", peice of shit PDF code which always has problems after sending it to the printers, that peice of garbage they call Bridge.



    Hey, Adobe - don't even bother porting your shit applications, 'cause they just aren't worth the effort.




    And what would you propose using instead? Aperature? GIMP? Xpress? Metro(shudder)? Corel Draw? Corel Paint?



    I am open to new and better options. But if those options dont give me a better workflow, more powerful tools, more inntuitive interface, more reliable delivery, etc. then dont talk to me about how Adobe is worthless.



    Lets face reality. Unfortunate as it is, Adobe is the only real answer at the moment (Xpress 7 does look promising). We need a true competitor to up the stakes. Until then, Im sticking with what gets the job done.
  • Reply 11 of 67
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by the cool gut

    They may have found out about Intel the same time we did, but Apple has been evangalizing Xcode for more than 5 years now.





    Did you miss the point of my post? Adobe had no incentive to switch IDEs when the binaries generated from Codewarrior worked just fine. Business only spends money when one of two conditions can be proven, either mid-to-long term cost cutting or increasing or sustaining revinue, untill six months ago, xcode had little to no claim at either.
  • Reply 12 of 67
    fahlmanfahlman Posts: 700member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by 4fx

    Xpress 7 does look promising



    As a replacement for Photoshop? Or InDesign?
  • Reply 13 of 67
    4fx4fx Posts: 258member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by fahlman

    As a replacement for Photoshop? Or InDesign?



    I realized we have digressed from the original topic, but yes I was referring to InDesign (though personally, I hate Xpress 6.5 with a passion when I have to use it every so often).



    And if you think Adobe is bad, just remember what Quark put us through a few years back. I really thought they were doomed until their new management headed them in a new and better direction. And now it looks like we will get a Universal Xpress before we get a Universal InDesign...
  • Reply 14 of 67
    the cool gutthe cool gut Posts: 1,714member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by a_greer

    Did you miss the point of my post? Adobe had no incentive to switch IDEs when the binaries generated from Codewarrior worked just fine. Business only spends money when one of two conditions can be proven, either mid-to-long term cost cutting or increasing or sustaining revinue, untill six months ago, xcode had little to no claim at either.



    I think you are missing the point. If you are CEO of a company like Adobe, and you need immediate incentives in order to make business decisions, then it's time to get out of the game.
  • Reply 15 of 67
    the cool gutthe cool gut Posts: 1,714member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by 4fx

    I would like you to show me an app that is... Everything I have seen so far has so many missing features that I dont even bother. I think Apple is headed in the right direction with Aperature, but there is much to be done before I am satisfied with a workflow that works for me.



    I'm not saying everyone is going to switch from Photoshop, I just said that it is falling behind. Aperture is at version >>1.1<< and by at least on review, already produces better colour from raw files than Photoshop.



    It is not going to take much to knock Photoshop off it's horse, Photoshop isn't Quark.



    For the majority of users, Aperture just needs Curves, Layers, Filters, and a Handfull of other tools to be an adequate replacement for Photoshop.
  • Reply 16 of 67
    placeboplacebo Posts: 5,767member
    Adobe Creative Suite will cost $50,000 per license to help offset the cost of the relatavistic starcruiser Adobe had to rent to get an Intel Binary coded within the millenium.
  • Reply 17 of 67
    cosmonutcosmonut Posts: 4,872member
    I can't fault Adobe too much on this, folks. They were in the same position that anyone else is about anything else that will eventually have to change over to something else: "We'll get to it later." If your feet aren't being held to the fire because of a looming deadline, you're less likely to care too much about it at the time. Adobe probably knew that they needed to move over to XCode, but also had some other projects on their plate that took higher priority.



    Hindsight is 20/20. If they'd known then what they know now, we might have Universal Photoshop much sooner. If we knew hijackers were going to use 757s as missles, we might have had better national security at the time. It's a universal (pardon the pun) truth.
  • Reply 18 of 67
    why are we even stressing about universal creative suite? there's no intel processor available right now that would make an intel powermac faster than a quad g5. it seems like most of the people bitching about creative suite not being universal aren't people who make a living from using it.



    it's not like this was a huge surprise to anyone in graphic design or photography. i'm sure we've all bought accordingly. i personally bought the fastest portable and fastest tower powerpc model for just this reason. i can wait out the first generation of intel macs or wait to see if the speed improvements and reliability warrant buying one.



    i wouldn't want to rely on the first version of both an intel mac AND ub creative suite to put food on my table.
  • Reply 19 of 67
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,807member
    Aperture 3.0 will definitely be an interesting piece of software.



    With regard to Photoshop, it's a complex piece of software which is why no-one's been able to replicate it on the platform.



    Adobe uses their own imaging technology to keep the software crossplatform, which is why it's bloated.



    The only software that begins to tackle OS X-native imaging is Stone Design's iMaginator.



    The problem there is that as MacWorld has said, Stone has never really understood how to make an interface that's compelling to Pros.



    I'm not sure why no-one's picked up on TIFFany's legacy.



    Personally, I think Quark should make an image editor to give away free with the purchase of Xpress and buy SoftPress' Freeway to complete their own Creative Suite.
  • Reply 20 of 67
    kim kap solkim kap sol Posts: 2,987member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by a_greer

    What the fuck is BSD/UNIX, and GNU-Linux? what the fuck is OSX (see open step, see nextstep), they are all spinoffs clones or variants of the Bell Labs UNIX large scale computer opperating system what is the forthcoming windows vista, and the current desktop king (like it or not), XP, just the reved versions of NT 3.5





    In many cases, old code is proven code, when you ajust levels in Photoshop, you KNOW that it works the way it appears to, it has to, that kind of reliability is crucial for the pros that use it, you dont get that by fiddling with every wiz-bang-doo-dad along the way untill it becomes a proven bedrock technology.



    With a pakage like adobe CS, and the expectations that people have, expecting a 6-month turn around is pretty nuts...they found out about the intel thing the same time we all did




    OSes are a different breed, my friend. You can't compare an OS to an app because the OS provides the APIs that apps should adopt. If you stick with the old APIs, you're not fully utilizing the potential being offered. If you don't use the APIs provided to you, why bother writing for a specific OS?



    Because Adobe refuses to use new APIs, it's a platform on its own...it's its own OS. That's bad. Having an OS over and OS just doesn't work.



    Adobe should just start selling AdobeOS boxes because, right now, it's a lousy System 7 app with an Aqua makeover. It doesn't integrate with OS X...at all.
Sign In or Register to comment.