I'm waiting to get a new MacBook Pro when CS3 is out. If Leopard isn't out by then I'll probably wait for that, too. And if sites like this start reporting Apple will change the chipset to allow for a full 4gig of RAM I'll wait for that, too. Based on the rumors, at least the first two should be available in time for my birthday in July!
Checked Adobe's web site and noticed that only the $449 Professional version of Acrobat 8 is available for Mac. The $299 Standard version is Windows only.
Checked Adobe's web site and noticed that only the $449 Professional version of Acrobat 8 is available for Mac. The $299 Standard version is Windows only.
Ouch! The bow shots are really flying now. Once Apple figures out how to replace the PDF core with "something better" all bets are off, baby.
I totally agreee. I don't like not having a choice...
I wonder if this makes apple nervous, I mean if adobe decides not to make CS4 for some reason.. apple would loose a lot of folks.
flick.
It depends on how many Mac users are there. Adobe has just said that Mac usership has been going up. Buy the products. It's that simple.
In my user group, people always complain about companies that discontinue Mac products. But, when I ask people to raise their hands if they bought the product, almost no one does. That's the problem.
Checked Adobe's web site and noticed that only the $449 Professional version of Acrobat 8 is available for Mac. The $299 Standard version is Windows only.
Adobe's reasons for that are that those who buy the product on the Mac platform are content CREATORS. Whereas most users on Windows are content USERS.
Also, many users of Acrobat in Windows are office document users and creators. Most Mac users are publishing users and creators.
There is a difference in the program sophistication required for those tasks.
I hope they don't. MS is trying to do that right now with their version of XML.
It would be a disaster!
PDF is ubiquitous in almost every industry now. Apple could never hope to come up with something on their own that would be of interest to anyone.
I'd rather Apple come up with the QuickTime equivalent of graphics. Something that would be 100% compatible with PDF, and it would enable new graphics creation minus the reliance on PDF. Isn't the entire OSX graphics engine based on PDF?
I'd rather Apple come up with the QuickTime equivalent of graphics. Something that would be 100% compatible with PDF, and it would enable new graphics creation minus the reliance on PDF. Isn't the entire OSX graphics engine based on PDF?
I'm not sure what that means. But the document standard is PDF. It's integrated into the OS. The display technology is based on Apple's own technologies. Next had Display Postcript.
And if you think Apple doesn't have a secret prototype of a Photoshop competitor in their labs based on their work with Aperture, you are kidding yourself.
The problems are InDesign and (now) Dreamweaver, that's all.
Comments
I think that's what they're trying to do with Final Cut, Apeture, etc.
-Clive
It's a shame Apple has no viable alternatives to Photoshop and Illustrator. \
It's a shame Apple has no viable alternatives to Photoshop and Illustrator. \
I totally agreee. I don't like not having a choice...
I wonder if this makes apple nervous, I mean if adobe decides not to make CS4 for some reason.. apple would loose a lot of folks.
flick.
However, I agree that Mac sales will increase when CS3 is released.
Checked Adobe's web site and noticed that only the $449 Professional version of Acrobat 8 is available for Mac. The $299 Standard version is Windows only.
Ouch! The bow shots are really flying now. Once Apple figures out how to replace the PDF core with "something better" all bets are off, baby.
Ouch! The bow shots are really flying now. Once Apple figures out how to replace the PDF core with "something better" all bets are off, baby.
Why would Mac need the standard version anyway? isn't Preview good enough?
flick.
I totally agreee. I don't like not having a choice...
I wonder if this makes apple nervous, I mean if adobe decides not to make CS4 for some reason.. apple would loose a lot of folks.
flick.
It depends on how many Mac users are there. Adobe has just said that Mac usership has been going up. Buy the products. It's that simple.
In my user group, people always complain about companies that discontinue Mac products. But, when I ask people to raise their hands if they bought the product, almost no one does. That's the problem.
Does that user base figure refer to 3 million Mac users or just 3 million users on both Windows and Mac?
That's the very question I was wondering about.
The AI articles aren't always complete, or accurate.
Checked Adobe's web site and noticed that only the $449 Professional version of Acrobat 8 is available for Mac. The $299 Standard version is Windows only.
Adobe's reasons for that are that those who buy the product on the Mac platform are content CREATORS. Whereas most users on Windows are content USERS.
Also, many users of Acrobat in Windows are office document users and creators. Most Mac users are publishing users and creators.
There is a difference in the program sophistication required for those tasks.
Ouch! The bow shots are really flying now. Once Apple figures out how to replace the PDF core with "something better" all bets are off, baby.
I hope they don't. MS is trying to do that right now with their version of XML.
It would be a disaster!
PDF is ubiquitous in almost every industry now. Apple could never hope to come up with something on their own that would be of interest to anyone.
Why would Mac need the standard version anyway? isn't Preview good enough?
flick.
Preview isn't useful creation software. PDF's can be made in almost ecery Mac program as Apple standardized on it. Editing is different.
Acrobat Reader competes with Preview. It is free.
I hope they don't. MS is trying to do that right now with their version of XML.
It would be a disaster!
PDF is ubiquitous in almost every industry now. Apple could never hope to come up with something on their own that would be of interest to anyone.
I'd rather Apple come up with the QuickTime equivalent of graphics. Something that would be 100% compatible with PDF, and it would enable new graphics creation minus the reliance on PDF. Isn't the entire OSX graphics engine based on PDF?
I'd rather Apple come up with the QuickTime equivalent of graphics. Something that would be 100% compatible with PDF, and it would enable new graphics creation minus the reliance on PDF. Isn't the entire OSX graphics engine based on PDF?
I'm not sure what that means. But the document standard is PDF. It's integrated into the OS. The display technology is based on Apple's own technologies. Next had Display Postcript.
The AI articles aren't always complete, or accurate.
Understatement of the year.
It's a shame Apple has no viable alternatives to Photoshop and Illustrator. \
An Illustrator competitor is available now.
Bundling it with every Mac Pro would be easy.
And if you think Apple doesn't have a secret prototype of a Photoshop competitor in their labs based on their work with Aperture, you are kidding yourself.
The problems are InDesign and (now) Dreamweaver, that's all.