Wait, so people who are already invested in Adobe for their work and already have a subscription are going to find getting another free version of Photoshop for their iPad is somehow too expensive?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Adobe Outlines Additional Features Coming to Photoshop for iPad Following Poor Reviews
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Basic ipads are great for home websurfing, mail clients or kids enterteinment, but computers still being the thing for serious work.
I’ve only see people buying iPad pro super happy for work, but buying a conputer after all for some reason.
tablets could be a real computer sometime, but its far far from that day, and apple doesnt want it to come close (they are selling both devices...)
I’ve only see people buying iPad pro super happy for work, but buying a conputer after all for some reason.
tablets could be a real computer sometime, but its far far from that day, and apple doesnt want it to come close (they are selling both devices...)
This just isn't true at all.
Kind of defeats the purpose doesn’t it? Whole idea of a pro tablet, or any pro device, is so one can complete a project from beginning to end on that device.
Why? You can have a pro device that is supplementary in some ways. My iPad Pro outperforms most of my other computers. I do vector and bitmap art on it.. But I need to switch to my other machines for things like programming or some more complex pixel graphics stuff. Sidecar is testament to the fact the platforms are symbiotic. Pros use a whole range of machines.
Having a on the go machine and a desktop machine is pretty common, for a lot of people that used to be a laptop and is now comfortably an iPad.. 🤷🏻♀️
Pixelmator and Affinity Photo are holding for you on line 1.
[automerge]1574383714[/automerge]
Then your concerns are misplaced. The problems with Photoshop have to do with porting it to run on iOS, not with getting it to compile/run on ARM. The latter is comparatively easy. An ARM-based Mac won't cause the same kind of problems.
Last edited:
Believe it or not, Adobe didn't dramatically change their software for a long time since they announced CC version. A poor optimization is a great example.
No, the different processors don't require different programming languages. You write in a high-level language (like C, C++, Objective-C, Swift), and then the compiler compiles that down into machine code for the selected processor. Moving between processors/architectures is relatively easy (unless you've made very poor decisions in your program design). Moving between operating systems (e.g. iOS to Mac) can be much more difficult.
[automerge]1574385031[/automerge]
Have you tried Apple Maps lately? I've found that I strongly prefer it over Google Maps, for the past few years. Sure, there were some problems right when it came out (it was rushed, because of the maps contract with Google running out), but those were fixed long ago.
Last edited:
I guess you never used Affinity designer or Photo on the iPad.
Affinity Photo for iPad. No subscription and it’s already awesome.
[automerge]1574405168[/automerge]
[automerge]1574405168[/automerge]
Well that was well timed reinforcement.
the issue isn’t ARM exactly. The problem i imagine is that adobe have a very old code base. Probably nearly as old as windows etc.. and that code base is probably tied to a cross platform inhouse framework that allows them to do both mac and pc software at the same time. Another issue is that they use a lot of their own graphic routines and their own hooks into whatever GPU is available on the desktop.
I think they are trying to move the whole adobe development platform to ARM. So that it’s easier to port other tools like illustrator etc.. that must have been hard! Affinity and Procreate make use of apples metal graphic tools so half the work is done for them. Adobe are probably having to integrate their code base into Apple’s metal to get similar performance.
I think all the above work would need to be done and then select the features that are priority at launch. It’s a 30yr old code base so it would have taken forever.
and the testing it as well.Ultimately it has to load a psd from decades ago so it has to make Sure all of the engine is in place
I just think they shouldnt Have announced it would be released this year. But I imagine Apple put pressure on them so that they could announce it at the ipad Pro launch in 2018.
A laptop is a "toy" - there's no way anyone can get serious, professional graphics work done on a display smaller than 27". 😉
New tools can subtly or dramatically change an art form. There was a time when professional photographers called 35mm cameras "toys." The negatives were too small, and they lacked tilts and swings (the ability to manipulate perspective by changing the angular relationship of the lens to the film plane). But 35mm combat photography by the likes of Robert Capa proved otherwise. The particular strengths of 35mm cameras in a combat environment (size/weight and speed of use) completely changed our expectations of what a photograph could capture.
The IBM PC and Apple II were toys to the engineers who had access to DEC or SGI mini-computers, and the favored few who had access to Cray supercomputers thought everyone else was just playing around.
In the end, the difference between a professional tool and a toy comes down to whether a person skilled in the use of that tool can produce professional-quality work. And when a new tool comes along, even a "great professional" needs to spend time mastering that new tool. You wouldn't be able to time-transport Thomas Chippendale from his 18th-century workshop into a modern woodworking shop and expect him to turn out masterworks of cabinetry five minutes later.
Owning a particular tool does not make someone a professional, what a person accomplishes with the tool is all that matters. Incredibly sophisticated work can be done with incredibly simple tools; it's often just a matter of how much additional skill or time is required in order to get those great results.
Does it matter whether a render takes one minute or one hour? No, that's just the speed of execution - the ability to do more work in less time. That's not skill, that's not quality; that productivity. Yes, productivity and profitability are part of being a professional, but they are not a measure of quality.
As to Photoshop? I've never used it on a desktop or laptop, and I'm not sure I'll use it on iPad, either. I've always used different image editors. Maybe I've missed out over the years - I'm willing to grant that Photoshop may have capabilities that my favored tools have lacked. But in the end, all that matters is the images that I produce. How I achieved those results is important only to hardware-heads.
New tools can subtly or dramatically change an art form. There was a time when professional photographers called 35mm cameras "toys." The negatives were too small, and they lacked tilts and swings (the ability to manipulate perspective by changing the angular relationship of the lens to the film plane). But 35mm combat photography by the likes of Robert Capa proved otherwise. The particular strengths of 35mm cameras in a combat environment (size/weight and speed of use) completely changed our expectations of what a photograph could capture.
The IBM PC and Apple II were toys to the engineers who had access to DEC or SGI mini-computers, and the favored few who had access to Cray supercomputers thought everyone else was just playing around.
In the end, the difference between a professional tool and a toy comes down to whether a person skilled in the use of that tool can produce professional-quality work. And when a new tool comes along, even a "great professional" needs to spend time mastering that new tool. You wouldn't be able to time-transport Thomas Chippendale from his 18th-century workshop into a modern woodworking shop and expect him to turn out masterworks of cabinetry five minutes later.
Owning a particular tool does not make someone a professional, what a person accomplishes with the tool is all that matters. Incredibly sophisticated work can be done with incredibly simple tools; it's often just a matter of how much additional skill or time is required in order to get those great results.
Does it matter whether a render takes one minute or one hour? No, that's just the speed of execution - the ability to do more work in less time. That's not skill, that's not quality; that productivity. Yes, productivity and profitability are part of being a professional, but they are not a measure of quality.
As to Photoshop? I've never used it on a desktop or laptop, and I'm not sure I'll use it on iPad, either. I've always used different image editors. Maybe I've missed out over the years - I'm willing to grant that Photoshop may have capabilities that my favored tools have lacked. But in the end, all that matters is the images that I produce. How I achieved those results is important only to hardware-heads.
you do realize the iPad Pro is more powerful than 90% of desktop computers, right?
Doesn’t it get tiring to still iterate this lame take after nine years of the iPad existing?
[automerge]1574604199[/automerge]
It’s nonsense. Yes, iPads are a different architecture, and yes, Photoshop probably has some architecture-specific optimizations. But that’s not a big, relevant holdup to porting Photoshop to the mythical ARM Macs or to iPads.
The likely hold-up is making it work well in a different user interface.
No thanks. The subscription ends up being cheaper most people who use Adobe for work, which is the majority of Adobe users. This is one case where a subscription is well worth it.
[automerge]1574640387[/automerge]
an iPad will never replace a desktop for Adobe regardless of how powerful it is. I generally have three 5k monitors going at once, and use an iPad as an input device.
[automerge]1574640481[/automerge]
I agree. You’re no Harvard Business School Professor.
People who already have a subscription obviously already have a desktop or a laptop. Why would they care about an inferior option (iPad)?
Except it's not inferior - it's just another tool for professionals to use. Being able to draw directly on the screen with a stylus has advantages for many tasks. Especially when you can do that anywhere.
Too bad nothing on Android (or that other pretend OS - Chrome) can even tough the abilities of Photoshop (or Procreate, Affinity, Pixelmator or others). I can do work across multiple devices from an iPad to a laptop to a high-end workstation and switch seamlessly between them since I have software actually available on all of them.