Adobe To Preview Universal Apps Next Week?

[digitalbiker]

What! not untill 2007?

i might just wait on buying a mac now *grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr sob sob*

Look, it is ridiculous to not buy a new mac just because CS2 is not UB. The new macs are so fast that they run photshop almost as fast in rosetta as your old PPC mac did running the native binary.

Plus everything else that is UB runs much faster as well as the OS running faster. Also in 6 months Adobe will most likely release a UB version of CS3 and it will run much, much faster than the ppc version.

 

[relimw]

Excellent point. I remember back at that Keynote when the Adobe CEO came out on stage with Jobs and he said they were fully committed to Apple's Intel transition, etc. Based on this I would have thought Adobe would have been one of the first companies to release UB versions of their apps, and lead the charge like the flagship company they should be. However, we now are witness to more proof of what kind of company Adobe is, as (in)actions speak louder than words.

Of course, Apple being ahead of the transition curve, carries no blame in being so far ahead of the original schedule that they layed out to Adobe and the rest of us.

 

[~Shard~]

Of course, Apple being ahead of the transition curve, carries no blame in being so far ahead of the original schedule that they layed out to Adobe and the rest of us.

Of course Apple isn't at fault, otherwise that would be unbiased...

 

[bousozoku]

Come-on I think you are being a little hard on Adobe. Adobe has always been great about supporting the Apple & the mac. Apple & Adobe's success have been directly linked both in text processing and image processing.
...

That's why they let Premiere languish until Apple did something about it and brought Final Cut Pro to market. They cried foul and removed Premiere from the Mac, even as they finally resumed development and released Premiere Pro.

Obviously, Adobe care a great deal...about money.

 

[digitalbiker]

That's why they let Premiere languish until Apple did something about it and brought Final Cut Pro to market. They cried foul and removed Premiere from the Mac, even as they finally resumed development and released Premiere Pro.

Obviously, Adobe care a great deal...about money.

All companies care a great deal about money. Apple cares a great deal about money too.

Adobe probably was well aware that Apple was working on Final Cut Pro. After it was released, they saw the writing on the wall and realized that the Apple market share was going to be too small for Adobe to compete in it against Final Cut Pro.

Therefore they did the smart thing and dropped the product on the mac and focused on optimizing Premiere for windows. Apple users may not have liked this but Adobe had to make a business decission. Apple creating it's own very capable software product killed premiere.

 

[bousozoku]

All companies care a great deal about money. Apple cares a great deal about money too.

Adobe probably was well aware that Apple was working on Final Cut Pro. After it was released, they saw the writing on the wall and realized that the Apple market share was going to be too small for Adobe to compete in it against Final Cut Pro.

Therefore they did the smart thing and dropped the product on the mac and focused on optimizing Premiere for windows. Apple users may not have liked this but Adobe had to make a business decission. Apple creating it's own very capable software product killed premiere.

So, you think that Apple caused Adobe to stop working on Premiere even though Apple weren't doing anything with video at the time?

 

[digitalbiker]

So, you think that Apple caused Adobe to stop working on Premiere even though Apple weren't doing anything with video at the time?

No, I don't think Apple did anything to slow the development of premiere. Adobe made a mistake here. They let the product get too stale. Apple made a business decission to produce a better product than Adobe. Adobe seeing the product didn't feel it was in their interest to compete against Apple in the smaller mac market.

Having said this, I will bet that if the mac market share increases now that Apple has gone intel. More macs will be preferred in the video industry and Adobe will probably get back into the competition.

 

[IlluminatedSage]

hey this is good news. at least adobe is making progress.

when they release their universal apps alot of people, including myself, will be very happy.

 

[monke]

I can't wait. I need to be completely Windows free.

 

[sparky672]

What's that got to do with the various versions of Windows? He did say CS3 for Windows.

Yes- I totally misread that. I thought he meant Windows-Vista-only.

 

[Habusho]

I think everything is going to be going Apple's way next year. They're going to come out with a phenomenal OS. I think Vista will be two generations behind what apple is going to come out with. With Adobe apps becoming UB Apple can finally pull in their core customers (the graphic designers, web designers etc.) into their product line. I think their market share next year is going to go through the roof. They have a superior OS, superior hardware, and superior aesthetics with their products. I'm seriously thinking of buying a whole bunch of apple stocks this year. If they could only finalize their problems with the reimbursement of their execs

 

[bretm]

I'm looking to flaunt the massive increases in speed to my staggeringly ignorant IT person (over not only CS2 on Mac, but also very much on the PC).

Don't let me down Adobe.

Everyone does remember that PS runs faster on the Mac Pro under Rosetta than it does natively on the quad G5, right?

 

[bretm]

AWARE? FCP had been out on the market 2 years and was on version 2 before Adobe pulled Premiere. If I remember right, it was more about converting it to OSX AND competing with a product that was completely schooling them.

Apple BOUGHT FCP from Macromedia. That was known almost a good 2 years before it was even released. Adobe is kinda slow. Look at Aperture and Lightroom. Adobe admits Lightroom has been years and years in the making, but they didn't kick the beta out until the Aperture release. If apple wanted to, I'm extremely confident they could release a Photoshop competitor in less than a year. Most of the tools and subroutines exist in their other apps already.

Adobe needs to move this along. The non-release of UB versions by now is obviously a kick in Apple's rear. Spiteful for FCP AND DVDSP AND Aperture.

All companies care a great deal about money. Apple cares a great deal about money too.

Adobe probably was well aware that Apple was working on Final Cut Pro. After it was released, they saw the writing on the wall and realized that the Apple market share was going to be too small for Adobe to compete in it against Final Cut Pro.

Therefore they did the smart thing and dropped the product on the mac and focused on optimizing Premiere for windows. Apple users may not have liked this but Adobe had to make a business decission. Apple creating it's own very capable software product killed premiere.

 

[digitalbiker]

Everyone does remember that PS runs faster on the Mac Pro under Rosetta than it does natively on the quad G5, right?

No it doesn't. This was one of the performance tests that the Mac Pro lost. I will have to dig out the macworld tests numbers. It was amazingly good considering it was running under rosetta but it still lost.

 

[bousozoku]

No it doesn't. This was one of the performance tests that the Mac Pro lost. I will have to dig out the macworld tests numbers. It was amazingly good considering it was running under rosetta but it still lost.

You're right. It runs pretty well but not better. I saw some tests on Digital Video Editing and they were comparing a MacBook against a dual core G5 and the MacBook pretty much crushed the dual core PowerMac. That's scary.

 

[digitalbiker]

If apple wanted to, I'm extremely confident they could release a Photoshop competitor in less than a year.

Your joking right? Adobe has been tailoring Photoshop to digital artists and image professionals for 20 years now. Constant feedback and subsequent updating are what has made Adobe withstand the test of time.

Apple is very good at designing easy to use general sofware. But putting together a well-rounded, integrated, industry standardized, professional product that would replace Photoshop in a year or less is just ridiculous.

Like you mentioned before Apple has always bought their professional products in the past. They buy and tweek.

Look at Apples recent efforts with iWork. After a year or better of development the first release of Pages was a complete piece of junk. Subsequent releases are better but still only mediocre except for simple canned boilerplate word formating. Maybe next year they will add a spreadsheet program. Maybe a few years after that they will integrate it all together with a database program, conferencing, etc. and then they might have something close to replacing office.

 

[digitalbiker]

Here is the MacWorld speed test I was referring to earlier.

http://www.macworld.com/2006/08/reviews/macprorev/index.php

If you scroll down the page they show the quad G5 completed their Adobe Photoshop CS2 test in 45 seconds. The Mac Pro completed the same test in 1 minute and 25 seconds. In this test shorter time equal better performance.

 

[swingerofbirch]

We should be lucky Adobe releases a UB anytime at all.

They could just make a big announcement saying, "We love Bootcamp. CS2 and 3 for Windows run great in Bootcamp and we're gonna work with Apple to make sure that's the case."

You have to admit it takes a lot of resources to be working on two simultaneous versions of a huge product, especially when one version is limited to a rather small market, and COULD run with only version. To make two versions is a real commitment to the Mac OS. Just as Microsoft making the next version of Office UB is a commitment to the Mac OS.

Apple is doing great because of their small size--they are nimble and have made huge transitions, but they take their developers for a hell of a ride along the way!

 

[digitalbiker]

We should be lucky Adobe releases a UB anytime at all.

They could just make a big announcement saying, "We love Bootcamp. CS2 and 3 for Windows run great in Bootcamp and we're gonna work with Apple to make sure that's the case."

You have to admit it takes a lot of resources to be working on two simultaneous versions of a huge product, especially when one version is limited to a rather small market, and COULD run with only version. To make two versions is a real commitment to the Mac OS. Just as Microsoft making the next version of Office UB is a commitment to the Mac OS.

Apple is doing great because of their small size--they are nimble and have made huge transitions, but they take their developers for a hell of a ride along the way!

Agreed! But it always surprizes me how many mac users want to chase off Adobe or Microsoft.

There are so many that want Apple to come in an write everything. Where the heck did this anger come from? Software developers are not staging covert operations to get back at Apple for this or that. They are just trying to produce a product and sell it to the software buying community.

I say the more the merrier. I would love to see Apple have as many software vendors competing for my business as window developers are competing for window user business. I really don't want to buy all of my software from Apple. I am happy with Apple focusing on hardware, OS X and a few assorted goodies.

 

[Blue Velvet]

You have to admit it takes a lot of resources to be working on two simultaneous versions of a huge product, especially when one version is limited to a rather small market, and COULD run with only version.

Good point. But the rather small market accounts for about 50% of total Creative Suite sales so I'm sure that Adobe is doing the best it can to make everything works as it should. After all, if it doesn't everyone will hear about it pretty damn quickly.

They're no fools; they've seen how quickly mind-share and market-share can erode as in the case of Quark's inept handling of its user-base. There may not be any capable competitors around at the moment but 5 or 10 years down the line may throw up some interesting surprises.

I suspect that they're very concerned about Microsoft's moves towards an alternative to PDF and a rival to PostScript; probably embedded within Vista. It will be interesting to see how Acrobat/PDF will evolve over the next few years.

 

[MacsRgr8]

Everyone does remember that PS runs faster on the Mac Pro under Rosetta than it does natively on the quad G5, right?

hahahahaha

You made my day, tnx.

Remember that the G5 still is a very fast processor. Even UB games running native on both platforms (Doom 3, Quake 4, Halo 2, UT 2004) were faster on the Quad G5 than the Mac Pro tnx to the better grfx card.
If the G5 were a much slower CPU we would have found out that these heavy games would have had CPU-related performance issues. Ofcourse we can't be sure until the Mac Pro will get the X1900 XT grfx card in their test lab... but then the Mac Pro will have a better grfx card than the Quad G5... and so on....

 

[Bern]

..... A UB conversion of the CS suite of applictions is not a minor task even though people on this site love to make it out like it would have been essentially a 2 day effort. Adobe's CS2 product most likely had a lot of non-standard and non-Xcode code in order to speed it up a little. Not only was this a big task but then you have to run all of the debugging cycles etc. etc....

I don't think anyone disputes that, in fact like I already mentioned had Adobe not sold out to Windows when they developed CS which was simply ported to Mac then within a few months released CS2 (which in all reality should have been CS all along) they certainly wouldn't have the mammoth task ahead of them.

I don't believe Apple's announcement to go Intel was the big surprise Adobe would have us believe, however it's a convenient excuse to justify their inability to have an Intel compatible version of CS3 available soon. That and the fact they now own Macromedia which they must now incorporate into CS3 we are now hostage to their monopoly and their "improved price increases".

 

[iMeowbot]

I don't think anyone disputes that, in fact like I already mentioned had Adobe not sold out to Windows when they developed CS which was simply ported to Mac then within a few months released CS2 (which in all reality should have been CS all along) they certainly wouldn't have the mammoth task ahead of them.

Adobe would have had to migrate to another development environment even if they didn't go to Windows. The Windows version may have even made their life a little easier now, because Adobe already had to go through the task of making sure all the filters worked on x86.

 

[BakedBeans]

Everyone does remember that PS runs faster on the Mac Pro under Rosetta than it does natively on the quad G5, right?

Hi,

Most (tempted to say all, but not 100% on that) tests show that the g5's are still the clear winners when doing (what I and others class as) fair photoshop tests.

http://www.barefeats.com/quad11.html

This shows it is upto 98% faster than the 3ghz MacPro. Although, that machine is going to be hellishly fast when things go native/universal.

 

[2ndPath]

Look at Aperture and Lightroom. Adobe admits Lightroom has been years and years in the making, but they didn't kick the beta out until the Aperture release.

Wasn't Lightroom developed originally by Macromedia? That way it can only have been in Adobe's hands for a short time. Or do I remember incorrectly and it was indeed developed all the time by Adobe?