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 Universal Support FAQ
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Forget about Job's stated transition dates. Marketing wise, it looks really good when your ahead of schedule... which was the plan all along. I'm betting they go Intel very soon with everything. The MacMall catalog I recieved today has the G5 power mac's on sale. That usually is the sign... out with old, in with the new. No way they release newer G5's. I'm thinking retailers got the directive from Apple to clear'em out boys. The release of Intel imacs made power mac sales come to a screeching halt. I was about to buy a G5 myself to upgrade my dual 1.25 G4. Not now. I'll wait for an Intel power mac. Whose going to update current apps now? Why buy a new G5 whose life cycle will be a fraction of an Intel machine. An Apple store employee told me G4/G5 sales are sloooowing... Intel imacs very brisk (just ordered one for my daughter by the way). Either Apple shot themselves in the foot with the release of the Intel imac or they have things moving quickly down the pipeline. I'm guessing the latter.ultrafiel said:
Payback?
I wonder if this could be payback to Steve for saying that Photoshop has always been slow (at least for launching) during the Keynote??
I wonder if this could be payback to Steve for saying that Photoshop has always been slow (at least for launching) during the Keynote??
l008com said:
wow, thanks for that newsflash. i guess my 1.67GHz PB, 1.6 GHz G5, dual 1.25GHz G4, all running 10.4.4, Illustrator CS2, Photoshop CS and 23" Cinema are pretty behind the times.
i know you're making broad generalizations, but i guess i hang w/ different designers. all the ones i know are on G4 PB's or G5 desktops and none of us have seen the HappyMac face of OS9 in years. i was "using" the developer release of 10.0, when did you switch?? (i say "using", b/c it wasn't very useful, but damn it looked pretty)
maybe you just know bad designers that can't afford to buy computers made in this decade or maybe they have kids (those things will soak up some dispoable income).
They need to do a complete rewrite for ps and their other apps like they did with premiere on the PC side. Granted its taken them until the new premiere pro 2 to get it right but its finally showing signs of being a good app and is pretty fast now. They have it in them to make great apps just need to start fresh.
Why is photoshop king?
Well, I have used Photshop before, but I am not a pro, so I wonder: I know Photoshop is the gold standard for editing still images, but is it really irreplaceable? Are there no other competing products that could be a good alternative to Photoshop (maybe with some improvements in the next 12 months)? e.g. Could Apple turn Aperture into a worthy competitor fairly quickly? I guess I don't know which features of Photoshop makes it so indispensible.
Well, I have used Photshop before, but I am not a pro, so I wonder: I know Photoshop is the gold standard for editing still images, but is it really irreplaceable? Are there no other competing products that could be a good alternative to Photoshop (maybe with some improvements in the next 12 months)? e.g. Could Apple turn Aperture into a worthy competitor fairly quickly? I guess I don't know which features of Photoshop makes it so indispensible.
Well if Apple has a photoshop competitor in the works Adobe just gave them a big opening. I'd love it if iPhoto had the same feature set as Elements.
Hm, this is not so good news. It looks like we are going to wait a little while... oh well, it's the best things in life you have to wait for. Does anyone know when CS2 was released?
Passante said:
Well that would be amazing, but the difference in editing power between those two apps is still huge. iphoto allows simple little touch-ups; elements allows pretty subsantial editing, at least for us amateurs.
Passante said:
I'd love to see what Apple would do, however I know Photoshop like the back of my hand...and it is pretty great.
I don't know why everyone is all freaking out. Does anyone actually think this is news? I think we all knew Adobe wouldn't take the time to rewrite their entire suite and not charge for it. Apple did it because they had to. Adobe isn't Apple. As far as 18-24 months. It was 18 months from CS1-CS2, CS3 is on schedule for this fall or hopefully sooner. I don't think Adobe wants to piss off the huge portion of Photographers and Designers that are on the Mac platform. When it's ready it's ready, and knowing Adobe I'm sure it will be great.
I believe those the CS is great and all, it is overly bloated and takes way too long to load and perform actions (and t his is with 1+ GB of ram on a standard legal size page image at 300dpi).
Here is a chance that Adobe can actually make they code effective and trim out the fat, if not the upcoming version hopefully the one to follow. I am getting sick of this crap, I have therefore not upgraded to CS v2.
Here is a chance that Adobe can actually make they code effective and trim out the fat, if not the upcoming version hopefully the one to follow. I am getting sick of this crap, I have therefore not upgraded to CS v2.
Photoshop v Aperture
i can't say that apple doesn't have a photoshop competitor in the works, but Aperture ain't it.
here's a culinary analogy for those that aren't familiar w/ each app:
Photoshop is a whole drawer of utensils, all of which are useful for editing images. Aperture is one sharp sushi knife. Much more specific of an audience and more specialized purpose. it's not an image EDITOR as much as an import/organization/color correction tool.
they are not competitors. however, Adobe Lightroom IS a competitor to Aperture. question is, does Apple have a tit-for-tat w/ Adobe in case they ever decide to pull the plug on Mac support...
i can't say that apple doesn't have a photoshop competitor in the works, but Aperture ain't it.
here's a culinary analogy for those that aren't familiar w/ each app:
Photoshop is a whole drawer of utensils, all of which are useful for editing images. Aperture is one sharp sushi knife. Much more specific of an audience and more specialized purpose. it's not an image EDITOR as much as an import/organization/color correction tool.
they are not competitors. however, Adobe Lightroom IS a competitor to Aperture. question is, does Apple have a tit-for-tat w/ Adobe in case they ever decide to pull the plug on Mac support...
This isn't any surprise to me. And I don't blame Adobe at all for not updating current versions. The NEXT versions have already been in progress, so why waste time/money--maybe a lot--porting the outgoing version? Keep those resources on the new version.
And I'm glad they've announced at least a vague timetable and explanation--but I do NOT like that Director wasn't mentioned by name!
This delay, as expected, will unfortunately create a dilemma for some people. Nothing can prevent that, and the transition is a necessary one that will bring great things this year and next. But some things will help:
* Most buyers of new Macs now are replacing an old G4 system--and so even with Rosetta they'll still see performance close to what they're used to, or better.
* Pros can still buy G5s (or G4 laptops). I expect Apple will keep selling G5 PowerMacs for as long as demand dictates--even after Mac Pros (or whatever) are out. So people who need Photoshop horsepower need not be left out in the cold.
* If the past 18-24 month record is what we have to go on then "Photoshop could be as many as 14 months away" is the worst case. 8 months is the best case, which is around when Conroe and Merom Macs are likely. The truth will probably be somewhere in between. That's really not far off the "late 2006" we were already expecting.
I want native Flash, Director, Dreamweaver and Photoshop ASAP. But realistically, I'll have to stick with what I'm using now for a year. I can deal. If I couldn't I'd get a G5 tower.
(BTW, as has been restated again and again, Apple's not "early" with the MacBook Pro and iMac. The NEVER said the transition would start in June. They said it would start BY June.)
And I'm glad they've announced at least a vague timetable and explanation--but I do NOT like that Director wasn't mentioned by name!
This delay, as expected, will unfortunately create a dilemma for some people. Nothing can prevent that, and the transition is a necessary one that will bring great things this year and next. But some things will help:
* Most buyers of new Macs now are replacing an old G4 system--and so even with Rosetta they'll still see performance close to what they're used to, or better.
* Pros can still buy G5s (or G4 laptops). I expect Apple will keep selling G5 PowerMacs for as long as demand dictates--even after Mac Pros (or whatever) are out. So people who need Photoshop horsepower need not be left out in the cold.
* If the past 18-24 month record is what we have to go on then "Photoshop could be as many as 14 months away" is the worst case. 8 months is the best case, which is around when Conroe and Merom Macs are likely. The truth will probably be somewhere in between. That's really not far off the "late 2006" we were already expecting.
I want native Flash, Director, Dreamweaver and Photoshop ASAP. But realistically, I'll have to stick with what I'm using now for a year. I can deal. If I couldn't I'd get a G5 tower.
(BTW, as has been restated again and again, Apple's not "early" with the MacBook Pro and iMac. The NEVER said the transition would start in June. They said it would start BY June.)
Interesting
This has shown more of the true face of computing - lots of people are running G4/G5 and will continue to do so for a while to come.
I know of a small in-house graphics shop; they do their co. website, brochures, handouts. etc.
There are 3 - 5 staff, depending on time of year (students/volunteers make up two).
They run b & w G3's and have one G4, a 533, I think. They have a pile of expensive, old scsi stuff, Nikon negative scanners and the like. All in use, often with OS9.
It all works, and they dream of getting a G5 in the next year or so.
OS 9 is used, and 10.3 is used. The co. has about 60-100,000 customers per year, its well-known in its field.
Intel for these guys? Sure, in about 3-4 years time.
The thing to remember is that OS9 and Photoshop 5 still WORKS, even if it isnt blazingly fast, and that computer speed is a very small part of what makes them useful.
I am happily running a 733 G4 tower, 1.25 ram, 120 HD, just bought a new internal Panasonic DVR-110 dual layer burner($50), cheap PCI wireless card($59), cheap PCI USB 2.0 card ($25). All work fine.
CS1 works fine, 3 year-old USB scanner, running 10.4 - will upgrade to dual G5 when one comes along used for around $900.
This has shown more of the true face of computing - lots of people are running G4/G5 and will continue to do so for a while to come.
I know of a small in-house graphics shop; they do their co. website, brochures, handouts. etc.
There are 3 - 5 staff, depending on time of year (students/volunteers make up two).
They run b & w G3's and have one G4, a 533, I think. They have a pile of expensive, old scsi stuff, Nikon negative scanners and the like. All in use, often with OS9.
It all works, and they dream of getting a G5 in the next year or so.
OS 9 is used, and 10.3 is used. The co. has about 60-100,000 customers per year, its well-known in its field.
Intel for these guys? Sure, in about 3-4 years time.
The thing to remember is that OS9 and Photoshop 5 still WORKS, even if it isnt blazingly fast, and that computer speed is a very small part of what makes them useful.
I am happily running a 733 G4 tower, 1.25 ram, 120 HD, just bought a new internal Panasonic DVR-110 dual layer burner($50), cheap PCI wireless card($59), cheap PCI USB 2.0 card ($25). All work fine.
CS1 works fine, 3 year-old USB scanner, running 10.4 - will upgrade to dual G5 when one comes along used for around $900.
It's really unlikely that major cross-platform apps will make the pointless jump to being all Cocoa.lD3LM3L said:
After all, Cocoa is built on Carbon. Ding-ding!
If Carbon were bad, would Cocoa be using it?
SiliconAddict said:
What the heck are you talking about!
This was not only expected but it was announced back in August. Apple without any notice switches CPU choices in June 2005, Adobe immediately begins to look into conversion. In August 2005, Adobe announces that it will take a major effort for Photoshop CS to go intel native and universal binaries would not be available until Photoshop CS3 when all products would be in sync.
Apple won't even have all of their own pro apps intel native until late March or early April.
If you were expecting Adobe to go intel native prior to Sept. 2006 then you weren't paying attention to what Adobe has been saying since day one.
Besides the the x86 iMac just started shipping. The MacBook Pro isn't shipping yet. The the iMac G5 performs at a respectable level and iMac x86 sales are poor. The PowerMac and ibook haven't gone intel yet.
Adobe doesn't even have market motivation yet to produce an intel native version. Cut them some slack. They make the richest suite of graphics tools for graphics artists bar none.
Welcome to the cutting edge. Most sensible people wait a year or two after a major OS change or cpu change before jumping in, simply because the software lag durring transition causes great STRESS!
Photoshop CS2 runs fine on Vista....DISCOMUNICATION said:
Are you maybe thinking of Photoshop x64 - the Intel 64-bit version? (Which would be sweet -- I've got a couple of quad CPU systems with 32 GiB of RAM that would scream.)
This is not a huge surprise...
We need to update 3 of our PowerMacs at work and I just handed a proposal to my boss to replace them with Dual Core 2.0 GHz G5's now and then we'll purchase the 3rd Creative Suite, which will work fluently with both Intel and PowerPC's, when it comes out. Then when our current G5's are about 4 years old in another 3 years, we'll make the transition to Intel Macs.
I have to say that I am really surprised that Apple is seeing a decline in PowerPC Mac sales.
I'm going out in a week and a half (after my new credit card comes in) and we are buying the Dual 2.0 Ghz PowerMac G5 for our home office. Why wait for the Intel version of the PM? All of my software is PPC based and I don't have it in my budget to update my software AND Mac this year. So why not buy the PPC G5 now that can accomodate 16GB of ram and have true 64bit architecture that I can use for 5+ years??? Makes sense to me.
My iBook on the other hand is a different story. I have no qualms about replacing it with the "MacBook" when it comes out.... as long as the price is under $999. Just need it to surf wirelessly around the house and while I'm out on the road for vacation or work. Don't need it to be a work horse.
We need to update 3 of our PowerMacs at work and I just handed a proposal to my boss to replace them with Dual Core 2.0 GHz G5's now and then we'll purchase the 3rd Creative Suite, which will work fluently with both Intel and PowerPC's, when it comes out. Then when our current G5's are about 4 years old in another 3 years, we'll make the transition to Intel Macs.
I have to say that I am really surprised that Apple is seeing a decline in PowerPC Mac sales.
I'm going out in a week and a half (after my new credit card comes in) and we are buying the Dual 2.0 Ghz PowerMac G5 for our home office. Why wait for the Intel version of the PM? All of my software is PPC based and I don't have it in my budget to update my software AND Mac this year. So why not buy the PPC G5 now that can accomodate 16GB of ram and have true 64bit architecture that I can use for 5+ years??? Makes sense to me.
My iBook on the other hand is a different story. I have no qualms about replacing it with the "MacBook" when it comes out.... as long as the price is under $999. Just need it to surf wirelessly around the house and while I'm out on the road for vacation or work. Don't need it to be a work horse.
Why all the negative votes?
Did you really expect a company with a product as large and complex as the Creative Suite not to pass on the considerable cost of updating there applications to work on macintels? At least the keep updating their apps for every chip that Apple decides to use every 3 years. Their cost for designing windows compatible versions must be much lower, but they have to optimize their apps for motorola chips, G3's, Altivec, G5's and so on.
If you are a business you will make your money back quickly, if you are a student its easier to afford, and if you are the common man, you don't need all that. And for everyone else, your already pirating it.
Did you really expect a company with a product as large and complex as the Creative Suite not to pass on the considerable cost of updating there applications to work on macintels? At least the keep updating their apps for every chip that Apple decides to use every 3 years. Their cost for designing windows compatible versions must be much lower, but they have to optimize their apps for motorola chips, G3's, Altivec, G5's and so on.
If you are a business you will make your money back quickly, if you are a student its easier to afford, and if you are the common man, you don't need all that. And for everyone else, your already pirating it.
I'm glad there are a few people here who realize that a) this is not a big intentional swipe at Apple on Adobe's part and b) it's probably not really Adobe's fault.
Adobe's applications are huge. They were built in a development environment that is not XCode and probably cannot build Universal Binaries. CS2 was already out by the time the Intel transition was announced. Now had Adobe known way earlier that Apple was planning the Intel move and that only XCode could build UBs, they might have considered moving to XCode during the CS2 development process. But they probably found out in June.
It simply isn't feasible for Adobe to move the CS2 codebase to XCode and do all the tweaking it takes, which I imagine involves changing dozens of custom libraries just right, then rebuild it and rush it through testing quick enough to get it to people before CS3 is out (although I suppose the whole process would make CS3 slip some).
Everyone would love Adobe's apps to be announced on the same day as the Mac Pro, but if it doesn't happen, it won't kill anyone. Nobody's G5 will stop working, and the people who need the maximum oomph from Photoshop will patiently wait for CS3 before trading theirs up.
Edit: it's great that while I was writing this post, half a dozen fellow voices of reason jumped in to say the same thing (I started when the thread was at 65 posts..)
Adobe's applications are huge. They were built in a development environment that is not XCode and probably cannot build Universal Binaries. CS2 was already out by the time the Intel transition was announced. Now had Adobe known way earlier that Apple was planning the Intel move and that only XCode could build UBs, they might have considered moving to XCode during the CS2 development process. But they probably found out in June.
It simply isn't feasible for Adobe to move the CS2 codebase to XCode and do all the tweaking it takes, which I imagine involves changing dozens of custom libraries just right, then rebuild it and rush it through testing quick enough to get it to people before CS3 is out (although I suppose the whole process would make CS3 slip some).
Everyone would love Adobe's apps to be announced on the same day as the Mac Pro, but if it doesn't happen, it won't kill anyone. Nobody's G5 will stop working, and the people who need the maximum oomph from Photoshop will patiently wait for CS3 before trading theirs up.
Edit: it's great that while I was writing this post, half a dozen fellow voices of reason jumped in to say the same thing (I started when the thread was at 65 posts..)
uhm, doesn't Adobe have some optimized x86 code out there (like, oh, in their Windows version). It has been my assumption (I know, I know, but I do code for a living) that the big problems will be taking care of the core of your high performance app. I assume that someone from the Windows side can come over and bring the x86 optimized core of Photoshop, etc.
Surely given their sticking with Carbon, they have a lot of shared engine code.
Surely given their sticking with Carbon, they have a lot of shared engine code.
"not late" != "ahead of schedule"
Jobs said "by" June '06. A lot of people immediately started talking about MWSF'06 as the launch back in June '05.
Those predictions came true.... Apple is not late, it is also not ahead of schedule in the MacIntel rollout. The transition is on schedule (but maybe not "going well" if you need Photoshop or other galactic applications (if something isn't "universal", is it "galactic", or "planetary", or "solar", or "terran"?).
Please, let's kill the "ahead of schedule" nonsense. (David Pogue - listen to me!)bigfoot said:
Jobs said "by" June '06. A lot of people immediately started talking about MWSF'06 as the launch back in June '05.
Those predictions came true.... Apple is not late, it is also not ahead of schedule in the MacIntel rollout. The transition is on schedule (but maybe not "going well" if you need Photoshop or other galactic applications (if something isn't "universal", is it "galactic", or "planetary", or "solar", or "terran"?).
l008com said:
Really? I don't know ANY designers who are still running on Blue and Whites or OS9. I have 3 Duals (1.25, 1.4, 2.0), 1 Quad (8 GB RAM, 1.5 TB hard drives), CS2, Maya 7 Unlimited, Electric Image, Lightwave, After Effects, Quark, Final Cut, Real Flow, 2 Barcos and a Cinema Display all running on Tiger. That did NOT come cheap.