Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Adobe Universal Support FAQ

Apple and Transitive better get to work

Since Ars testing revealed that the intel imac is generally about half as fast as the imac g5 running photoshop cs in emulation:

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/imac-coreduo.ars/6

this means that the macbook pros will run even slower so mobile pro users will be stuck with very slow photoshop performance on the road. Hopefully Apple will fine tune the OS to make better use of both cores and improve the Rosetta software so we can get performance up to 70-80% of PPC native.

And hopefully the Lightroom UB beta will fill a big camera raw processing void on the new macbook pros until Adobe releases CS3 next year. Also Aperture better run very fast on the macbook pro when it is converted to UB or pro photographers may be forced to switch to PC laptops.
 
OSXconvert said:
Since Ars testing revealed that the intel imac is generally about half as fast as the imac g5 running photoshop cs in emulation:

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/imac-coreduo.ars/6

this means that the macbook pros will run even slower so mobile pro users will be stuck with very slow photoshop performance on the road. Hopefully Apple will fine tune the OS to make better use of both cores and improve the Rosetta software so we can get performance up to 70-80% of PPC native.

And hopefully the Lightroom UB beta will fill a big camera raw processing void on the new macbook pros until Adobe releases CS3 next year. Also Aperture better run very fast on the macbook pro when it is converted to UB or pro photographers may be forced to switch to PC laptops.
Click to expand...

Pro photographers won't buy macbook pros until next year. Which is when it will make sense. Why buy first generation, machine, OS, and software and then complain because it is either buggy or a native version doesn't exist.

Un-unh! Any sensible pro will wait. Use the mature, friendly, G4 or G5 version and upgrade to the faster new machines in gen. 2 or 3 when most apps are native.;)
 
theBB said:
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.
Click to expand...
I've been using Photoshop at a Pro level since version 3.0 and I can tell you this, it is king because they have been doing it for so long.
PS has evolved just as Illustrator has.

Sure, Apple could come out with a PS contender, but it would not be up to par with PS for about 2-3 versions. Meanwhile Adobe would be evolving their app to meet the needs of the users that have been patrons for years.

You could almost look at it this way:
Would you buy a car that was made by Harley Davidson?

Sure they know about motors and wheels and suspensions, but I guarantee you that it would not be a smooth, comfortable ride their first couple tries out of the gate. Adobe specifically creates design-type applications. I wouldn't expect Adobe to offer me a tax program or a disk utility. Corel is a joke. Adobe is just an expert at what it does.
 
not "true"

KindredMAC said:
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.
Click to expand...
Getting a PMG5 may be the smart thing for you now, no disagreement.

But, it's not "true 64-bit" - only limited support for daemons and command line 64-bit apps is in 10.4. Windows x64 is "true 64-bit" - everything can be 64-bit, and 32-bit runs as well. Maybe Apple plans for 10.5 on x64 to be "true 64-bit" - but we haven't heard anything from Apple about 64-bit on the Intel platform.

A PMG5 might support that more than 4 GiB of memory - but I have 3 year old Xeons with 32 GiB of RAM that are in the same category (category = "32-bit systems with more than 4 GiB of RAM").

Buying a PMG5 today may be the right decision - but it's hard to predict that you'll be happy with a PowerPC chip in 5 years. Apple could drop PPC development, or kill the 64-bit PPC development, or just let it suffer benign neglect. Intel will be the focus, period. (It should be pretty clear that Apple isn't interested in supporting old hardware - if nothing else the class action lawsuits that tried to force Apple live up to its promises about making OSX run well on the Bondi iMacs should make that obvious.)

If your "repurchase horizon" is 12 months, buy PowerPC today. You'll get a good year of use of the system. If you can only afford to replace systems on a 2 or 3 year cycle - only buy PowerPC where it's critical to upgrade right now.
 
AidenShaw said:
Please, let's kill the "ahead of schedule" nonsense. (David Pogue - listen to me!)

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"?).
Click to expand...
Amen!

Basic rule of thumb, promise longer than you know you can deliver and the world will think you are a miracle worker. I like to refer to that as the Scottie rule from Star Trek.
;)
 
dornoforpyros said:
oh boy, I'm glad adobe acquired macromedia!

Seriously this sucks nutz
Click to expand...

Seriously, I am shocked that this surprises anyone. Why did everyone expect Adobe to be intel native prior to CS3?

This will be a poor sales year for Apple. Not last year. Last year was a good year for Apple because people wanted to upgrade once before the transition.

Now it makes no sense to buy. The new machines are gen. 1. Most software isn't available yet and the OS is gen. 1. But the old G4 and G5's have not dropped in price soooo... even they are not a good buy right now.

Hopefully by MacWorld SF 2007 all will be right with the world. Bugs will be worked out of gen 1 hardware and OS. Most all software will be native.
 
KindredMAC said:
...Would you buy a car that was made by Harley Davidson?
Click to expand...

If Harley Davidson stole the engineers, designers, marketing staff, assembly line, and dealer network from Toyota I would consider it.

The speed at which Apple can make a Photoshop competitor depends on how many Adobe programmers Apple can recruit.
 
Dudes

Listen, many of you are commenting that it doesn't matter because graphic editos you Powermac's and the powermacs will be the last to go Intel. That is a total fallicay the truth of the matter is that a huge percentage of Graphic's Professionals, want to use MacbookPro's so they have the power with the portability, so this announcement by Adobe comes at a big blow for Apple. I am shocked that Adobe is willing to wait past this year (possibly, I mean who know's really) to release a Universal Binary.
 
Apple will newer compete with Adobe Photoshop ,illustrator, indesign or Aftereffects simply because this pro softwares are one of the fortunes of Apple computers!
Apple wants the pro to use their machines... beacause are the best AD in the world (if the pro use Mac it means it works best) pro user use Adobe software.
Imagine if Adobe decides not to deliver a universal version of its softwares...
Apple will continue to sell ipods, ibooks, imac and some 15'' Macbook pro but could stop producing the enitire real pro computer gamma.

So what do you think Apple will do? Aperture is enought

Ps. Some one wrote Aperture is a professional software! Yes if you need a good software for storing your photos. i use it! it's wonderfoul for this purpose!


Last Ps. I hope when G5 Powermacs will be replaced, Apple will give us a much affordabe machine compared to this first intel iMac
(I've used one at Apple store and crashed the new iLife aps 4 times... new iLife installed on my PowerBookG4 performing the same tasks doesn't present the same problems!
 
I've been loyal to adobe and have been paying them since they released photoshop 2.5. I have been frustrated with the terrible performance of their suites since illustrator 10 on my powerbook; it is too slow to demo to clients on site and painful to run. This disrespect to myself and to every other small business, artist, student, and user who pays more for the CS suite than an entry level mac. Let me be the first to lay down the challenge to ambitious coders, I will pay the sticker price of any comprable adobe product to those who can add enough features to products like GIMP that I never need waste my company budget on Adobe's bloatware again.
 
Wow....def seems like a grudge match, a love/hate relationship in the hating phase. It seems like it will hurt Adobe as well. Their programs can be downloaded.

I understand that Photoshop is powerful and extensible....but why doesn't Apple just copy it? Adobe has sat on their products for a long time. I mean Photoshop is extremely powerful, but it was extremely powerful when I used it eight years ago.

Plus *I* still have a grudge against them for making GoLive worse with each successive release. I wish they had never bought GoLive out. GoLive was the name of the company that produced CyberStudio. Adobe bought them and renamed the program GoLive. GoLive Cybyerstudio at its place in time was the most awesome program ever. Adobe has bloated it. Made it harder to use. And made it gain the UI of Photoshop etc, which is long in the tooth (too many pallettes).

***EDIT*** How much would Adobe cost to buy? Could Apple do it? That would be awesome.
 
OSXconvert said:
Since Ars testing revealed that the intel imac is generally about half as fast as the imac g5 running photoshop cs in emulation:
Click to expand...
But nor is a PowerBook G4 any speed demon compared to an iMac G5.


digitalbiker said:
Now it makes no sense to buy.
Click to expand...
UNLESS your current machine runs slower than Rosetta. Which is true for VERY many people--including mobile professionals. Rosetta on Core Duo actually DOES look like it will be mostly a step up from a year-or-2-old PowerBook G4. So MANY people will see an immediate speed benefit from buying a MacBook Pro NOW to run Photoshop.

Not the BIG benefit that we all wish were suddenly possible--but other apps WILL see a big benefit right now, and Photoshop will catch up this fall. Or next winter. We don't know yet.

The point is, MANY people who need a new Mac laptop right now can do so without LOSING any Photoshop performance, and often with some immediate gain. So the MacBook Pro DOES make sense for many people--even Photoshop users.

I use Photoshop every day. I'm waiting to see what other sizes of MacBook come out, but Photoshop won't delay my purchase. I'll keep using my current Photoshop until CS3. I'll have greater speed in Photoshop than I have today--which is not blinding speed, but does the job.
 
This isn't good news for apple. If your a professional your not going to buy a new intel mac and not have PS run native, this hurts apple the most IMO
 
I'm not a pro and have no benchmarks, but Photoshop from CS2 works fairly well on my 17" iMac Core Duo 512MB. Stuff like gaussian blur and liquify runs at a decent speed for me as I noodle around with a 12MB image. I also notice very few things I did seemed to tax the dual CPUs to the limit. Again, I'm just casually fooling with it, and I'm switching from a mere G4 dual 1GHz 1GB. Startup seemed much, much slower.

A bigger problem for me is my tablet won't work until I get new drivers.

Adobe Bridge did crash on me while I was browsing a folder full of pictures tho.. Illustrator didn't seem bad at all.

GoLive seemed similar. Slow to start, but not glacial to run. You do see that beachball on the PDF preview.. DreamWeaver seems to be much slower than GoLive.

So, I don't see running these apps in Rosetta as a disaster, but I sure would like the impressions of people who use the apps day in and day out.
 
l008com said:
Newsflash: Most graphics people are so cheap, they are still running blue and white G3's under system 9 and photoshop 5. This is true, I see it all the time. Very few people stay on the cutting edge in graphics, they are just too cheap.
Click to expand...


that might be your experience but i visit multiple agencies due to the nature of my position and all have G5s except a few mirrored door dual G4s. ive seen one blue and white mac but thats an itunes server.

tk421 said:
Actually, Adobe wasn't bad at all. That's the biggest reason why Quark lost so much, because Adobe was there for OS X when they weren't.
Click to expand...


not to mention the fact that quark sucks :p
 
well if that's true, I am glad i bought my quad G5 last October.
It's hard to believe that. I hope Adobe will then have all new apps by years end. if not I think the new Intel Powermac will have a bad start. people will not buy it unless photoshop and After effects are native. Not the professional people at least. No one wants to deal with Rosetta on a professional environment.
I wonder if this is a reprimand to Apple because of Aperture, Motion and Final Cut.
 
All the more reason for me to hold off on getting a MacBook Pro. I was willing to wait for a revision C, but with this Adobe news you can bet it will take at least until their second Intel release of CS (CS4 or whatever) before they get it right. Adobe haven't been too reliable in the past.
 
KindredMAC said:
I've been using Photoshop at a Pro level since version 3.0 and I can tell you this, it is king because they have been doing it for so long.
PS has evolved just as Illustrator has.

Sure, Apple could come out with a PS contender, but it would not be up to par with PS for about 2-3 versions. Meanwhile Adobe would be evolving their app to meet the needs of the users that have been patrons for years.

You could almost look at it this way:
Would you buy a car that was made by Harley Davidson?

Sure they know about motors and wheels and suspensions, but I guarantee you that it would not be a smooth, comfortable ride their first couple tries out of the gate. Adobe specifically creates design-type applications. I wouldn't expect Adobe to offer me a tax program or a disk utility. Corel is a joke. Adobe is just an expert at what it does.
Click to expand...

Well said!

I love Apple, but I think Photohop, Illustrator and After Effects are king. It would be very hard for Apple to make something better. Plus many people are so used to use the adobe apps that would make even harder for Apple to succeed. Motion 2 is nice but a joke in comparison with AE. So I hope Apple focus on other software and don't start a major battle with Adobe. That would be bad for many professionals.
 
nagromme said:
UNLESS your current machine runs slower than Rosetta. Which is true for VERY many people--including mobile professionals. Rosetta on Core Duo actually DOES look like it will be mostly a step up from a year-or-2-old PowerBook G4. So MANY people will see an immediate speed benefit from buying a MacBook Pro NOW to run Photoshop.

Not the BIG benefit that we all wish were suddenly possible--but other apps WILL see a big benefit right now, and Photoshop will catch up this fall. Or next winter. We don't know yet.

The point is, MANY people who need a new Mac laptop right now can do so without LOSING any Photoshop performance, and often with some immediate gain. So the MacBook Pro DOES make sense for many people--even Photoshop users.
Click to expand...

Yes but speed is not the only issue here. The downside of getting a new MacBook is several fold.

1) Performance boost for new machines is minimal or non-existant for PPC native apps.
2) Some software and drivers won't even run on new hardware.
3) OS X is gen 1 for native version. Bugs are bound to have crept into OS X for the first release on Intel.
4) Native software is gen. 1 on Intel version of software. Again bugs are more probable.
5) Hardware is gen 1. Possible issues there.
6) No legacy OS 9 support.
7) Pro software requires purchase / upgrade to native intel version which means immediate investment in software.

These issues will all be resolved in a year or less. They are not show stoppers but after going through the transition period I went through for OS 9 to OS X, I am more than happy to wait this transition out on the sidelines.

I found the first year of OS X 10.0 very, very painful. Slow for new apps. Problems with getting drivers and software,etc. etc. On top of that I bought a gen. 1 TI PB 500 Mhz. Talk about a glutton for punishment. I see the same scenario playing out again this time as well.
 
1st gen intel mac pro and cs3 1.0

Sounds glitchy to me. I don't want to rest my creative laurels on an new hardware architecture and 1.0 software package. I would settle for revB Mac Pro and CS2 / Studio MX universal discs:)

PS I saw rosetta run photoshop live at Macworld. SLOW !!! My G4 PB is faster has has alot less ram than Steve's demo computer. He even stated Rosetta is not appropriate with Photoshop for pro users.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back