An Apple made Photoshop...?!

Discussion in 'Design and Graphics' started by mogzieee, Apr 3, 2008.

  1. mogzieee macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2008
    Location:
    London, UK
    #1
    I cannot see why Apple hasn't made this alternative already...

    Photoshop may just be the most awesome app out there to buy(certainly my favourite), and surprisingly, its the one application not made by Apple that kicks ass! Not saying Adobe is doing a bad job... just an Apple alternative would be faster, 64 bit (perhaps), more seemless with the Mac, simpler, and moreover, cheaper.

    I've seen it before - iWork was made to kick out Office:mac, Final Cut to shut off all video editing apps out there, Safari to smash IE out in OSX.2 (correct me if I'm wrong), etc.

    I spose that Aperture is a close alternative, but it's not built for designers - you can't edit images with effects, layers, etc. like you can in Photoshop....


    Anybody with me here?
     
  2. speakerwizard macrumors 68000

    speakerwizard

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #2
    a lot of people think this but apple doesnt want to completely stifle development too much, adobe are a big 3rd party vendor, and they dont want devs to feel their work is in vein.
     
  3. psychofreak Retired

    psychofreak

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #3
    Well, Aperture has recently prompted Adobe to bring out a Lightroom beta, Spaces has all but destroyed VirtueDesktops, TM has likely taken a lot of business from SuperDuper!, Stacks has removed a need for OverFlow, and Boot Camp has obliterated the competition from XOM.
     
  4. speakerwizard macrumors 68000

    speakerwizard

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #4
    exactly, apple has to evaluate these sorts of things very carefully and photoshop is and always has been very important on the mac, its also been important that it is on multiple systems keeping it a standard, this said aperture now has a plug-in architecture so who knows where that could lead, and now we have quick-look in osx preview has received lots of new features including masking, so has the potential to grow into something quite interesting. look what happened when apple acquired final cut, premiere died on the mac (its back now) what if the same happened with photoshop, could cause a lot of problems in the industry as its just too ingrained.
     
  5. fluidedge macrumors 65816

    fluidedge

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    #5
    Because as soon as they try it Adobe will turn round and say, fine we'll just develop for PCs --> designers move back to PCs --> Apple execs get fired.


    :rolleyes:

    Why assume all that that? It might be slower and more expensive.

    :confused: not sure about that one. iWork is not a direct competitor to Office - it does slightly different things.

    Lightroom is the Adobe equivalent of Aperture. They're almost identical.
     
  6. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #6
    I personally do not think that Apple needs to make a photoshop equivalent. You see, why waste time reinventing the wheel? Photoshop is industry standard and does what it needs to do very well. A smart company would spend their time developing new applications/products that not just replace old products but go even further. I think Apple should continue to focus on hardware solutions and stay away from trying to be the next Photoshop.

    Besides, after creating a program that will probably be pretty buggy at first and then getting it right think of all the time that it will take for it to be adopted as the industry standard...if ever! Apple does not need to do everything.
     
  7. change macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2008
    Location:
    Who knows...
    #7
    I hesitate to even mention it, this thread is not for the faint of heart, but there is some related discussion here. That thread got ridiculous. I can see Apple weening some people off of Photoshop, but i don't think they will be releasing a "Photoshop Killer" in the near future.
     
  8. mogzieee thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2008
    Location:
    London, UK
    #8
    Awesome, thanks for all the views and replies guys.... I spose they do make sense... it's one of those "well if they do.... but if they don't" topics....

    Anyways, thanks again.
     
  9. ease718 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    #9
    why do you think an apple copy pf ps would be 64 bit ?
    which of the 'pro' apps now are 64 bit ??
     
  10. Hankster macrumors 68020

    Hankster

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #10
    Exactly. There is no reason to reinvent the wheel, especially when it comes to something like PhotoShop because the program has been so established for so long. People would most likely not move to an Apple product if they have been using PhotoShop. There would be no point. I don't feel a copy-cat Apple product of PhotoShop would out perform the original.
     
  11. chaosbunny macrumors 68000

    chaosbunny

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Location:
    down to earth, far away from any clouds
    #11
    An Apple Photoshop would be pretty useless in my opinion unless there is an Apple Illustrator and an Apple InDesign too, at least for real professional users.
     
  12. jeremy.king macrumors 603

    jeremy.king

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Fuquay Varina, NC
    #12
    It would be a much better idea to snap up, say Pixelmator, and rebrand it as some iApp...
     
  13. fluidedge macrumors 65816

    fluidedge

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    #13
    apple don't really have much of a history in these sort of apps. At least with Aperture they had the backbone of iPhoto to work with - AppleShop™ (trademarked FluidEdge 2008 thankyouverymuch ;)) would be a completly new application built from the ground up. They might be able to use bits and pieces of Pages somewhere, but it would be a HUGE project to undertake. They've got better things to be doing frankly. They've got the pro team working on bringing the Pro Apps into the 21st century and making them 64 bit. They don't need the headache of a new app to test and debug for the next 2 years.

    I like the idea of snapping up PixelMator and rebranding it into a pro app - PixelShop Pro™
     
  14. ease718 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    #14

    yes with aapl multi billion dollar profits, how on earth could they spare the resources...
    they are way too busy trying to make a profit from consumer electronics to be serious about their 'pro' apps. virtually none of which are 'pro' standards anyway. if they where serious the 'pro'apps would be 64bit. they promised 64bit carbon lol..

    btw. apeture is not the pro standard, Capture One is. good as logic is protools is the standard, final cut is still second to AE.
     
  15. fluidedge macrumors 65816

    fluidedge

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    #15
    Final cut second to AE? I assume you're talking about Motion. They do slightly different things. Apple have (had) Shake which together with Motion are more than a match for something like Combustion or Flame, let alone AE.

    Phenomenon is coming (apparently there is something being announced around the time of NAB) which should take the best of motion and shake and produce a first rate compositing package.

    A true pro app is one that is written just for the clients exact needs, until the day i can afford that i'll have to make do with off the shelf software. But don't get snobby about apps like Final Cut and Aperture - Professionals do use them and they do stunning things with them. It's all about the wizard not the wand.
     
  16. stainlessliquid macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    #16
    Trying to compete with Photoshop is like trying to compete with Wacom, its bad business sense since you cant make a better product. Photoshop is about as good as its going to get, Apple could not make a better Photoshop, they could however make a better Photoshop Elements and try to come out with a really good low cost graphics program. But I really think Apple would miss the point of how universal Photoshop is, Im positive they would neglect the paintbrush engine and other non-photo stuff that makes Photoshop such an excellent program for everybody regardless of what they do.

    I think InDesign/Quark could definitely be better though, so an Apple made program that does professional page layout with way better graphic creating tools would be good. Those programs could really benifet from some good tools that allow you to create simple designs without being forced to reopen Illustrator or Photoshop, their current tools are total garbage even for the simplest of things.
     
  17. IgnatiusTheKing macrumors 68040

    IgnatiusTheKing

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Location:
    das Fort
    #17
    I hope by "AE" you meant Avid Xpress and not After Effects.
     
  18. QuarterSwede macrumors G3

    QuarterSwede

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs, CO
    #18
    It may be but it's a pain in the butt to use. Not a great example.
     
  19. ease718 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    #19
    i agree protools does suck. <<its still the standard

    logic studio is miles ahead IMHO agree that its not the best example.

    Yes I did mean Avid
     
  20. J@ffa macrumors 6502a

    J@ffa

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2002
    Location:
    Behind you!
    #20
    I figured there'd be a backlash against Adobe for the whole 'no 64-bit CS4' debacle, if you can even call it that. What happened is this:

    Apple announced that 64-bit carbon would be in Leopard.
    Adobe started writing CS4 with this expectation.
    Apple pulled 64-bit carbon.
    Adobe said 'O hai 32-bit CS4'.

    It's not exactly the worst thing in the world. 64-bit only makes a difference when dealing with hundreds of megapixels or even gigapixels. Given that top-end Nikon DSLRs can do maybe 25, is it really the end of the world? As a real world issue, this is negligible. The pros who desperately need it and run Macs can just use CS4 for Windows in Boot Camp, and the 'but can it play Crysis on max settings' crowd will be safely ignored by Adobe and Apple because they're not the ones buying image manipulation software.

    Plus, look on the bright side. Adobe have already said CS5 will be 64-bit, and to achieve that? Cocoa! They've already said that they'll be doing this, and native Cocoa apps are much nicer than straight Carbon ports. It's a lot more work for Adobe, but Mac users buy a lot of their software, so it has to be done.
     
  21. jerryrock macrumors 6502

    jerryrock

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Location:
    Amsterdam, NY
    #21
    Adobe has released a 64 bit version of Lightroom (2.0 beta) that runs on Leopard.
     
  22. Halcyon macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2006
    #22
  23. theBB macrumors 68020

    theBB

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    #23
    I agree, but just like iWork is not an exact replica of MS Office, a competitor could come up with an alternative for consumers and hobbyists who like something between CS2 and Elements with maybe a better interface so that it does not cost more than their camera. :)
     
  24. psychofreak Retired

    psychofreak

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #24
    iPhoto? I think that Apple will keep advancing it until its good enough for most hobbyists.
     
  25. fluidedge macrumors 65816

    fluidedge

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    #25
    yeh i agree - i think iPhoto can get to the stage where it does most of what PS elements does for photos. Though the interface of iPhoto has never sat well with me.

    I still think snapping up PixelMator and releasing an iPhoto Pro would be cool.

    Aperture is so cheap this time round it'd also be a great application for any hobbyist to buy.
     

Share This Page