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.
No 64bit for Photoshop CS4 on OS X
- Thread starter sosumi1981
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Excellent, while Adobe is coding CS5 in Cocoa they can optimize it as well. CS3 works alright for a Carbon application, however it still takes too long to load even with 2Gigs of ram and the thousand + extensions/plugins.
As others have voiced they opinion(s), I feel CS3 is going to be the last Adobe application for a while, Cocoa comes along.
I could care less for 64-bit, considering you will require 4Gigs or over worth or ram installed for PS to access.
As others have voiced they opinion(s), I feel CS3 is going to be the last Adobe application for a while, Cocoa comes along.
I could care less for 64-bit, considering you will require 4Gigs or over worth or ram installed for PS to access.
And for years Apple developed their tools to cover the weaknesses and legacy requirements from Adobe, Macromedia and Microsoft.
XCode 3 was the first release to say, ``We're done. Either get onboard or stay on your island.''
Poor decision for Adobe
This is a poor decision for Adobe for several reasons. Firstly, professional artists have been known to be mac supports for years, and the trend is only becoming more extreme. To only provide the professional features for windows users is quickly cutting off your user base.
This wouldn't be a large problem for such a successful company if it weren't for Aperature making huge strides as a professional photo editing tool. Especially now with the ability to add plugins, it seems your forcing the mac audience, the professional audience, to use your competitors product.
Even this isn't too bad in it of itself. The biggest problem lies in the fact that higher education is incredibly mac dominated. It is one of the only enviroments where truly a macbook or macbook pro is more common than any other kind of computer. In fact, many major university's are now requiring their art students to have macs.
If all these students are learning on macs, and aperature offers a considerably better program for the large images on a mac than Photoshop, all these students are going to start learning on Aperature. As such, making a switch away from aperature for cs5 will become highly unlikely for all these students.
Finally, the explanation adobe gave is valid, but its more an explanation of their own poor functioning than anything else. CS4 has probably been under preliminary development for years now, and Apple has made it clear for years now that Cocoa was the way of the future. This is a consistent trend of Adobe not being prepared for the future of Apple technologies, such as taking over a year to provide native support for intel processors. They act like Apple doesn't have roadmaps for their future out years in advance open to the public, let alone the information I'm sure they could get from apple if they decided to contact them as a major developer. All in all, Adobe clearly needs to start planning for the future of computing devices, not the present.
This is a poor decision for Adobe for several reasons. Firstly, professional artists have been known to be mac supports for years, and the trend is only becoming more extreme. To only provide the professional features for windows users is quickly cutting off your user base.
This wouldn't be a large problem for such a successful company if it weren't for Aperature making huge strides as a professional photo editing tool. Especially now with the ability to add plugins, it seems your forcing the mac audience, the professional audience, to use your competitors product.
Even this isn't too bad in it of itself. The biggest problem lies in the fact that higher education is incredibly mac dominated. It is one of the only enviroments where truly a macbook or macbook pro is more common than any other kind of computer. In fact, many major university's are now requiring their art students to have macs.
If all these students are learning on macs, and aperature offers a considerably better program for the large images on a mac than Photoshop, all these students are going to start learning on Aperature. As such, making a switch away from aperature for cs5 will become highly unlikely for all these students.
Finally, the explanation adobe gave is valid, but its more an explanation of their own poor functioning than anything else. CS4 has probably been under preliminary development for years now, and Apple has made it clear for years now that Cocoa was the way of the future. This is a consistent trend of Adobe not being prepared for the future of Apple technologies, such as taking over a year to provide native support for intel processors. They act like Apple doesn't have roadmaps for their future out years in advance open to the public, let alone the information I'm sure they could get from apple if they decided to contact them as a major developer. All in all, Adobe clearly needs to start planning for the future of computing devices, not the present.
Exactly... Seems like they don't care *that* much about the conversion or they tried to push-it back as much as they could
Oh, I don't know. Apple has been asking a LOT of Adobe, IMO. First, they switch processor/platforms (requiring a lot of work by Adobe to make a Universal application) and THEN, Apple at the drop of a hat getting rid of Carbon64 (there was no warning back in 2001 that some future 64-bit OS like Leopard was coming any time in the remote future and that carbon 64 wouldn't exist at that time... and I can say that because Apple WAS developing Carbon64 up until 2007! If Apple was SERIOUS about getting rid of Carbon, they should have done so 5 years ago and made good THEN on their claims from 2001 that Carbon was the past. But saying one thing and doing another gives the wrong message, not to mentions costs companies lots of money by forcing them to convert over.) Meanwhile, you CANNOT take Apple serious about Carbon because they themselves are still pushing their iTunes software in Carbon!!! On Leopard even! Tisk tisk Apple. It's just a little bit hypocritical to tell people to stay away from Carbon and then keep using it yourself.
MAYBE, just MAYBE, Apple needs to understand that they do not have the massive large user base of the Windows platform and they are in no place to make demands of powerhouse software companies like Adobe and that they are darn lucky Adobe makes anything at all for the Mac these days. Either one of those moves (switching to Intel and/or dropping Carbon64) could have resulted in Adobe announcing they are no longer making a Mac version of Photoshop because it's simply not cost effective to have to completely retool every other year and that all Mac users should user Parallels or Fusion if they want to continue using Adobe products. Given how easy it is to use Windows on the new Macs, that EASILY could have happened, IMO.
Likewise, I'm halfway surprised Microsoft even bothered with an Office update for the Mac. They've discontinued most of their other products for the Mac (Internet Explorer, Media Player, etc.) as not worth their time and probably only existed in the first place to bail Apple out in its darkest hour so that they would have a puppet competitor (what 3-5% of the market at the time?) to show off in the Justice Department hearings.
And as for those touting Office 2008 on here, are you actually USING it? It's the slowest Office ever! You might even be better off running Office 2004 through Rosetta than using that giant hunk of bologna! The whole reason people wanted a NATIVE Office was because Office 2004 was faster on 4 year old Macs than on brand new ones. Well.... the new Office 2008 is JUST AS SLOW if not SLOWER than Rosetta, this time on BOTH CPU platforms. And yet people on here are touting how Apple's decisions FORCED Microsoft to code "more efficiently" by being forced to use Cocoa instead of Carbon. HOW'S THAT AGAIN? They couldn't have made it much less efficient if they tried!!! Plus the switch meant Microsoft didn't even bother porting things like VBS, thus making Office 2008 largely incompatible with Windows Office.
Now you can blame Microsoft and you can blame Adobe, but it just seems to me that small platforms only have themselves to blame when they can't pick a road and stick to it. Apple has been trying to go down 2 different roads now for YEARS and now has 4 roads (Carbon, Cocoa + PowerPC AND Carbon, Cocoa + Intel). That's a lot of baggage for such a small platform to carry (mostly only noticed on the developer side, though, although users feel it with delayed and/or poor performing software). The only saving grace for the Mac is that Windows sucks so bad to begin with that it's its own baggage. The Mac is very weak in 3D, though and that should be blamed purely on Apple for poor drivers and a lackluster choice (if any in the case of most Macs) of video cards.
Personally, I do use Photoshop, but mostly on my PC as the pinball development software I use to make recreations of real pinball games for an arcade company is only available for the PC. Frankly, even Photoshop 7 works fine for that so I haven't bothered to upgrade. And since Windows hasn't changed platforms in the past decade plus, I haven't had to worry about it not working full speed. In fact, it's much faster than CS2 or CS3 and no doubt CS4 as well.
Ironically, I use Microsoft Office 2004 on my Mac because the MacOS in general is more stable than Windows. Likewise, I use it as a whole house music server and often as a web browser, but I use the PC for gaming and gaming development and software that is simply not available for the Mac or runs too poorly on it by comparison (again games come to mind). The primary difference, though is I COULD use the PC for ALL of those things. I CANNOT use the Mac for all of them without having an Intel Mac and running Windows on top of MacOSX. So while I prefer the Mac OS, I am forced to keep a PC around one way or the other for the time being at least.
If Apple would get their game together and support through hardware what people like the makers of Cider are TRYING to do for the Mac OS, maybe I could one day ditch the PC and Windows altogether. But Apple has a known history of fighting their own platform developers as much as supporting them (often producing competing products of their own that take advantage of the OS just like Microsoft has done). Basically, some days it seems like Apple can't make up its mind whether it wants the Mac to be a closed Apple ONLY system or not (look at the iPhone mess and how long they took to come around to an SDK. Don't think they weren't thinking about NEVER making it available because I'm sure they thought long and hard about it. Even so, they're keeping tight reigns on it).
...for example: I still cannot us After Effects because of an cryptic error during startup. Total reinstall does not change anything. Photoshop and Indesign is crashing when it quit. And different other issues...
All updates applied...Only Premiere is working well...
I suggest you actually work for an Operating System company first and if you actually did work in Apple Engineering and then came back to read what you wrote you'd have to laugh hard at yourself.
Adobe no longer has the leverage. Microsoft no longer has the leverage.
Adobe is now using the Press to plead their case.
Port to Cocoa Adobe.
Adobe doesn't want to force it's Graphic Artists to choose Vista over OS X.
They know they'll lose. Adobe is hoping for sympathy to get more resources from Apple to help them along.
It's done. Hire the staff or get used to your products languishing on OS X or just see them booted into Boot Camp running XP/Vista.
Either way, Apple has moved forward.
Apple isn't just moving Adobe to Cocoa they are moving their users to Cocoa.
No...you´re right. Leopard is the whorst OS X update i remember. I had to make the fault and installed it because of a harddrive crash. Its more then 3 moth ago and I could cry the whole day...no, not really, but Leopard is coming close to vista for me...Yeah because Leopard is totally bug free.
Photoshop will never be good. Why? It's always like $700. They need to make it lower price because unlike back then, I can't download photshop illegally cause no one is hosting a free download.
Young whipper snapper. You've had it easy.
Now it's someone else's turn.
<]=)
LOL! Yea, I know I've had it easy. Everyone who has used PS from the beginning or near it has told me so! My retort? Sometimes it's nice to have somethings easy in life
At my last job I was rewriting an Windows application originally written in C++ to C# and the .NET framework. It is no easy task. You really can't blame Adobe for not being able to implement 64-bit software in time for CS4. It's not their fault Apple abandoned Carbon 64. Yeah you could say "well they should have switched over to cocoa sooner." As the article states, there really isn't any huge benefit from carbon over cocoa. So why would Adobe have invested so much time and money into something that would not really improve their product?
A Man needs a Maid
If PhotoShop was my spouse, I would say that the shine is long since gone from her eyes. She has let herself go and is now both immensely fat, and terribly slow at getting around. She has a dogged determination and is a tireless worker, but she just doesn't have the energy that she used to do. I cringe when I see her puffing her way up a reasonably small set of stairs, even though she always (eventually) gets to the top. I still love her, I just wish she would take better care of herself.
Despite her ageing bones, Photoshop has tried to do more and more as time goes by. She not only does the laundry and cooks and cleans, she now fixes the car, mows the lawn, and does all the shopping. Unfortunately, she carries all the tools to do these tasks around with her on a massive (and massively confusing), utility belt strapped around the middle of her substantial girth, which of course just slows her down even more.
Underneath her graying hair, her brain also seems to miss-fire as much as it fires. She forgets things all the time and can't seem to get her head around many of the concepts our kids are using today. If you move her to a different room when she isn't looking she *instantly* forgets where all the tools are and freezes on the spot until you pick up her massive tool belt and carry it back to her. I overheard the kids talking to her the other day about graphics cards, and she was smiling and nodding but you could tell she had no idea at all what they were talking about.
She ignores all the modern tools I bought her for doing the housework and insists on using and old fashioned broom and dustpan instead of a vacuum for cleaning up. In fact she likes to actually make her own tools for each job and hang them off that silly utility belt of hers, even though we have a whole basement full of perfectly good ones.
Sadly, as her capabilities have decreased over the years, her opinion of herself has gone "through the roof." She is of the opinion that I can't get by without her, and although I *do* depend on her a lot, the truth is if she died tomorrow I could easily get some hired help in to do everything she does and do it quicker. I don't want her to feel bad though so I never tell her this.
Every six months without fail, she paints a giant "version" number on her back (3.0, 4.0 etc.), and announces loudly at the dinner-table that she is now "new and improved" and goes on and on about this or that "capability" that has been added. The kids and I just kind of grin and nod, knowing that she is bonkers and that we will never have any use for her new "capabilities."
She's a nice old sort, but someone should take her aside and tell her she went absolutely raving mad a long time ago. None of us have the nerve, but perhaps one of the neighbours will do it some day.
I used to love Photoshop, and since there is no alternative yet, I still use it every day. The best way to define the diminishing relationship I have with PhotoShop is through that "relationship" analogy.
If PhotoShop was my spouse, I would say that the shine is long since gone from her eyes. She has let herself go and is now both immensely fat, and terribly slow at getting around. She has a dogged determination and is a tireless worker, but she just doesn't have the energy that she used to do. I cringe when I see her puffing her way up a reasonably small set of stairs, even though she always (eventually) gets to the top. I still love her, I just wish she would take better care of herself.
Despite her ageing bones, Photoshop has tried to do more and more as time goes by. She not only does the laundry and cooks and cleans, she now fixes the car, mows the lawn, and does all the shopping. Unfortunately, she carries all the tools to do these tasks around with her on a massive (and massively confusing), utility belt strapped around the middle of her substantial girth, which of course just slows her down even more.
Underneath her graying hair, her brain also seems to miss-fire as much as it fires. She forgets things all the time and can't seem to get her head around many of the concepts our kids are using today. If you move her to a different room when she isn't looking she *instantly* forgets where all the tools are and freezes on the spot until you pick up her massive tool belt and carry it back to her. I overheard the kids talking to her the other day about graphics cards, and she was smiling and nodding but you could tell she had no idea at all what they were talking about.
She ignores all the modern tools I bought her for doing the housework and insists on using and old fashioned broom and dustpan instead of a vacuum for cleaning up. In fact she likes to actually make her own tools for each job and hang them off that silly utility belt of hers, even though we have a whole basement full of perfectly good ones.
Sadly, as her capabilities have decreased over the years, her opinion of herself has gone "through the roof." She is of the opinion that I can't get by without her, and although I *do* depend on her a lot, the truth is if she died tomorrow I could easily get some hired help in to do everything she does and do it quicker. I don't want her to feel bad though so I never tell her this.
Every six months without fail, she paints a giant "version" number on her back (3.0, 4.0 etc.), and announces loudly at the dinner-table that she is now "new and improved" and goes on and on about this or that "capability" that has been added. The kids and I just kind of grin and nod, knowing that she is bonkers and that we will never have any use for her new "capabilities."
She's a nice old sort, but someone should take her aside and tell her she went absolutely raving mad a long time ago. None of us have the nerve, but perhaps one of the neighbours will do it some day.
Too funny. So then by your logic, Final Cut Studio must be almost twice as bad because it costs $1299.00.
It pretty much is. Why buy a program that costs more than an actual computer?
What is left to say? That was a beautiful and poetic analogy. One that reminds me why I divorced and date women much younger and smarter than me. Thank you for writing that - it should be saved and posted in other venues.
Still, I am using CS with a very old computer - think of a very old Alfred - and so I am used to the spinning ball. Also, my largest files are usually under a GB (and those are rare).
Thank you again for that enjoyable piece of prose ... oh and OT, I still have the Dinkey toy of your avatar from my childhood (along with Thunderbird 4)
Virgil, if Photoshop was your spouse perhaps she just wants to leave you for someone who is a bit better equipped?
Adobe's performance with CS3 and Leopard has been abysmal. InDesign still doesn't work right, 6 months later. I am not happy with Adobe..
I see. So Photoshop is no good because you're too cheap to buy it and no one will let you steal it.
There was an alternative.... It was called Corel Draw. And it is the laughing stock of the industry.
BTW, I love my "spouse" more every day since we were "married" 15 years ago.
Obviously where we have worked together to understand each other, you have just been eyeing up the hot little 17 year old down the street waiting for her to turn legal at 18 so you can "help" your wife down the stairs and out into the hole you dug in the backyard for her in the middle of the night.... Very "Desperate Housewives"-like wouldn't you say?