But it's operating system and Apple managed to work on both PPC and Intel version, for Apple it wasn't just converting carbon to cocoa like it is for Adobe.
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
But it's operating system and Apple managed to work on both PPC and Intel version, for Apple it wasn't just converting carbon to cocoa like it is for Adobe.
Not the same thing. The development tools (XCode) allow you to build universal binaries that work on both architectures. It provides an insulating layer for software developers. In many cases code changes aren't required.
Carbon and Cocoa are two different languages. The only solution is to rewrite everything. Porting code can range from moderately tolerable to fairly unpleasant.
Just as Apple would never release an app like Aperature. Or Final Cut. Or Logic Studio. Oh, wait....
Sorry, but if your file is 2 GB, then 2 GB of RAM will slow it down significantly. With scratch space, the app needs several times the file size. Not to mention, of course, that many professionals use files even larger than that.
I don't see people saying that. What I see people saying is that updating it to 64 bit is at least as important as anything else they can add - which seems reasonable.
And if you don't see why some people want a 64 bit app, then ignore them. SOME people think it's important. What gives you the right to tell them it's not?
Furthermore, it's not just about 64-bitness. It's about Adobe's slowness to adopt Apple technologies - they were slow on PPC. They were slow on Intel. They're slow on Cocoa. That means that Apple is forced to slow down their own efforts to satisfy Adobe's foot-dragging. It also means that Adobe is doing things with Carbon that could be done much faster and easier with Cocoa. Aside from the wasted computer cycles and RAM that this requires, it's also a source of bugs.
This is completely wrong. First, Carbon and Cocoa aren't languages. Second, there's no need to rewrite everything - just the parts of the code that benefit from 64 bit.
Like somebody said what is advantage of TextEdit 64 bit over TextEdit 32 bit? Everything that needed to be updated was updated.
wow why are we arguing
Apple is not going to release a tool for tool, option for option "Photoshop Killer" tomorrow. What it can and is doing is developing its own apps to provide competitive features. How many people bought Photoshop for Dodge and Burn and other plugins? Not to many, but a few. What about the next change? A few more. They don't have to write a million lines of code that do the exact same things. They just need to write a few thousand for the next update, and the one after that. They just need to gain 100 customers. Then 1,000. That is within their power. The genius of the plugin SDK is that Apple doesn't even have to code all the features or plugins themselves. Let's enjoy the ride, i know i will.
Apple is not going to release a tool for tool, option for option "Photoshop Killer" tomorrow. What it can and is doing is developing its own apps to provide competitive features. How many people bought Photoshop for Dodge and Burn and other plugins? Not to many, but a few. What about the next change? A few more. They don't have to write a million lines of code that do the exact same things. They just need to write a few thousand for the next update, and the one after that. They just need to gain 100 customers. Then 1,000. That is within their power. The genius of the plugin SDK is that Apple doesn't even have to code all the features or plugins themselves. Let's enjoy the ride, i know i will.
Who ever said TextEdit should be 64 bits??
Has apple updated the Logic or Final Cut suites? Nope. Those are the apps that can really benefit from 64 bit, and they haven't done it yet, and there hasn't been any sign that we'd see it any time soon. I wouldn't be surprised if even stuff like iMovie could potentially benefit. And even for apps like TextEdit, while 64 bit would be pointless, if apple is hyping cocoa so much, why not switch those all over to cocoa? Could you imagine the impact on devs it would have if apple finally announced that every app they shipped was cocoa, no more carbon apps from apple?
I've even heard that the programming team on Logic doesn't even want to update the app for 64 bit and has no plans to do it.
No what? I'm not sure what you disagreed with in my post.
I love the use of the term "ONLY a million". Yeah, a million is nuthin'.
And you didn't answer my question - if "Adobe just has to cut the crap with carbon and move to cocoa and they had plenty of time to do so" - then why hasn't apple cut the crap and moved their apps to cocoa? Since they get inside info and builds earlier than third parties, they've had even MORE time to update.
Yeah, you're right. Not sure why I phrased it like that.
Let me try again: Carbon and Cocoa are two different frameworks. Objective-C and C++ are two different languages. The only way to move from C++ to Objective-C is to rewrite everything.To my knowledge, you cannot leverage the Cocoa framework from C++ on OS X. Therefore to switch frameworks you also have to switch languages. Correct me if I'm wrong though.
Whoa! Whoa! Saying this at this point in Apple's comeback of the last 10 years is really disturbing. Either you have been living under a rock on mars of all places or are deliberately suffering from denial.
Other MP3 players were king of the hill before Apple decided to create their own MP3 player called an iPod. Maybe you heard of it?
The cell phone industry had about 20 years to make phones that didn't suck a**. And Apple decided that even with a 20 year head start they could make a better cellular phone.
The music industry had 10 years to embrace and create a thriving digital music sales ecosystem. Result? They did absolutely nothing and after years of stagnation Apple decided it could create a better way for the consumer to get their music. iTunes is the #1 music store in the US now.
So your whacked out idea that Apple cannot unseat a stagnating, lazy, company that is just sitting on its laurels milking the cash cow is absurd on so many levels it defies any kind of logic. If Apple *chose* to write a PS killer you can rest assured that is exactly what it would be. A Photoshop killer. Regardless if you like it or not Apple has proven multiple times in the last 10 years that if you are slow, lazy, and/or can't innovate, Apple can and will eat you for breakfast. If I were adobe I would not want to be in Apple's cross hairs. Don't be so arrogant into thinking your holy Adobe is above getting their backside handed to them by Apple. It's my personal belief Aperture is the first of many app's that is kicking around inside Apple R&D. One of which I am convinced is a PS killer. To think Apple cannot destroy PS with an App of their own just blows my mind. Call me a fanboy all you want but if *nothing* else Apple has shown in the last 10 years they just can't be out innovated or out designed and they won't wait forever for companies to get off their butt to design products that don't suck.
X
I agree! Adobe products is what made me make the switch to mac! Two versions is ridiculous. Thats like 4 year gap considering the product cycles of CS.
I wish Adobe would make their own computers!
I am trying to imagine how long an Adobe computer would take to boot up... regardless of the processor!
Yeah, you're right. Not sure why I phrased it like that.
To my knowledge, you cannot leverage the Cocoa framework from C++ on OS X. Therefore to switch frameworks you also have to switch languages. Correct me if I'm wrong though.
Wrong again. The point of ObjC++ is to leverage C++ directly within ObjC.
Most of Photoshop is a mix of C and C++. ObjC is a superset of C. C++ interfaces can directly be wrapped in ObjC++ interfaces.
What will change is the fact that Adobe's aged Object Model will have to adapt to the MVC/KVC Model of Apple that has been around since, oh when Adobe natively developed Illustrator and Framemaker in ObjC and AppKit/Foundation Kit back when NeXTStep 3.0 was released.
Welcome to Cocoa Bindings [Delegates], Core Video, Core Data, etc.
http://developer.apple.com/document...l/CocoaBindings/Concepts/WhatAreBindings.html
http://developer.apple.com/document...s/OtherArchitectures/chapter_8_section_3.html
C++ and ObjC were around back in 1986. If you can't handle brackets and right to left message passing to object references ala verb to noun than you truly are language impaired.
By the way,
Intuit has finally bitten the bullet on their product suite to release Cocoa only products and which will have portions of functionality exclusive to Apple that only OS X can offer.
Yeah, you're right. Not sure why I phrased it like that.
Still wrong - at least in context. Adobe doesn't need to write 'everything', only those parts that do the heavy lifting.
For example, back in the 0x0 - PPC transition, only a tiny fraction of the code had to be rewritten in order to get most of the speed gains for most apps. The same thing is undoubtedly true here, as well.
anyone remember ...
Apple's Dylan.
Apple's attempt at a new language started in the style of LISP then they changed to be more C syntax like, then it was dropped.
Things evolve and change. It is apparent Adobe is not learning that lesson. Also, if they would have started migrating sooner, whose not to say they could have had more capabilities then they do now (because what cocoa affords them over carbon).
Apple's Dylan.
Apple's attempt at a new language started in the style of LISP then they changed to be more C syntax like, then it was dropped.
Things evolve and change. It is apparent Adobe is not learning that lesson. Also, if they would have started migrating sooner, whose not to say they could have had more capabilities then they do now (because what cocoa affords them over carbon).
The app that needs 64 bit the most is After Effects. Create a 10 layer film res file in Photoshop and then bring it into AE for animation. You can barely preview 5 seconds in RAM before you're out of memory.
The whole Illustrator>Photoshop>After Effects>Premiere>Encore workflow is fantastic in concept, but very sluggish in practice and no amount of memory can improve it while the apps remain at 32 bit.
The whole Illustrator>Photoshop>After Effects>Premiere>Encore workflow is fantastic in concept, but very sluggish in practice and no amount of memory can improve it while the apps remain at 32 bit.
Interesting. Do you have access to current Photoshop source code? Just curious.
Pixelmator seems to have had a quick genesis. I got it. It's buggy and unstable and is in no way a Photoshop competitor. It might have a future as something to bundle free with cameras.
Can't see people flocking to this or Apple's purported Wonderapp if it means ditching years and years of expensively acquired add-ins and filters.
It's like all of those iPod gadgets and cases that don't fit Sony or Creative products. After a while it creates its own ecosystem and people are loath to try something else.
Yeah, you're right. Not sure why I phrased it like that.
To my knowledge, you cannot leverage the Cocoa framework from C++ on OS X. Therefore to switch frameworks you also have to switch languages. Correct me if I'm wrong though.
Renaming files to have a .mm extension will enable the Objective-C++ compiler in mix ObjC and C++.
While the Carbon framwork references would have to be reworked to use the Cocoa framworks a lot of Adobe code that does all the actual processing (and is probably almost identical to the code used in the Windows version - thus saving massive effort because much of their code would no longer have to be supported on two different platforms *) could be reused with little or no modification - assuming Adobe programmers didn't to a half-assed job structuring their code.
*Of course that would mean ditching PPC support - but its coming sooner or later
Tell that to anyone trying to use multi-gigabyte sample libraries for piano/drums/orchestras under Logic. Or anyone doing film compositing in FCS. Moving to 64 bit is a question of when, not if, and Apple ought to be ahead of the curve, particularly since they have a unique perspective on the development of the core operating system.
I don't believe Apple had such pleasure as we now have when everything you need is to check what CPU architectures support you want Xcode to compile for you application and etc.
Apple "came up" with Final Cut Pro??
As far as coming up with a new product. I don't think Adobe/Macromedia will let Apple buy abandoned products any more. They learned their lesson with Key Grip .....
As far as coming up with a new product. I don't think Adobe/Macromedia will let Apple buy abandoned products any more. They learned their lesson with Key Grip .....
You want to compare Adobe with Apple? It's a joke right? Apple is developing Mac OS X, iPhone software, Final Cut Studio, Apple TV software, a lot of work with drivers, hardware design. It's a very long list. I agree that things could be different, but it's not the worst scenario, as for Adobe they do what? Computers? OS? Hardware design? NO!
Young whipper snapper. You've had it easy.
I've been working with PS since version 2, when layers weren't even implemented. I have a good friend that's been working on it since the beginning.Now it's someone else's turn.
<]=)
That's a stupid view to take though.
Apple MAKES the tools that the software is built with, so while they might be doing more - they should have the inside knowledge to get it done well and fast.