Slashdot Mirror


Adobe Drops Mac Support For Premiere

Theaetetus writes "In a story on MacCentral, it's revealed that Adobe Systems is dropping support for the Mac in the new version of video editing app Premiere: 'If Apple's already doing an application, it makes the market for a third-party developer that much smaller,' said David Trescot, senior director of Adobe's digital video products group. In response to the news, Apple issued a statement welcoming Premiere customers to make the switch to the Mac and Final Cut Pro."

8 of 616 comments (clear)

  1. Adobe afraid of competition? by mao+che+minh · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Well, it would have made more sense to have kept selling the product to Mac users until it was no longer profitable. As far as I knew, Premiere is still the most popular film editing app amongst Mac users, which would stand to reason that it is still making a lot of money. So why decide to drop the product entirely, instead of just entering into some healthy competition?

    I guess when you are used to being the only bully on the block, and have thus come to enjoy forcing people to pay your extremely high prices (since there isn't anywhere else to go), then you would react in such a non-sensical way to sudden competition. First post?

    1. Re:Adobe afraid of competition? by Agave · · Score: 5, Insightful
      "David Trescot, senior director of Adobe's digital video products group, said the new edition of Premiere is a complete rewrite of the application and it didn't make financial sense to support the Mac anymore." If this is true, then porting to Mac OS X would be a significant cost for Adobe. I assume they will keep selling the old version for Mac users.

      The problem I have with this argument is that a total rewrite is the PERFECT time to make a platform cross-platform. Design it in from the start; keeping processor-specific and interface-specific code separate from the beginging and you make moving to different platforms less costly.

      sounds to me like they just hired about of Windows developers on the cheap that don't know _how_ to make a cross-platform app.

  2. That is a lame excuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's similar to Microsoft's excuse for dropping IE for Mac. If you don't want to support Mac, then just don't support it. Don't blame it on competition when your product has been superior for years and recognized as such. If it's not selling well, reduce the price to sell more. If the Apple market is just too small, say so.

  3. Re:Is n't this normally reserved for MS? by runenfool · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Adobe isn't talking about competing with iMovie, which is bundled for free - but rather referring to competing with Final Cut Pro (and Express) which are 999 and 249 respectively.

    I'm sure Apple has known about this for some time. FCP Express was certainly a shot across the bow of Adobe (because of its power for the price).

    It looks like Adobe felt it couldn't compete with FCP for whatever reason, so it decided to throw in with Intel/Microsoft and support their hardware and media technologies, respectively.

    I think this has been expected in the Mac world for some time - the writing has been on the wall.

  4. Re:Here is why Adobe didn't port Premiere to Macs by b-baggins · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The comment on the article you linked suffers from a logical fallacy of false equivalence.

    Apple has a 3% market share (it's actually closer to 8% total installed base, but for the sake of argument...) of all computers in existence.

    Adobe does not sell Premier to all computers in existence. They sell to the video editing industry. In this industry, Apple has about a 70% market share.

    So, obviously, market share is NOT the reason Adobe is dropping Mac support. The truth is, they can't compete with Final Cut Pro, so they've dropped their support for that platform and are concentrating on the minority platform where they still maintain the monopoly. If FCP were ever ported to Windows, Premiere would pretty much cease to exist as a product.

    --
    You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
  5. premiere used to be standard by f00zbll · · Score: 5, Insightful

    video editing for 3D and animation classes. But now Final Cut Pro is the default standard for film schools and most animation courses. The thing is, Adode has seriously lagged the last couple of releases with Premiere. Adobe had a lead for a long time and simply let the advantage go. Nothing remains constant and innovation requires a sense of pressure and urgency. It looks like Adobe didn't have a sense of urgency until it was too late.

  6. bah! by SweetAndSourJesus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All Adobe is saying is "we're not going to compete in a market where we'll be soundly trounced."

    By the way, Acrobat sucks pretty bad on OS X. Most people use Preview instead of Reader. Creation of pdf files is as easy as hitting "Print", then "Save as PDF", which takes away much of the need for the full version of Acrobat.

    --

    --
    the strongest word is still the word "free"
  7. What I don't get by mcc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What I don't get is why it is that when this came up, and when the whole IE thing came up, people seem to occationally somehow think it's harder to compete against Apple than against a different third-party.

    Why?

    I don't see what Apple's advantage is. All of their apps have gone through public, well-documented (okay, and in some cases not-so-well-documented, but they're working on that) APIs; there's nothing hidden. There have even been a couple cases where widgets and classes used in iApps have been later migrated into the main Cocoa API (like the itunes search system or "that switcher thing") because apple thought they might be useful to developers. The only real advantage Apple's had is that they've taken advantage of new APIs immediately, whereas other companies don't like saying "you have to upgrade to Panther to use this app". I went to the WWDC, and it really seems like Apple hasn't done anything anyone could have done; in fact, they actually had one session where they used Safari as a case study, showing how they used performance testing tools in making Safari so other people could do the same.

    Don't say it's because Apple can use the money from their OS/computer business to unfairly finance other things; Apple is clearly understaffed and Adobe probably has more loose change than Apple. And I seriously doubt it's becuase of the expertise and access to engineers that comes from being in the same building as the Quicktime engineers. If Adobe's support contract didn't give it roughly the same degree of access, they would be able to bitch and moan about that specific problem and there would be a big community backlash.. there's worry already about apple's new presence in the applications area and a perception that apple is giving its own engineers preferential treatment could hurt them kind of badly.