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."
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?
Post #1! This has become a very popular thing for developers to do nowadays...lost your will to innovate? Blame it on the other guy. What I don't understand is how this happens when it seems clear to me that people have learned to compete with Microsoft, arguably the most anti-competitive entity in the business, so why is it that they cannot compete with Apple, a company with significantly fewer software titles and an overwhelming demand for the portage of many common applications from the Win32 side of things? Just my two cents.
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.
http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=3976#11
XP comes with Windows Movie Maker. How can Adobe compete with that!?
Final Cut Pro is far superior. I know a guy heavy into video production/editing and he switched to FCP and never looked back. Premiere is/was a crash happy POS.
I had the pleasure of sitting in on a "Q and A" session with an adobe rep, while I was at RIT. The rep (perhaps not the position of the entire company) basically didn't like the mac platform. He complained about how it was more to support, and changed more frequently than the windows counterpart. This of course costs them more in development and support. Granted this was not long after the OS 9 -> OS X transition, so of course adobe is going to bitch that the platform changes too much because they just dumped the whole API adobe products were based off of. Carbon helped fill this gap but it's by no stretch a the cure-all.
I wonder if this is the general feel of Adobe developers however.
- tristan
What are the stats for video editing? Clearly not as favorable.
Another benefit of open source - no need to obey market economics when developing products.
They have also added nested composition to premiere (like final cut pro) I can't wait to see this two new versions in action!! By the way its my First POST!
Adobe Premier: $546
Apple Final Cut Pro: $999
I'd think Adobe would still hold a large share of the market based on price alone.
It's normally Microsoft that is derided (sp?) for bundling apps with their OS.
However I guess with Apple being the manufacture of machine you could argue that the rules are slightly different. I suppose they are trying to sell the Mac as an "Experience", ie buy a Mac no need to buy extra software everything works out of the box.
Who cares? Adobe, like Microsoft, is slowly being made a moot point on the Macintosh platform. Adobe- like Microsoft, has always had the "you should be grateful to be doing business with us" kind of attitude. As the story poster says- Apple says "sure, come on over Adobe users!"
I worked at a company that did plugin development for Premier and After Effects- and not a day went by without Adobe getting pissed off about something. They'd accuse the their 3rd-party plugin development community of giving out prereleases. They'd "change their mind" about giving the company developer licenses. They were constantly getting upset about the slightest things developers or marketing people said at tradeshows. Each little temper-tantrum from Adobe would take hours of people's time to "fix"(fix being "kiss adobe ass until they're happy".)
The funny thing is that when you act like that, everyone else puts up with it, but slowly works to make you irrelevant. This former employer is doing great business with Apple- their plugin is included with every copy of Final Cut Pro, and while I was still there, I never heard a bad word about relations with Apple.
Please help metamoderate.
- Premiere was left to languish before Final Cut 1
-Once Final Cut shipped adobe was very slow to respond
-Premiere is a crappy product compared to Final Cut
-Adobe has shifted its mentally to the PC even though 30% of their revenues come from apple's "5%" of the market
-Premiere is a crappy product compared to Final Cut
-Adobe was very late getting an OSX version out
-Adobe says they can't compete with Apple but now is competing in the PC market that has FREE products and products that also get better reviews?
-Premiere is a crappy product compared to Final Cut
-Adobe has yet to take advantage of the second proc in macs for After Effects even though they have been standard for years
-Premiere is a crappy product compared to Final Cut
-Premiere is a crappy product compared to Final Cut
-Premiere is a crappy product compared to Final Cut
Welcome to life, Adobe. Innovate or die.
I'm certainly not saying that FCP is the be all, end all for video production (it isn't), but at least give it a chance, Adobe. Final Cut Express is lookin mighty fine right now...
I like big butts and I cannot lie.
Microsoft drops Mac IE development as Safari reaches 1.0
Of course, anyone who wants to develop Office-like business software or any kind of web browser for Windows faces the same uphill battle. When the OS manufacturer makes non-OS software, they enjoy unparalleled integration with the rest of the system and anyone else comes in four to six months behind the development curve.
It's sad that third parties stop developing Mac software because Apple's doing it better, but it's no more fatal -- to businesses or to consumers -- than it has been on Windows. When Microsoft took over the Windows office software market, developers either died or moved onto a different software niche. Same happens on Mac OS. Such is business.
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.
Adobe Premiere: $550
Final Cut Express: $300
And If you need the high-end features of FCP, chances are that $999 is cheap compared to the Avid you'd otherwise buy.
Additionally, as a person who does this for a living, i offer that the Premiere interface is a bad joke.
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"
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.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
So instead of fighting for glory with Apple, they will now put all their eggs in one basket in the competition against AVID? Makes no business sense to me...
So anybody thought of running this on OSX using FINK or whatever? Maybee nice on G5.
I am the bastard of base minus 12! Turing was the ejaculate of my complete machine!
Ok, ok, hear me out!
PS kicks every other Pixelprogramm up and down the street. I get that.
But what with the rest? We've got Cinelerra for free (beer, speech and all), we've got Pinnacle who recently bought Fast, a kick ass high end Video Tool company and are now shedding their technology in bundles in every Walmart alongside realtime NLE cards for a dime-a-dozen.
And we got Apple who's new Final Cut Pro apears to be kicking the living crap out of Premiere. So I heard from my former Video NLE Teacher the other day who'd wee-wee in his pants whilst raving about the superdooper Premiere just 3 years ago when he tought us.
From what it looks like to me with every software company in the vector/pixel, video and 3D business struggling for life and the cheap ones getting cheaper or even being bought by hardware vendors and Gimp pushing the GPL-freeness envelope on the Pixelside and Sodipodi giving Freehand, Illustrator and CorelDraw the GPL creeps, it seems these companys like Macromedia *and* Adobe aswell would be better of finding new fields of business *fast*.
Just my 2 Eurocents.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Photoshop 4 may be usable, but I find 7's brushes to be EXTREMELY useful for texturing. Additionaly the layout changes between 5.5 and 6.0 made a huge usability improvement. Let's also not forget the immensly useful Image Ready, which makes slicing up layouts for the web very easy, although ultimately they still must be edited by hand, it gets rid of much of the grunt work. Adobe has done a great job of innovating Photoshop, currently there are no real competitors.
Photos.
Final Cut Pro costs more than a copy of Premiere, but it has more high-end features you see on really expensive Avid setups that run you well over two grand.
/half/ of what Adobe charges for Premiere, while having the same badass UI of FCP and most of the same feature set.
If you want to mention that Premiere costs less than Final Cut Pro, please do mention that Final Cut Express costs about
Mikey-San
Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
Um, Adobe's not leaving and taking the only video editing app with them. Adobe is leaving because they are no longer the only game in town.
And what do Blender and POVray have to do with anything?
In the Microsoft anti-trust trial, it was ruled that Apple should not be considered competition to Microsoft.
Therefore, Apple and Microsoft are not competitors, and therefore, they are in seperate market spaces.
Therefore, Apple has it's own market. By definition, the market MS is in (amoung others) is "Desktop Operating Systems for x86 compatible hardware".
The question then becomes, is Apple a *monopoly*. On the face, a ridiculous question. But in depth, it's not. Apple is the exclusive maker now of hardware able to run Mac OS. Therefore, they maintain a hardware monopoly in relation to what can run Mac OS X.
The question is this: in relation to the ISV (independent software vendors) does Apple maintain monopoly control? This isn't the first software package killed by Apple's bundling: Internet Explorer, Roxio stuff, and now Adobe stuff.
At some point its not inconveivable that Apple could be the target of a Sherman related case. They are the exclusive makers of Mac OS X compatible hardware, and they bundle it with software, at the expense of smaller software companies (or in cases larger). It is entirely possible that Apple could face a charge of anti-competitive bundling much like MS did.
Speculation yes, but it is starting to get obvious that Apple is killing ISV's via their use of bundling.
*baffled look*
/. is about some angry competitor swearing off the mac. What exactly is causing this? Personally, I'd have to go with the incredible ease of use that Safari/FCP/etc 'suffer' from, but there has to be something else.
After years and years of Windows/Solaris usage, I finally went out and bought a mac. The OS was stable and unixlike to the point where I couldn't rationalize -not- buying one.
Now, every 8th story on
Could enough people actually be buying macs now that companies are purposefully trying to pull out of the market to cease the flow of new mac purchasers?
Christ knows I won't be buying another PC until my dev box dies. Yay Apple.
Are you MORE than your SPINAL COLUMN?
Also missed out:
3 posts giving anecdotes on the infinitesimally small TCO (that word being used in the most conspicuous manner) of a Macintosh. Promptly modded +5, Interesting.
if they were going up against something free (iTunes, iPhoto) from Apple, then i can see it hard to justify a consumer level app..... maybe. There will always be things that Apple's iApps can not and will not do in the name of simplicity. You can't tell me anyone is giving up a legit copy of Photoshop for iPhoto. Kind of off topic, but my point is that FCP and FCE are not free by any means. FCE is a lot cheaper than Premiere, but FCP is still the most money. FCE is targetted at people wanting a step up from iMovie, not people working on big films. If anything it's like Photoshop elements, which is still very much not the application that iPhoto is.
Hidden, unpublished APIs?
Have you even looked at the latest FireWire SDK?
Or QuickTime?
Or WebKit?
Or CoreAudio?
Or iMovie Plugin?
Or Image Capture?
Or Information Access Toolkit?
Or the rest of the Cocoa and Carbon APIs?
After you've written something that has exhausted the possibilities in those APIs,
then you might have a reason to gripe, but until then, you're just spreading FUD.
Yep - in a nutshell that comment PERFECTLY describes the situation.
The only thing I would add is that Adobe is under attack in Windows-Land also. With products like the awesome Vegas Video out there who can blame them for not wanting to fight a two front war?
Perhaps they should think about porting to Linux. What serious competition would they have there? If you could tell video production houses that they could save some bucks on licensing, and sweeten it by selling the open source concept, I think Adobe would have a winner (and a leg up).
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
Premiere 6 natively supports DV editing. That means any system with a firewire port will perform like your DV500 card (BTW, the DV500 is crap, like anything Pinnacle has ever made). It also supports firewire device control, it uses any of After Effects' filters, it loads MPEG files, it supports effect keyframing and - more importantly - it crashes about 10 times less than version 5. The differences between Premiere 5 and 6 are much bigger than between 4 and 5. Premiere 6.5 adds real-time preview of effects (even without any real-time hardware) and a built-in MPEG-2 exporter.
Avid DV Express is a piece of crap. FCP 4 is nice, but the interface is too antiquated. They need to drop some of those old concepts and learn from compositing and rendering software like Shake, DFusion, 3D SMAX, etc.
A similar article here. Bottomline, after reading the 2 articles: Adobe is very sensitive about direct competition from Apple. Adobe also fears that Apple might one day start giving away Pro applications for free, which is not entirely impossible because Apple is still mainly a hardware manufacturer. What, about 75% revenue from hardware sales?
Another reason stated in the article on Digital Video Editing is:
This announcement seems to follow a consistent trend at Adobe: none of the applications in the digital video editing segment get an OS X version Encore DVD, Audition, now Premiere gets the axe, when will After Effects get the boot?
"It usualy starts with some screaming. Afterwards there is much running around."
Perhaps this is their reasoning but I think they have waited too long. If Adobe had pursued this strategy right away when FinalCut was introduced it would have worked as you suggest but now it will be a near run thing. Apple is a niche player and has it's eye on dominating the video editting/production niche. FinalCut Pro is one of the "killer" (or "tractor") apps in their strategy. Once the Mac platform has a critical mass of users and a critical mass of applications many of which are Mac only even competing apps like Premier can't leave without doing themselves more harm than good. Instead of Adobe keeping their business their users (some reluctantly) switch to FinalCut Pro because the *other* apps they need and the other people they need to work with are all on the mac.
Sadly for Adobe FinalCut Pro has already proven itself and is widely regarded as a superior, even revolutionary product. Also Apples play to dominate the video/film production market doesn't rest on FinalCut alone but also on a fundamental technology (QuickTime) and a parallel strategy of "tractor apps" at the very high end (Shake), the very low end (iMovie) and in related fields (DVD Studio Pro, Logic) and on Apple hardware designed specifically for this market (why do you think they offer a "server" with an option for a high(ish) end video card and a FireWire port on the front?). Apple's hand has just gotten stronger with the introduction of the G5 and the introduction of the Pixlet codec. (not to mention the implications of Apple developing a codec at the specific request of Steve's other company which just happens to be a major Hollywood player and the developers of RenderMan (Coming to a Mac near you soon?))
Adobe may do OK despite all the advantages Apple has at this point since increasingly FinalCut Pro is not competing with Premiere at the low end of the spectrum but with Avid at the high end, but that begs the question of why someone getting in to the low end would buy a middle-to-low end product like Premiere when for the same price he can get a middle-to-high end product like FinalCut Pro on the platform with all the users and software (in this niche).
It won't just be Premiere. In this case Apple's "Final Cut" software was obviously the cause, but expect more software companies to flee Apple after the relase of 10.3 with its built-in XFree86 that makes running all that cool free software in Apple.com's "Downloads" section a breeze.
Adobe has already made it quite clear that Windows is their new preferred platform, so I think that it's safe to assume that we will see more of this down the road. Adobe is, for the most part, a proprietary software company, and with Apple cozying up to the Open Source world, Adobe's profit margins in the Apple world will shrink as popular free tools like Gimp encroach on Adobe's market share. Microsoft yanked IE support for Apple, punishing Apple for providing a little competition. It will continue.
Apple is doing what the Linux world has failed at- bringing Open-Source software to desktop users. In a few years Apple users might not need much proprietary software at all- making up for the higher cost of Mac hardware. Apple is taking a big risk by pissing off a lot of software companies, but the rewards should make up for it if Apple comes through it.
Ehh, FinalCut is a better product. It has a much better UI, handles 24p h4 video perfectly, and does quite few things that Premiere needs 3rd party hardware to accomplish. Moreover, FinalCut on a PowerBook is typically a much more robust portable solution the Premiere on a PC laptop.
FinalCut's video/audio solutions have surpassed that of Premiere's during the past two major releases. Over the past 12 months FinalCut has become -the- pro video editing solution for MacOSX.
Honestly, it makes no sense to keep selling Premiere on OS X. Adobe would be loosing money. Now that FinalCut's feature set is mature, Mac user are migrating away from Premiere. Furthermore, a lot of Digital Video folks are migrating to OS X simply to use Final Cut or Final Cut Express.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
Jesus, at the first sign of the competition taking their market away, they turn and run with their tales between their legs. I guess Adobe isn't comfortable unless they have a monopoly and can take years between new version releases of their software. Welcome to America, Adobe. It's called capitalism. This is a bad thing for both Final Cut Pro and Premiere. Less competition is almost never good for the market, and it certainly isn't a good thing in this case.
You ARE wrong. FCP came from Macromedia, who had pinched Premiere's lead programmers to produce a Premiere killer (that's why FCP is so Premiere like - it IS "Super Premiere"). Macromedia had let the project founder, Apple bought it back to life.
Now, Adobe has finally admitted defeat. The Premiere killer has killed.
That was classic intercourse!
I like apples, but not apple users
Yeah. I feel that way about most groups of enthusiats, which includes linux zealots, BSD nuts, MS lovers, Metallica fans, Kiss army, Ect, ect. I love technology, movies, music, tv shows, art. I just don't always love other people who also love those things. I don't really know why. I think its because I'm a free thinker. No, wait I think its because I'm a jerk.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
Apple left third parties to their own vices for many many years and the market dried up, became uncompetitive and utterly boring. Apple took matters into their own hands by improving and innovating. It's not their fault Adobe is a company of cowards who refuse to compete in a fair market. Apple's API's are open and they provide all the tools needed to get the job done for free.
The only reason Adobe pulled out was spite and cowardice. You can probably blame arrogance too with Adobe thinking they own the multimedia market.
Apple hardly shot themselves in the foot. They released a better product and took over the market. That's what happens in a free society. Adobe shot themselves in the foot by showing their customers and their investors they have no spine, and perhaps worse, no ideas.
Gimp poses no threat to photoshop whatsoever.
The only people who would be interested in using GIMP instead of Photoshop are home users who pirated photoshop in the first place. Adobe makes its money from corporations, not home users. And there are no open source programs that rival adobe now, or in the near future.
Apple says FU to to Adobe by releaseing iGimp as a free replacement for Photoshop pushing Adobe away from Mac platform entirely. In a related note Microsoft chairman Bill Gates sent a memo to Adobe management welcoming them to his playground.
People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them
As much as I admire OSX and the new Mac hardware, I have to be honest and say that I think Steve Jobs is burning bridges with a big group of Mac users. First he moves the Mac to a Unix codebase, which we love, but old-line Mac users have huge reservations about. Then he slowly goes about writing all the important apps for the Mac, pushing out longtime 3rd party vendors that Mac users have relied upon for years. This is a direct shot at Adobe, the software company most associated with Mac third party software. Jobs seems intent on making all software on the Mac "All Apple, All The Time". And I think this might be the new Apple's Achilles Heel; its really hard to expand your market if no one else is writing software for your platform. I know ole' Steve wants the revenue, but this is getting rediculous.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Given the apple integrated approach to OS10+ your statement might just be a little premature
If Apple does succeed in integrating Gimp functionality into a desktop, then the average PhotoShop pro might just say hey why the hell should I pay big money for a 64 bit pentium work station, then tons of cash for software as well.
Adobe dropping Apple is a move that is obvious in it's implications. To keep Redmond happy! The free software movement is gaining steam with the pro's.
In music, imaging, etc. The home market for PC junkies has become more important to Adobe. Pro's will pay for great tools like ProTools audio, but Photoshop Pro has become a bloated button ridden overpriced PC style app, great as it was it is not that indespensable.
I do not even own an Apple, but I am getting very tempted!
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
And you're articulate and insightful.
I'm running 16 threads with 250 simultaneous stereo audio tracks in my game tranquility
and it's doing it while drawing 10,000 objects in OpenGL. Sometimes, if not always, you have to dig for the right information,
but most things are possible immediately or eventually, or you end up taking an alternative approach to solving the problem.
I gripe about Apple's sparse or non-existent documentation as much as anyone, but what I was addressing was the
accusation that the iApps etc. were built on intentionally non-published APIs and I don't think that's a fair assessment.
With every non-trivial app there's always some aspect you get stuck on when trying to get things just right (or just working),
but Apple's pretty good at disclosure, and getting better as time goes by. The new FireWire SDK is an excellent example of that.
Closer to the truth is that internal development of applications at Apple drives the extensions of the toolkits more than third
parties do. A team is building something like iPhoto against a specification and when they need some specific part, they
either write it, or ask the department in another building to extend an API to accommodate their needs. So naturally, Apple
gets first crack at the new functionality. Eventually that new functionally gets documented and tested, and Apple publishes
it to developers. But that's not a real-time pipeline.
but people like you are embarrassments to the platform
That's not true. I'm a unique and beautiful snowflake. There's no one like me.
And besides, to Apple, anyone that buys a few Macs isn't an embarrassment to the platform.
Final Cut Pro is the Premier-killer application and it's been pillaging Premier for some time. It's gotten to the point that Apple has released FCP 4 but Adobe still doesn't have a reply to FCP 3. Remember, FCP has been taking the pro market by storm even at twice what Premier costs. With Final Cut Express undercutting Premier's price, Adobe has decided to take their ball and run home before Apple shuts them out entirely.
I mean, even Avid is restructuring their marketing strategy and slashing prices because of the heat they're feeling from Final Cut Pro. What's a long-in-the-tooth, klunky program like Premier to do in the face of this competition?
From what I understand, Premier is not really competitive on the PC side, either, with several programs having more features and better interface. The PC market is larger and more fragmented, though, so they it's more economical for them and less embarrassing. (I.e., on the Mac side, a single opponent came from nowhere, kicked sand in their face, took their girlfriend, and has been voted "Most eligible Editor on the beach".
All of the video editors I know hate Premier, which is so primitive and klunky. I mean, this is the 2000's and it can still only have a single timeline per project file?
As far as I can tell, Premier's user base is: 1) people who have been using it forever, 2) novices who recognize the brand name and have read over the years about Premier, or 3) those who got it free with a bundled purchase.
microsoft photo editor has stopped photoshop?
Stories such as this remind me of the time John Warnock stood before the attendees of a Seybold conference years ago and actually cried because Apple was threatening Adobe's PostScript font tech with its own TrueType. (Well, okay, I can't find any articles that back up my recollection, but perhaps that's what the author of this one meant by "visible dismay.")
In those days, Adobe had a stranglehold on the fonts market. Sure, there were players such as Bitstream and Agfa, but nothing compared to Adobe and the huge fees it was collecting per font. Then came Apple (along with Microsoft) who announced a competing technology that would be included with its operating systems, rather than as an add-on such as Adobe Type Manager, and if not make PostScript irrelevant, at least take a huge bite out of Adobe's margins. History tells us a truce was achieved, but at the time, my sympathy for Adobe was in the minus. Gouging your customers inevitably is bad business.
Now we have this. I personally haven't used Premiere in ages, and I can't say I know how it has evolved in the meantime. But while I was using it, I always had the unnerving feeling I was using a pee cee port that was an afterthought. A stagnant afterthought. (Not quite as bad as MS Word 6.0, but you get the idea.) After using FCP (and FCP Express), the question I have is: Why would I ever want to go back to Premiere?
Again, I'm thinking it's just desserts for Adobe. While I'm certain their reasons for redeveloping Premiere are exclusively retaliatory (just my opinion), Premiere is a fading star in as much the same way that Quark Xpress is. Ironic, in a way, that it's Adobe that's eating Quark's lunch.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, write technology blogs.
From what I've heard, they hired a former Adobe programmer. Depending on who's telling it, that's why Adobe's video products stagnated until after FCP came out.
I haven't run into any problems getting the files to be accepted by any press houses. A lot of them take InDesign documents these days even if they don't advertise the fact. The few that don't take the native file wil usualy accept a PDF or EPS.
Next time you upgrade get one of Adobes all inclusive packages (one of those ones that includes PS, Illustrator, Acrobat, ect...) you would practicaly be getting it for free, so if you don't like it it's no big loss.
There is a serious flaw in your reasoning, Final Cut doesn't even use the standard widgets. Apple bought Final Cut and ported it over, custome widgets and all. Premire should have had, for all intents and purposes the "head start" thanks to Carbon.
Because the OS maker has a few months head start shouldn't be a deterent to building a better mouse trap. Microsoft has had 20 years to build windows, that hasn't stopped OSS from trying has it?
Fact of the matter is, Final Cut is just better. Apple isn't bundling it, they aren't giving special breaks or sneaking in special API's. They aren't even competing on price, yet Premier STILL can't beat it. That alone speaks volumes about Adobe. I haven't seen such blatant incompentence since Quark waited 3 years to release an OSX native app.
I think it's important to remember that there was a lot of dissatisfaction with Adobe's attitude and Premiere's interface in particular before Apple bought FCP from Macromedia.
It's that Quark-style "hey, we own this market, we don't need to fix anything if we don't want to" attitude that did them in. Apple have clearly decided that they don't want the main reason to have a mac (a/v media editing) in the hands of unfriendly third parties.
It's much the same as Microsoft not leaving the main reason for having a PC (office apps) to 3rd parties.
Adobe lost the Apple market share because Apple produced a better product. That's called competition and competition is good! I just hope Apple doesn't slack off on their FCP software.
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
"We like the Mac, but Apple currently has three [video] editing applications shipping.... It just didn't make sense for us to keep developing for the Mac when the Mac is well served by Apple." here
Translation:
Adobe Premier is Mickey Mouse BS when compared to FCP - we just could not compete. It is a good thing FCP is not available for Windows - we still have those Users under our finger.
Prediction:
If Adobe does not kick it into high gear and start making some changes (start with the interface which looks like it was designed by a focus group comprised of accountants, librarians, and lawyers) they will end up losing a good amount of their After Effects customers to Discreet' Combestion. Combustion rapes AE - hands down.
The upcoming AE 6.0 is heralded as:
"After Effects 6.0 Professional adds motion tracking and stabilization, advanced keying and warping tools, more than 30 additional visual effects, a particle system, render automation and network rendering, 16-bit-per-channel color, 3D channel effects, and additional audio effects."
Combustion had these 'new' features in late 2001 - only difference is that then it costs 4,995 and now you can get it for $995 - bye bye AE. Only advantage that AE has is all the plugins that are now being written to be combustion 2 compatible. Combustion 2.1 is available for OS X and Windows XP.
Hey - but they will still have Photoshop, right?
Still, Adobe Premiere was revolutionary in its day. I did some good work with Premiere on a 20MHz Mac IIci in 1995. Sure, it was slow, and I had to take the files to an Avid shop for final output, but it did the job.
But that was a long time ago.
You know, I don't give a great god damn about the P4, personally I think Intel lost it after they introduced the PII... the PIII was stupid and the P4 is a ridiculous re-design.
The work flow of FCP is only better if it's the only thing you use. Personally, I use Photoshop a lot more and I feel right at home in After Effects and Premiere, even more so than in Final Cut.
Like I said, Final Cut gets the job done, and well. But it's certainly a far cry from being "hands-down" best.
- iMovie, which ships on every Mac, and is an entry-level video programme that is still quite good -- and completely locks Adobe out of the low-end. This was once Premiere's territory. Even iMovie supports a thriving third-party plug-in community.
- Final Cut Express, which is FCP shorn of some of the true pro features, that only true pros need. This sits just about exactly where Premiere is in the market, but costs less and the interface skills you develop can be taken "upstairs." There's also the snob appeal of using the "lite" version of stuff the big Hollyweird boys are using.
- Final Cut Pro itself, which as other
/.ers have mentioned, is eating Avid's lunch.
Two of these have identical code bases, practically speaking, letting poor Premiere get beaten up from above and below at once. Apple also is extending FCP's reach (and Apple's money-making) with things such as add-on compositing software.The bottom line is, Adobe's marketroids looked at Premiere on OS X and said, "Why would I buy this product instead of...?" and the answer they came up with... was curtains for Premiere.
That doesn't make any sense - if 80% (plucked number) of users of your product use the MacOS version, why does it matter that there are 15X as many Windows PCs in the world? There are probably more ATMs in the world that Palm OS computers, doesn't make it sensible to write a calorie counting app for ATMs, does it?
That was classic intercourse!
By your theory, Adobe should write Chinese version only and cease their English version development.