Slashdot Mirror
Adobe Forming a Linux Strategy?
rocketjam writes "According to cnet, Adobe Systems, the 800-pound gorilla of commercial graphics software is looking to become more involved with desktop Linux. The company has recently posted two new jobs, one for a director of Linux market development to 'identify and evaluate strategies for Adobe in the Linux and open-source desktop market', and one for a senior computer scientist who will 'become maintainer and/or architect for one or more Adobe-sponsored open-source projects.' Additionally, Adobe has joined the Open Source Development Labs and is active in the desktop Linux working group. A company spokesman said they are not currently looking to port any of their flagship products such as Photoshop to Linux yet, as they currently don't see sufficient numbers in the platform to make a good business case for it."
m$ is gonna love this...
Get your torrents...
when we have GIMP. $600.00 vs. free. No brainer IMHO.
Aren't there quite a few Adobe programs that run/ran on IRIX?
This would almost be a way for SGI to re-enter the market, with Linux/Adobe workstations. Out-Macintosh the Mac, I guess.
Before everyone gets excited, I doubt this will result in brining photoshop over to linux. I see them going real small with this, such as Adobe Acrobat Reader, or some other smaller apps. Fear not gimp!
they could spend a little more time developing/testing their wares so they run fine in wine/cedega/crossover just like corel did once.
this would help creating market to an eventual native port.
What ? Me, worry ?
Hopefully, Photoshop and Illustrator will be ported. If they are, Linux can count me in as one of their users. My Adobe applications are the only reason I still use Windows.
With how (seemingly) easy they ported Acrobat Reader to Linux, I can't imagine Photoshop being too much different.
;) (unless you're writing with evil compiler-specific hacks)
:-P
The only difficult part would be the GUI stuff, all the underlying code is just C++, which, IIRC is pretty portable
Funny story my friend bill told me about WWDC (refrencing Photoshop's portability)
Apparently Apple gave free t-shirts if you have a project with over 5000 lines of code that you compiled with XCode. Some really dorky guy quietly walks up, writes down "Photoshop"....the apple guy looked at him for a second...and then just handed him a shirt, no questions asked
Error 407 - No creative sig found
there goes the primary mac/linux/windows argument. For years adobe programs have defined aspiring web/graphic designers' choices. Here comes alot more noobie installation hell.
going by google's old zeitegeist (sp?), which is a much more accurate indicator of machines people use (as opposed to servers, or single-process machines) Apple was up by a few % to Linux. And remember, Apple's is a platform with a disproportionate number of graphic artists, many of them rusted on to the Mac.
It's a good move for Linux to get Adobe behind them, but I wouldn't be sacking your GIMP just yet.
-- james
Newsflash... the GIMP doesn't hold a candle to Photoshop.
Thanks to WINE, anyway! :)
If they port photoshop, I'll give a guarentee that I'll pirate it!
...for a while - witness their use of Tomcat and MySQL in GoLive as far back as 2002.
The Army reading list
. . . about Sklyarov, do they? They can port Photoshop to Linux; I'll stick with the GIMP, thank you very much.
The transition from DOS to Windows took a while too ;)
I really have to wonder why it took so long for Adobe to jump on the Linux bandwagon. Sure, everybody and their mother will say that there is the GIMP and I agree, it is a great program and ver powerful. However, that being said, it is no Adobe Photoshop.
In the election spirit, to paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen
"I have used Photoshop. Photoshop is my friend. Mr. GIMP, you are no Photoshop." (Sorry, I couldn't resist)
Seriously, if Adobe moves into Linux with Photoshop and the other heavy hitters from their lineup (e.g., Illustrator) it will do two things. The first is truly and absolutely, positively legitimatize Linux (but honestly, it didn't really need it but this is a true stamp of approval). Second, they will just further extend their lead in the computer graphics market because it would be hard not to believe that a Linux-optimized Photoshop would do well in terms of marketshare. Also, just as important, when does Macromedia jump into the deep end of the Linux pool? They would almost for certain have to make some kind of move.
Sure, it would cannibalize some of their Mac and Windows market, but I feel pretty confident that there is a significant number of people that are waiting for this offering. While we can argue all day about some of Adobe's policies and other doings, I tip my hat to them on this one.
No trees were harmed in the composition of this; however, numerous electrons were inconvenienced.
The problem be that you have an inferior project. Why is not GIMP used professionally? At many companies the tech departments have heard of GIMP, but the design departments prefer Adobe Photoshop. Why? Simple quality issue. Nothing more. The GIMP must be the furthered develop before gained market share.
Read journal when you are not understand
How hard would it be to port the kinda-sorta BSD code from Photoshop CS (or the entire Creative Suite, for that matter) to Linux?
(Actually, this is question is not facetious--really, how hard would it be?)
Danke tres mucho, tovarishch.
- Relatively open standards for postscript, PDF
- True freeware tools (ghostscript, xpdf, OpenOffice) to read and generate according to the open standard
- Many commercial softwares that read and generate too
- Adobe-supplied free reader for most common Unices and Linux
Really, what else is needed? There are a bazillion companies out there with "Linux strategies" but no products or open standards.i've been waiting to dump Windows for a loooooooong time. Games do not matter to me.
...and NO Photoshop over Crossover is NOT going to work. It's "good enough(tm)*, but not for those of us that know PS inside-out - it just doesn't cut it. i hope i get PS for linux soon.
:)
Photoshop and only Photoshop is the reason i've not dumped Windows.
Adobe, if you are reading: i will plunk down anything under $500 for a copy of PS for linux....now, get to it.
The parent post is NSFW content of a shit covered woman and a bouncing javascript window.
AC because mods have their heads in their asses and modded me Troll last time.
Linux is gaining ground, think about the tortoise and the hare story
Linux will win because it is cost effective in the long run to do so, the price for 100k desktops is the same as 1 desktop and as a manager you cannot ignore that forever, you owe it to your investors to maximise YOUR profit not MS's
thanks to *NIX and OO.org they are becoming "good enough to do the job" and thats what matters
We're definitely past the first stage, and it sounds as if we've skipped right over the second and third stages with Adobe.
Seriously, we're on the radar screen of a company which has never shown any interest in anything which wasn't strictly proprietary. This isn't even the beginning of the end, but it's a big change in the right direction.
See what I've been reading.
they currently don't see sufficient numbers in the platform to make a good business case for it.
Isn't this a chicken and egg thing for Adobe? I can imagine there are several people who use Photoshop who are unwilling to switch to Linux because it has no Photoshop. I mean the GIMP is there, and it is a great product, but it is not Photoshop anymore than OO.o is MS Office. (It might work just as well, but it is still a whole new piece of software to learn the quirks in)
So what I am wondering is, does it make sense for Adobe to take the plunge and see what customers are out there?
I tried for 5 years to come up with a clever sig...only to realize that I am not clever.
I've gotten Photoshop to run under wine, and Crossover Office lists it as Silver, which means there may be some bugs, but it runs for most purposes.
You mean like the G5 hack?
It isn't? Do you doubt that the GIMP is used professionaly in non-print graphics (web design, games)? Even if GIMP isn't used Cinepaint sure is.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
I fell for the parent's trick yesterday. If you click the links your browser window will reduce to a smaller size and bounce around the screen, and an audio clip will play saying "I'm looking at gay porno", and because your browser window is dancing around it's hard to close. Really, it's a pretty nicely crafted troll. But a troll nonetheless.
This post cannot be rebroadcast without the express written constent of Major League Baseball.
Their popular "Photoshop Album" digital image management for home users, uses QT. It's very probable that Adobe already has in house expertise with this cross platform development library, and will use it to port Photoshop itself.
-
sig sig sputnik
IIRC, back in 1997, I was running Photoshop 3.x on an SGI O2. Gee, don't they have Photoshop for Mac OS X? I think porting to the Linux platform would be one of the killer apps we've all been looking for. Now, I'm a big fan of Macintosh in the commercial graphics industry, but I've been saying for years, besides a great office suite (see OpenOffice), good image editing and manipulation software would plant Linux right in there as a great desktop alternative.
Yes, this is open for great debate, but the fact is, many companies that can't afford the great Macintosh (no disprespect intended) would gladly plop Photoshop on Linux. But that's my opinion.
INSERT INTO comment VALUE('Doh!') WHERE user='you';
...you are not.
Sorry, PS over Wine/Xover is NOT acceptable for those of us using PS to its full extent and abilities. And before you ask, yes, i've tried it...many times...on 3ghz machines sporting 2gig of ddr - not going to work. Need it native...plain and simple.
"...as they currently don't see sufficient numbers in the platform to make a good business case for it."
Is this the hen and the egg all over again? I mean... the only reason why I havent made the complete shift from Windows to Linux is the fact that then I cant run Adobe software - thats it.
Well the fact that they are not rushing to port Photoshop to linux is probably a good thing, as they are aware of gimp, and know there may not be much of a market. The fact that they are taking notice of linux as a viable Desktop OS could mean new innovative product possibilites.
I have always thought of Adobe as a high quality software manufacturer.
It will be interesting how they assess this market and proceed.
OK, so they are not looking to port the big apps over to Linux. So what are they looking at?
An improved Acroread.
The only thing I use Acroread for is to view and fill in my tax forms once a year. Other than that, I'd far rather use GGV to view a PDF file - it is a cleaner, better app. If GGV allowed me to fill in the blanks on the 1040 forms I'd drop Acroread in a heartbeat.
So, how is Adobe going to improve acroread enough that I care about it?
Other than that, what other little apps do they have - Distiller? Nope, don't need that, I can already tell the system to make a PDF from a print job.
Seriously - other than the big apps, what does Adobe bring to the table?
www.eFax.com are spammers
they are not currently looking to port any of their flagship products such as Photoshop to Linux yet, as they currently don't see sufficient numbers in the platform to make a good business case for it.
WTF??
Of course not!! i believe the very act of porting the software to a linux machine would create the numbers they need!!!i don't think i only speak for myself when i say it feels like i am stuck with windows as long as i am trying to stay marketable in the graphics design world. Sure those of you Linux people might say, "Linux has a lot of software that acts like Photoshop..." But thats just not good enough... i promise, i for one would reformat this weekend if i could use the same graphics software on a Linux machine...
~slashdot are my only freinds ):
How is MS going to love this? I don't understand. What effect really does this have on anything Microsoft? I would be more affraid if I were Steve Jobs.
INSERT INTO comment VALUE('Doh!') WHERE user='you';
Most viable project that Adobe can open source is Postscript above all else.
Postscript is not a end product thus no real self threat, it can however very much gain a large programmer pool and a good image.
Their image currently is one of being very hostile towards the community.
"A company spokesman said they are not currently looking to port any of their flagship products such as Photoshop to Linux yet, as they currently don't see sufficient numbers in the platform to make a good business case for it."
I just don't think this is entirley true. Maybe the numbers are quite small now, but there already is a lot of momuntem behind Linux on the Desktop and I think it would already make sense to port these aps to Linux. However, if Adobe decided to port them, this would even increase the momentum so that the bussiness case would even get better.
Adobe, take the "little" risk, I think it's worth it!
It's obvious why Adobe is now thinking about building some leverage here:
With Linux making considerable inroads in the server market, Adobe needs to ensure their backend products are still going to be available.
Of course, tying in with that is Adobe's total dominance of PDF as a standard and their stranglehold on fonts... If Adobe can get a toehold in how things like PDFs and fonts are displayed on the Linux desktop, they can push out the little Linux PDF players and retain dominance.
From there, if Adobe makes some serious impact, THEN we'll probably see desktop apps starting to port to Linux.
If you see Acrobat as a Linux app, that's your first step.
They're dreadfully aware that the moment Microsoft wants to forcefully enter the "pro graphics" market, they will be hurt.
Smart move, IMO.
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
The only reason I have one legal copy of Windows is on an Adobe Premiere box. If I had Premiere for Linux, it's bye-bye Windows forever.
Well, contrary to some oppinions voiced, I must admit that Adobe might be aiming at deploying its more sophisticated tools such as Photoshop and Illustrator on Linux platforms. Why? Well, after various goverments on local and national levels, such as Germany, France, UK, Indochina, Brazil, even Basque Parliament and more have started migrating to Linux en masse, it is not even a matter of when but now that Linux users' market will develop serious need for Adobe's products. Thus, I'd dare say Adobe knows damn well what it's doing, and might well hit a platinum vein in this little undertaking.
'...computers in the future may have only 1000 vacuum tubes and perhaps weigh 1.5 tons...' Popular Mechanics, 03/49'
Linux/Opensource software has been getting alot of good press in relation to the graphics and image processing functions. Companies using linux clusters to process massive cgi arrays etc. Its only a logical area for adobe to want to tap into.
I personally have been now using Slackware + KDE for well over a year as my pure solution. it works.. its reliable and im yet to have a crash.
Why wouldnt adobe want to open up more business chanels. from the other side of the table it also raises the linux / open source publicity and it works best for both players.
Its not about killing microsoft its about giving the consumers more options and a better level of freedom. Hopefully OpenSource can remain free for the long term as these big companies get involved.
Stuff like Photoshop and 3ds max will be ported to Linux eventually. Companies like Adobe just can't afford to avoid the Linux market. Also, by not porting them to Linux the companies would be encouraging people to switch to Open Source alternatives like GIMP and Blender. Once these Open Source alternatives develop enough they will starting coming into Windows (as these two already have) and will start cutting into the market share of Photoshop et al. IIRC, PowerDVD has already been ported to Linux.
It's always struck me as odd that Adobe, known initially for Postscript and then its compressed offspring PDF, is not a big FOSS player. Their model for the free Acrobat Reader versus the full version of Acrobat was risky, but strangely enough Microsoft never included a PDF print driver in Windows, assuring Adobe of some revenue there.
They claim they don't see a market for Linux products, but what they really mean is they don't see a way to sell a Linux PhotoShop when the GIMP is Free. They've got good name recognition and well-developed good will with most computer users (ever since they quit making you register to download acroread :-).
I'm not a big graphics user, so under Windows I use PaintShopPro v4, which is uncrippled shareware, and the GIMP under Linux. For the casual user who just needs to crop an occasional picture from the family trip to Wallyworld, I don't see much difference in usage. I know the GIMP is scriptable and has an Open library, but I'll probably never use it that way.
Not to start a religious debate, but is there a huge gap in functionality between the GIMP and Adobe's PhotoShop? Would Adobe be able to take market share away from the GIMP, which is bundled with a lot of distributions?
sigs, as if you care.
finishing FrameMaker for Linux, which was nearly finished at one point some years ago and then dropped.
And while they are at it, they could port it to MacOS X as well.
There is simply no program available that is working so good and stable for large structured (scientifc) texts (and, no, the TeX family isn't always a viable option).
" A company spokesman said they are not currently looking to port any of their flagship products such as Photoshop to Linux yet, as they currently don't see sufficient numbers in the platform to make a good business case for it."
One of the things that hold people back from linux, is the lack of commonly known softwares such as Photoshop, InDesign etc. Even if there are alternatives to these softwares on linux. (scribus/gimp/Blender/etc)
Forget the graphics apps, what are the chances Adobe is interested in helping develop something like KDE or Gnome? If I remember correctly, OS X desktop is somehow based on PDF which would be right up Adobe's ally as far as domain knowledge. My point is I want a nice clean, fast, stable, feature rich front end for X11 before I want Photoshop for my Linux box. No version of X Windows I have seen is even close to OSX in these departments.
Ehh...this is the life we chose.
In addition to the threat that GIMP might pose to the sales of Photoshop, dont forget Scribus, a competitor with InDesign (and the old FrameMaker) product. With tight integration (via XML docs, KDE, etc), these could be a real threat down the line, especially at a savings of (over) USD$500 per ! and when people say GIMP is not Photoshop, what percentage of the people even use 30% of the capabilities ?
If my wife could run autocad on my linux box, then I could completely dump Windows from my system. Autocad started life on AIX so it shouldn't be that hard of a port.
We don't need Creative Suite for Linux
But InCopy and Adobe Server SW powered not by MS W2K and MS SQL - that would be nice
adobe already checked out what's possible by using Trottlechs QT for their windows version of photoshop album. they made the design mistake to enable cleartype antialiasing - so the interface looks quite fuzzy - but the overall design is quite a success IMHO.
PAT
SEO Test: TIGI und SEBASTIAN - Online Shop - V
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Sorry, this is going to be highly redundant, but sadly I must weigh in on the side of those who say Photoshop STILL beats GIMP.
I am a graphics professional turned web guy, have used various versions of Photoshop on PC since 1995. Believe me, I really WANT to like GIMP. I've installed it on Windows and Linux over the years, and tried it....but I agree with those who say Photoshop still rules.
GIMP, as good as it is (and it has gotten MUCH better over the years) still feels like a knockoff. Photoshop feels much more intuitive, as it should, given the years Adobe has used fine-tuning their interface, which, incidently, they stick with on all of their graphics products. Part of the appeal (I'm guessing) with the Graphic Professionals is that ability to jump from app to app without a lot of re-learning of the user interface.
Type handling in Photoshop has always felt easier, which for someone making web graphics is a big deal.
Again, much as I love the idea of GIMP, I still shell out money for Photoshop. But your mileage may vary, and to each his own.
Web and video graphics are ALOT different from print media which is where Adobe shines.
If you're making a spread for a magazine, it _has_ to be in PDF/X-1a format which Gimp doesn't do.
Gimp is starting to get into color seperation with CMYK support but it isn't there yet.
Adobe Illustrator is the leader for SVG. The Linux alternatives aren't as good yet for print output. As far as usability and making a cute web graphic, sure Inkscape is fine.
Finally, Adobe InDesign is starting to replace the cumbersome Quark. There is NO layout tool for Linux for print. Again the support for PDF/X1-a goes without saying.
The only program I see that has support for PDF/X1-a on Linux is the libraries that come with PDFlib
if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
They have always been slow to updated their moneymaking software, they are slow on tech support. The only thing they are not slow on is price increases. Most of the shops that "need" them are going to use their products no matter the cost, but with the tools available scribus, the gimp, et al, I don't need their crap offending my linux boxen. I installed the TANK Acrobat Reader and was a) appalled at the size, and then it won't close properly. They should maintain their current status as an app that is used with wine.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
Well, it seems as if Adobe will want to maintain dominance ffor SVG and PDF standards in Linux. Obviously, they won't port creative software to Linux. Maybe Elements or something, but who on earth would use Linux for Illustrator or Photoshop?
"Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
for years now, i wonder why graphics/audio software manufactures never came up with the idea to port their software to linux, put it on top of a rudimentary desktop and sell boxes, taylormade for one specific purpose - like the AVIDs in video postproduction. they would avoid the huge overhead of windows and had total control over the hardware so huge performance optimizations (especially in audio production) would be possible. MHO..
PAT
SEO Test: TIGI und SEBASTIAN - Online Shop - V
Comment removed based on user account deletion
If you have Adobe Acrobat Reader 6.0 installed, take a quick glance at the credits. You will see Indian name after Indian name. Considering the pooer quality of Acrobat Reader 6.0, it is quite conceivable that it was written by cheap foreign labor rather than properly designed and implemented by educated, experienced and accountable software engineers.
...they are not currently looking to port any of their flagship products such as Photoshop to Linux yet, as they currently don't see sufficient numbers in the platform to make a good business case for it.
The funny thing is that a tool like photoshop could actually get people to use linux. Abobe would likely lose money for a few years on it until linux captures more market share but they can accelerate the process. The tail wagging the dog if you will.
I understand the finances and strategy of it all, but I've always been a little surprised that Adobe, Intuit, and similar companies to be almost completely uninterested in reducing the threat Microsoft poses. Sure, they've been able to outperform the big gorilla for quite some time, but it only takes one screwup to get squished. I guess Adobe doesn't feel enough pressure from Microsoft or other competitors.
They don't do more because there is a a free rider problem if they promoting linux. If they are successful, other companies get the benefits without the cost while they may or may not recoup the cost of pushing the platform. I'm guessing they see IBM and Novell as absorbing the cost of putting linux on desktops and are just waiting. But if I were them I'd probably see having my products available on linux as like having fire insurance. You might not need it but if you do, you REALLY need it. Photoshop is a great product but there are competitors out there. Adobe is gambling they have the mindshare to come late to the party and still win. And they might, but it is a gamble and possibly an unnecessary one.
If I were them I would make the Mac version easily portable to linux. Underlying technology is similar but the cost isn't as bad. It essentially gives them a Real Option (in the financial as well as strategic sense) they can exercise when they want on porting to linux. Cuts time to market to weeks/months should a linux version be necessary but there is no cost to support it unless linux really takes off.
I wonder if the existence of Scribus is giving them reason to wake up and realize that eventually (maybe not today, but eventually) they're going to be facing some real competition in the DTP universe. If so, I have to applaud Adobe for being proactive about it.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I agree with the Illustrator/Potoshop things but there is quite anice layout program for Linux called Scribus. Check it out. It does PDF/X-3 at least
The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
I really have to wonder why it took so long for Adobe to jump on the Linux bandwagon.
Because the Linux bandwagon currently only exists for servers. That's where the big spotlight is in the market. Adobe has some very minor server software for PDFs, but everthing else is the desktop. And the Linux desktop isn't taking the market by storm like the Linux server.
Developers: We can use your help.
I would not hold out too much hope for a Linux version of Photoshop any time soon. I predict Adobe will be late to this game.
THe only reason holding me back from using Linux for my work computer is the lack of proper photoshop. Sure I can Wine it but it still doesn't quite cut it. I have been trained to work with Photoshop and really The Gimp is not that good of imgae editing program. I can't do numerous this with it which I can do with Photoshop under Windows (2k). And I do hope when they port it to Linux (even if it's a closed-source program) I hope they'll allow licence transferring. The day that happens I'll be freed from the Dark Side.
Slashdot 1|0 Productivity
they seem to give it away on Kazaa all the time...
Go ahead, mod me evil - i am just in a stupid mood today
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
I don't know, as a destop Linux user since Redhat 4.2, I've sent many an email to Adobe and the only response I've ever got was "F off".
I consider them like a Unisys,Sun, etc. They have to look like they are doing something with Linux, especially since Macromedia is working on Linux versions.
I think they pretty much hate the Linux community.
Most people using Photoshop professionally have a large amount of time invested in learning and mastering the program. These people aren't going to casually switch to another image editor because of price or a handful of cool features. There have been some very good commercial competitors to Photoshop over the years including the highly regarded LivePicture, but none of them has threatened Photoshop's dominance. Adobe now markets heavily to the consumer end of this market with Photoshop Elements which still contains most of the Photoshop features a casual user might need and this ultimately reinforces Photoshop's market-leading position.
If I were Adobe (which I'm not), instead of just an Adobe user (which I am), I'd be putting more effort into porting my flagship products to AMD/PPC/Intel 64-bit platforms now for the next release. Most Adobe products are compute intensive, and run by people who can afford leading edge hardware. 64-bits has been out for over a year now in both their main markets, and that would be the compelling reason to buy the next upgrade.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Hopefully, Photoshop and Illustrator will be ported. If they are, Linux can count me in as one of their users. My Adobe applications are the only reason I still use Windows.
I used to run Windows for this precise reason as well as you. Now I run both Photoshop and Illustrator quite happily on OS.X. I am free from Windows viruses/worms/trojans nor do I have to put up with the multitude of petty annoyances brought on by immature open source apps when running Linux as a desktop OS (Linux as a server OS is a whole other chapter of course). I did try to run Photoshop for Windows under Linux/Wine but it does not work 100% and it's generally just to much hassel for my taste to run Windows apps on Linux when I can run most of them natively on a Mac or find an acceptable substitute. The only thing I'm missing now is a G5 PowerBook (not on the market yet) although Photoshop runs amazingly well on my current 1.25Ghz G4 PowerBook.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
I fear Acrobat Reader, for if should click on a PDF my 3ghz box turns to molasses and I have a good 15 second wait. Suprisingly, if you right click save as the PDF, then click the dl file, it opens almost instantly, now that my friends, is pure crap.
Don't even get me started on the full Acrobat 5.0/6.0.
Now that I've found the win32 version of Ghostview/Script I'll never look back.
...to have Premiere and Audition ported over to Linux. I'd totally download those programs from bittorrent if they were available!
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
This is good news indeed.
I'm sure most people will be thinking Photoshop at this point, but I believe the best thing that could come out of this is a port of InDesign to Linux. The GIMP has most of the functionality of Photoshop already, but there's no really good high-end page layout application for Linux.
I think the #1 priority Adobe should have is to get together with all the other pdf viewer developers out there and create a free, open, kick butt pdf viewer that can run anywhere and read all pdf files well. (And fix the doggone 100% CPU bug with mozilla while they're at it.) Acroread is already free, and there are other free viewers available. I think it would make a LOT of sense for Adobe to create a free, open source high quality pdf viewer. It makes Acrobat itself more desirable (if that's possible) and cements the pdf standard even further into the public mind as THE document reader standard. I'm actually a little surprised they didn't do this earlier, but I guess they felt they didn't need to.
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
The weight and complexity of most Adobe apps (they make more than PDF software and Photoshop) do not make most Adobe apps candidates for Wine and its friends. But they are missing the boat when they say that they see no market yet for porting their apps to Linux, many shops would move than direction if it where available. Most of the professional users of Adobe pre-press and web stuff like the Mac OS, not Windows. Linux would be an easy sell to this crowd.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
is making Adobe CS workstations...
:-)
Think about it, they could port their products over to Linux and make their own distro and perhaps even build their own computers with it preloaded. It would give them complete control of their products and systems. They could then sell these workstations to graphics/special fx houses and make some good money doing it too.
Just a thought.
DEAD DEAD DEAD DELETE ME
As if this is even news. If they're only now looking for people, expect something in 2-3 years if they decide it's worthwhile. Maybe then Linux will have done enough to validly compete with Windows and Linux on the desktop. Maybe not.
Of course not!! i believe the very act of porting the software to a linux machine would create the numbers they need!!!i don't think i only speak for myself when i say it feels like i am stuck with windows as long as i am trying to stay marketable in the graphics design world. Sure those of you Linux people might say, "Linux has a lot of software that acts like Photoshop..." But thats just not good enough... i promise, i for one would reformat this weekend if i could use the same graphics software on a Linux machine...
You've said the same thing about 100 other people have said in this thread. But, you're not thinking... you're ALREADY an Adobe customer. Why would they bother to port to Linux for you, and everybody else that says, "If I had Photoshop on Linux, I'd use Linux"? What do they stand to gain? You're not a new customer. If anything, they'd make LESS money, because they're not going to gain any new customers, but will have to spend ($100,000's?) to port to Linux.
I don't respond to AC's.
Linux at work. OSX at home. Life is stable.
I recently had to print a "secure" form which arrived in the form of a semi-printable PDF file. (I think the suffix was actually .asx ... "Adobe Secure eXchange" format, perhaps?). What I didn't realize is that several of the fields -- which were blank, on both preview and printing -- should not have been blank; they contained the "secure" information (none of which was secret, at least not in a way that merely possessing the document would have been bad, but that's not Adobe's fault, just that of the issuing organization). Looking at the document on Linux and Mac OS X (the only options at home for me), I had no idea that the info was missing.
...
Now, the silver lining is that I lost the original print I'd made, and had to print the document out elsewhere, which ended up being from a Windows machine. Turns out that when looking at it with a more modern version of Acrobat (6.1), those fields I'd wondered about were in fact filled in. So, quite by accident, I discovered that this is one case where the little warning about needing Acrobat was not just a big lie. (For *normal* PDFs, Apple's Preview, or Ghostview, or Kpdf, etc. do a perfectly fine job.)
Also (here's my gripe for Adobe), it's impossible to print the output of the secure PDF as a *normal * PDF (the way one can otherwise print to a PDF. Is this in Windows by default yet?) Now, this may be "the point" I realize, but if the document can be printed, what the heck's going through your head, Adobe? I could scan the printed copy as a PDF, you know -- why make things needlessly, ridiculously complicated? Nothing like finding a printer in a strange town at 11 pm
anon.
Please please please! I need the full version of acrobat on linux! I have a really cool project that transforms xml into the FDF file that fills in PDF forms... It is used to automatically fill out paperwork, and is currently used by many government ministries around the world.. A linux option would be very welcome.
On my XP machine, it sucks. XP refuses to use all available memory before paging, so I run into the situation where I have 140 MB of free RAM, and the machine starts swapping. WTF is up with that? If I could have Adobe coolness on an operating system with a sane VM, I'd be happy as a Troll at a Natalie Portman convention.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
But Adobe deson't offer crossgrades between the Mac and Windows product lines AFIAK.
That means you must have had to pay for full versions of PS and Illustrator for the Mac, even though you aleady owned the Windows versions. Ouch!
What about NVU? It is still in beta, but it already offers enough functionality for basic web sites.
Actually, it is also a platform issue. When you are working in print graphics, the chances are there is a mac in front of you. You can install and run gimp on a mac, but it runs under x-windows and does not play well with other programs or the native GUI. Most people are not going to run Linux just to run the gimp, especially when they already have a working environment. The gimp is a pretty nice application, it is functional and free, but when you compare it side-by-side to photoshop on a mac, well the non-native GUI and the relatively steep learning curve to become productive, combine to give it a reputation among graphics professionals as cludgy and unfinished. If the gimp ever takes off in market share it will be because linux has dominated, or because it has been popularized by the video editing market.
(insert text editor of choice) is all you ever need to design a website, i've never used a wysiwyg application for creating my websites because there's no need to; you have far greater control of what's going on when you're doing the markup and CSS by hand than you ever will with Dreamweaver/Frontpage/whatever. Additionally you can make sure that only the attributes needed are specified; i've lost track of the number of site's i've had to overhaul which were originally made in these wysiwsy applications and wading through the crap it puts in is soul-destroying.
There's mischief and malarkies but no queers or yids or darkies within this bastard's carnival, this vicious cabaret.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
what they really mean is they don't see a way to sell a Linux PhotoShop when the GIMP is Free
I would love to have Pshop in linux. Judging from the threads, I'm not alone.
IMHO there is a demand, thus it is sell-able.
GIMP maybe free, but I've accustomed myself to Pshop, I like the power and cross-themes.Being free is not enough to hedge GIMP's success.
Disclaimer : I've never used GIMP. Unlike Word I find Photoshop to satisfy my needs, and am not compelled to test other products.
Timang tinggi tinggi
parang sudah asah
alang alang mandi
biar sampai basah
It supports ENCRYPTION, not DRM.
Sites like http://drivethrurpg.com/catalog/index.php have content that XPDF can not view.
Another of those 'it must be crap because it's free' people. There are things that MS Office can do that Open Office cannot do and GIMP is not a drop-in replacement for Photoshop. If OO office or GIMP will not meet a person's needs, of course they will need to choose another product; it is not a matter of whether a product is "free" or commercial, it is a matter of needed functionality. Just because a particular piece of software is "free" does not mean that it is not useful.
You must also be one of those folks who prefers to run IIS or Netscape/iPlanet (or whatever it's called now) just because they are "commercial" products rather than running Apache, which is "free".
Will the code for Adobe Photoshop's counterfeit prevention be open sourced?
Speak truth to power.
Seriously, bring back five!
Perhaps for people that read ebooks 6 is a good thing, for a casual user of PDF's six is horribly slow to start compared to previous versions.
Also the plugin is nasty to my computer.
Push out the little Linux PDF players?
Out of curiosity, have you used any Linux distro lately? KDE and Gnome both have output filters that generate PDF's easily. PDF is an open standard and the OSS people have already written the software to generate and read PDF's.
And to be honest, the OSS PDF viewers are miles ahead of Adobe Reader for Linxu.
It could be that there's no market case for it. But if they released a reader for Linux, I'd use it instead of hopping over to the Windows machine everytime.
And also: I used to use Photoshop on a Sun Solaris box in the early/mid 90s. I am sure the Solaris market then was much smaller than the Linux market now.
For Photoshop...being that Photoshop is the cash cow at Adobe, why would they look at Linux? To push up their sales at the low end...
I think whoever applies for this job will have a short career at Adobe when they decide to pull the plug on the position...
Framemaker, already beta'd for Linux, is important as it opens i32/i32-64 desktops outside Solaris 86.
... printing ... retail.
As another poster has noted, Document-Construction in the Large, for which Word is literally useless, the pre-print and print industries are all real markets where a combination of desktop, server and process management are required.
Sometimes, and I err in this as much as the next man, think that those of us who develop sofware and use a computer to help run our business are at risk of loosing the plot; computers are now a process tool in may industries, banking
Entirely predictably, these industries seek out value, and efficiency in the market, and sofware vendors follow the money.
Please head over to LinuxAppeal.net to send a petition to Adobe. The more users that do this, the more likely that they will port something to Linux. Let our voices be heard and show adobe that there are people using Linux on the desktop who want their products.
If they can't afford Macs, they're not going to purchase photoshop. You wouldn't be buying it unless you had relatively demanding graphics requirements. You won't be producinig demanding graphics stuff on low-end hardware. If you can afford high-end hardware, you buy the mac and get photoshop.
I'm *NOT* saying PS for Linux would be a bad thing, or that no one would buy it. It's just that trying to make the argument that people that can't afford a mac *would* buy PS for Linux is very far-fetched.
creation science book
I used 2 distros on a daily basis, thanks.
Your reply shows you have ZERO understanding of the market Adobe makes its bread and butter with.
Adobe doesn't care about crappy desktop output.
When you can show me a Linux distro that provides IDENTICAL PDF functionality that Acrobat Professional provides (interactive forms, digital signatures, etc etc etc) THEN maybe they have a chance.
Adobe is interested in the corporate desktop, NOT the consumer desktop.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I know that is't a lot different, that's why I was asking why he thought that GIMP isn't beeing used in non-print areas professionaly.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
What about using GNUStep?
Adobe could make it advance really fast, if they want to.
Windows users:
Internet Explorer is obsolete. Please upgrade to Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox.
They dropped Framemaker for the Mac. (Never had an OS/X version). Do you think they might revive their
attempt at Framemaker for Linux (There was a beta once, but it never became a produce)
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
Consultants used to add a surcharge (as much as 25%) for using Word instead of Frame, because Word was that much more trouble to use, even for medium-sized projects.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
sorry, I'm still more productive in quanta (no hard feeling vi and emacs people) than using nvu. I think software such as NVU only serves purpose of distracting you from what you are trying to do.
using WINE (or crossover probably so they get support).
I am NaN
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
I would be more interested in native or wine compatible apps from Corel, again. I am having trouble with WordPerfect Suite and Draw for Linux on a recent distribution. While Corel lacks a Premier and GoLive, I believe their quiver of apps has a broader potential than Adobe's.
Recode the GUI in something like wxWidgets, Qt, FLTK, etc (stated in order of personal preference). It'd probably also help clean up any bugs within their code ... Dare I dream ? .... Been hoping Mathworks would do the same thing with Matlab. Me thinks, from the look of things, that their OS X port is a recompilation of their linux port ...
I use Adobe's server products extensively and for the past two years we have been begging for them to port those products to Linux. Right now you two choices Windows and Solaris, basically the people who paid for it. The response back has always been 'it cost to much for the testing and quality assurance, blah blah blah money, money.' Off the record we were told simply that if nobody will pay for the port it won't happen.
emacs
Most viable project that Adobe can open source is Postscript above all else.
How is postscript not open? Adobe provides full specifications available to anyone to implement it. Completely royalty free and without patent encumbrance.
Postscript is not a end product thus no real self threat
Wrong. Postscript is a product. Who makes the embedded PS systems for the millions of PS printers out there, eh?
it can however very much gain a large programmer pool and a good image.
It already has these things. Have you been living under a rock since 1985 when Postscript language specifications and reference manual (AKA 'the blue-book' and 'the red-book')
Their image currently is one of being very hostile towards the community.
In your mind perhaps.
But he did point out if you use any of Adobe's other products, the interface is nearly identical. I know from going between Encore, Premiere, and Photoshop that it makes it seem almost like its 1 big program versus 3 seperate ones
I'd pay for Frame. It used to be on Unix, now it is windows only. For those with money, it kicks the low-cost but brittle but of OOo.
I think the latest Frame version for windows comes with good DocBook support, BTW. I'd love that most of all.
Photoshop feels much more intuitive...
Well, if you've been using it since 1995, obviously it feels more intuitive.
I've been using the Gimp since 1999 and it feels way more intuitive than photoshop.
When you consider that you can easily script it to do amazing things in scheme or Perl -- or even extend it in C if you so desire!
My gosh, what's the big deal with Photoshop? -- Is their API open?
Can you easily extend it as you can the Gimp?
The Gimp is free and powerful.
Photoshop is not free -- you are trapped into the never ending cycle of forking over your hard-earned money for features you don't give a shit about.
Being an artist and a programmer, I much prefer the Gimp.
Currently, cmap files for CJK required by PDF is not distributed under open source license. Due to this, we have cmap-adobe-japan1.deb or so under non-free categories in debian distribution.
It would be nice for us that Adobe releases free version of cmap files for CJK.
"...Photoshop to Linux yet, as they currently don't see sufficient numbers in the platform to make a good business case for it."
Pixar, PDI|Dreamworks, Rhythm and Hues, Alias's Maya, ILM... <sarcasm>nah, I don't think they use linux at all</sarcasm>
...Like I said, your mileage may vary and to each his own.
I'll add that over the years I've also used Corel PhotoPaint, JASC Paintshop Pro (a bargain), as well as Macromedia Fireworks, and some abomination Microsoft beta'ed back in the late 90's (obligatory Karma whoring). When I made the initial jump to Photoshop (from PhotoPaint and Paintshop Pro) there was a learning curve, but this was primarily because Photoshop was a much more full-featured package.
That being said, I'd say I was in a pretty good position offer an informed and objective opinion. But, to repeat, to each his own! If GIMP is a tool that allows you to accomplish what you need to do easily, then it is the right tool for you.
Currently, cmap files for CJK required by PDF are not distributed under open source license. This is why we have cmap-adobe-japan1.deb or others under non-free categories in debian distribution.
It would be nice for us that Adobe releases free version of cmap files for CJK.
if they release the official version of linux framemaker, I will believe this article..
Actually Quanta (included in KDE and included in pretty much any distribution) seems to fit your needs.
Sure, ppl who don't care about the 'Open Source Software' initiative (that's all non-geek/hackers .. etc), and it would suffice for them to at least be able to run, say, photoshop in/on Linux - Adobe can't *really* compete with Gimp (or any other GPL'd OSS alternative to their Product-X) in the long term (MAKE Note of This phrase!, "in the long term!"). Because as the Linux-initiative grows, after a while GPL'd OSS will reach such a development rate; That no ONE proprietary, closed source and un-thinkerable sourced company, like Adobe, will be able to hold a candle against OSS. As they wouldn't be able to "feed so many moughts" (that's, hire/pay, etc) the amount of ppl whom would hack OSS (Without having to question their existance as a "coorporation" - that is to quench thy edacious thirst for profits, proofits... and more profits, "on the backs of the 'worker(s)'" (hackers, beeing it this time), and not stoping without trying aswell of exploiting the customer(s) too (by overpriziation one way or another, that is)).
Let's think about it. And say Linux has reached a 50% OS marketshare, and there are about 1 Billion+ Users around the world; and of the 500 Million 1-10% of them are 'OSS Hackers'. I ask, who? Who? has the funding of hiring such a large workforce? even with the lowest, 5 Million developers; Who would have the capital of sustaining a _competetive_ workforce, against that of your imagined (futuristic) 'OSS Hackers'?
And that's the angle companies have to start realizing, why they can't compete with OSS in the long run, "having so many willing eyeballs, correcting 'n fixing minor 'act ups'" ... it's the regular 'A Bugs life'-analogy, they are the 'grasshoppers' and we-the-OSS-community are the 'Ants' ... sure, induvidually one-vs-one we are puny compared against a 'grasshopper' - And sure beeing hit by one 'pea' per second, doesn't even feel much on your skin ... but how would you feel beeing hit by 5-50 Mega++ 'pea(s)' per second? *Ooch, I say* :-) */
So, unless Adobe (and other closed sourced companies) embrace Linux/OSS in/as a whole, and walk the 'Open Source Software' route, I'll (like many other(s)) would be glad to say "Naaahh, Keep it, Adobe", and then some someday in the future followed by, "R.I.P ol' fell'a". *in long due time, in long due time* :-)
PS. Coz' some ppl aren't impatient, and don't care of stressing or acting *much* voraciously. - to quote, "Patience, my little grasshopper" *said the little ant*
I think the most important contribution Adobe could make would be to lessen the restrictions on several key Intelectual Property (sic) assets. Of course to make this even potentially reasonable for Adobe, they could do so in a copylefted-approach, so that the IP rights are only granted in a non-discriminatory manner when used in open-source code or applications. Surely that has to be a way for Adobe to keep its monoplistic protections against other commercial players, yet allow the free software community enough leeway to actually deal with Adobe (and in the long run help Adobe). This is in some ways similar to the Sun/Java debate.
Several key technologies currently keep Linux way behind, especially in the high-end graphics market. Some I can think of surround fonts, such as hinting, or even the free distribution of the core fonts that make up PDF or Postscript; and also especially around color processing. Adobe has literally hundreds and hundreds of patents and other protectionist assets that are an extreme hinderance to Linux adoption of their "standards"; especially in the higher-end markets and applications.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I understand that porting Photoshop to Linux costs a lot of money. Money that you maybe can't make a "business case" for. So, tell you what, Adobe. Open source it and we'll do it for you.
If aspiration is a virtue, achievement cannot be a vice.
Has everybody forgotten that Adobe put Dmitri Sklyarov in Jail for reverse engineering one of its file formats?
Has the entire upper management at Adobe been sacked?
Don't sell your soul to an evil company for a "neat job" - your efforts are better spent at companies that "Don't be evil".
If you're new here, brush up.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I'm 99% sure eMacs does that, but most text editors can do the syntax highlighting; personally i prefer not to have the drop-down things when i'm typing and I certainly wouldn't trust Dreamweaver or whatever to upload everything to my webserver automagically... give me Filezilla or any good ftp client anyday.
There's mischief and malarkies but no queers or yids or darkies within this bastard's carnival, this vicious cabaret.
Though i feel the same as you, i'd say such tools are designed to boost productivity, regardless of the fact that, yes, all languages are ultimately Turing-equivalent and that writing your program/website in assembly/notepad gives you much more control over what you're doing than compilers/WYSIWYG tools.
And PHBs love such tools because they make tasks so easy that it makes up for a large, cheap, easily replaceable, market of fast button pushers for common business operations. That's the main target of VB, Dreamweaver and alikes...I don't feel like it...
That analogy is flawed though; it is very realistically possible for a single person to do the markup and CSS for a complex and large website doing all of your markup in a text editor, especially with scripting langages such as php which allow you to have a templating system throughout. Good analogy otherwise though.
There's mischief and malarkies but no queers or yids or darkies within this bastard's carnival, this vicious cabaret.
These are the same folks that got Dmitry Sklyarov in jail, isn't it?
They won't get any of my money, I can tell you that right now.
And if you're considering partnering with them, check news records first. Make sure you know who you gonna work for...
eMacs? eMacs?! It's either EMACS, Emacs or emacs but please don't bring Apple into an editor argument...
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
They could hire Dimitri Skylarof as their pr man.
Otherwise I won't give Adobe 2 cents.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Now will you fucking update Acrobat Reader already ?!! And please, no more fucking Motif. We're not in the 80s anymore.
(And to all of you people saying "use xpdf or ghostview", shut up. Both are worthless for any serious PDF viewing.)
They snubbed us for years with their "no way in hell " attitude toward Linux adopters so many of us have had to find replacement applications which have now become entrenched in our enterprise.
Maybe they can overcome the inertia of their own making with the newbies but for some of us it's way to little, way to late.
Why would Steve Jobs be afraid? Adobe's already pulling their support from Apple, no?
/. is a bunch of nerds at a million typewriters. It's not a political conspiracy determined to undermine your beliefs.
I switched a month ago to OO because Word kept choking on my 600-page book (and not letting me recover). Since switching, I've had ZERO problems. Word has many pseudo-features, but it's unreliable bloatware. I also created my book cover using GIMP after creating it in Powerpoint and learning that my slightly outdated version of Adobe Acrobat has a bug that prevents creating a PDF from larger-than-normal-sized PowerPoint pages. Adobe's only "workaround" is buying the most recent version of Acrobat. Go open source!
And what were you running on before? After all, MMX came out halfway through the lifespan of the original Pentium at about speed grade 166MHz. Which preceeded all the Pentium III, Pentium II, and Pentium Pro machines.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
is to press CTRL+W.
I would suggest them to start with releasing Adobe Reader 6 for Linux, and preferably written for GTK2 this time. I really did appreciate RealPlayer 10.
Now I can switch over to linux completely.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Consider that FrameMaker originated on UNIX was ported to Windows and Mac, bought by Adobe, and the beta test of Framemaker for Linux was discontinued and no product was released.
At MyCorp, dozens of users of Framemaker were hung out to dry as expensive Sun SPARCStations were replaced by less expensive Linux boxes. Besides, the attachments sent by the beancounters suggested strongly that they needed a Windows box to decode Word and Excel files. Hardly any of them bought Framemaker licenses.
Adobe took an unnecessary big step backwards on desktop Linux before this announcement.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
And what were you running on before?
I was running on a P90. IT department finally gave me a new system (just remembered not PIII, but PII 266, confused it with another upgrade) and I reinstalled and downloaded the MMX core plug-in since my version of Photoshop was pre-MMX. I think it was v4.
Adobe we gave you 6 years to switch to Cocoa. Now do it or get run over.
If they need a 'business case' for it, they don't quite understand it yet- they don't quite get it. Recall that SCO's offering has been unchanged since 1989 because they saw no reason to invest in the kinds of changes Linux was doing anyway: graphics, better tools, better daemons, better everything.
Making a first release for Linux probably won't ever be 'business justified'. But at some point they'll have to jump onto the bandwagon.
--- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
Just because coding is analogous to writing does not mean you can take a formatting convension from one and, without need or warrant, apply it to the other. Reading this gave me more of a headache than debugging poorly formatted perl. Oh, and as far as italics and bold characters go - less is more, man. Less is more.
Otherwise, I agree.
is that what it takes to get good performance from a copy of linux?
Since when was emacs an editor? I thought it was an operating system, in need of an editor.
Emacs is what an operating enviroment, with excelent built in editing capabilities.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
Do your homework before you declare nothing on Linux does PDF/X1-a.
http://www.pstill.com
A company spokesman said they are not currently looking to port any of their flagship products such as Photoshop to Linux yet, as they currently don't see sufficient numbers in the platform to make a good business case for it.
Once again, Linux falls victim to the Chicken and Eg problem.
I doubt the desktop apps will happen.
a) why bother ? tiny market share and what do they use kde or gnome or what ? linux is a moving target without standards, it's very messy
b) other vendors seem to be quietly pulling away from Linux and preferring BSD, Windows, OS X, etc.
HP pulled VisualThreads for Linux recently, why ? maybe because you have to changed the product all the time just to keep up.
I already own a PC.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.