Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Adobe Releases Cross-Operating System Runtime

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the playing-nice-with-everyone dept.

An anonymous reader writes to mention that Adobe released the first public version of their new cross-operating system runtime today nicknamed 'Apollo'. "The software relies on HTML, JavaScript, Flash, and Adobe Flex. The alpha version, which presently works on Windows and Macintosh, can be downloaded for free at http://www.adobe.com/go/apollo. Once the Apollo apps are created, users can launch them from their desktops, without using their browser or connecting online. An Apollo application can connect automatically to online data or services when an Internet connection is detected, with new components automatically downloaded and integrated. The user needs the Apollo runtime to run the apps, just as a Flash player is needed to run Flash animations."

4 of 297 comments (clear)

  1. Translation... by davidbrit2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The software relies on HTML, JavaScript, Flash, and Adobe Flex."
    Translation:

    "It's slow."
  2. Could be very useful by brunes69 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anyone who has ever had to make a cross platform GUI application that works identically on Linux, Mac, and Windows, can tell you what a nightmare it is. Even if you use a good cross platform toolkit like Qt or wxWidgets, the apps are still not *identical*. And you have to build them and test them for every platform. And you have to account for the myrid of possible library combinations the users my have installed. Etc etc.

    This is why so many companies are embracing web applications - but web applications can't do it all. Some things you just *need* to do client side. This Apollo thing could be a really great way to do it.

    And what may make it even more killer, would be the fact that you could perhapse share GUI code between your web applications and your client applications - so a user could run his UI over the web *OR* locally. Excellent.

    I will definitely be taking a close look at this.

  3. I beg to differ by DancesWithBlowTorch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The first reason, and the less sure one and more petty one, is that I feel that Adobe ruins all software over time. If you think carefully about this, and if you have sufficient experience with Adobe software, you will agree with me. The only project Adobe has not completely destroyed is Photoshop, and that is only because they move most cautiously with that product. If they screwed up Photoshop they would cease to exist yesterday.
    Actually, I quite like the Adobe Creative Suite. Did you ever try the real Acrobat, i.e. the full version, not the reader? It's an amazing tool: You can do reviews of texts among a group of people, including mere mortals. They will intuitively know how to use it, it does what they want, and it works. Illustrator is even cooler. You can actually open a pdf and do with it whatever you like. Move text, change single letters, add stuff, copy elements, whatever. InDesign is the perfect print preprocessing tool. (I'm not in the printing business, but I've written a few large documents in (pdf)LaTeX (with lots of (pdf) figures) and the odd fancy one-page flyer). I'm managing my webpage in GoLive, although I will readily admit that this particular piece of the suite has its quirks. I got hooked up to the Creative Suite when I worked at an institution that had a licence. A few months ago, I actually purchased it for myself. I don't know of any other software package for document-handling out there that's this well-documented, easy to use yet powerful.

    Now you're going to say: "Of course, it's because Adobe is the inventor of the stupid portable document format, so no wonder they know all the tricks." You know what? You're right. In fact, Adobe even changes the definitions of pdf with every new release of the reader. I don't care. PDFs are the only format for documents besides Microsofts moronic .doc Word format that normal people know of. I can't send dvi's or postscripts to publishers, not even to non-techie friends. Adobe has not only developed a nice toolbox, the also deliver the userbase with it, right to my door. It might be that their software uses quite a lot of memory and processing power, but it also actually does what I want it to do. That's more to me. I've got the CPU cycles to burn.
  4. Re:Wrapper by sabernet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I must call shenanigans on this one. Photoshop's tools, especially the use of vector masks and blending effects, are damned handy in the graphics biz and is thought first thing in many graphics design courses. I used them myself quite often. I tried the Gimp. It ain't there yet. It's damned awesome for a free app. But:

    "For professional graphic artists, I guess can see a need for Photoshop, but those are the extreme minority of users. Even some professionals could probably get by with only using GIMP"

    Is like saying, "For professional cycle racers, I guess can see a need for sports bikes, but those are the extreme minority of bikers. Even some professionals could probably get by with only using a kid's BMX."

    Currently, nothing holds a candle to PS.

    Now, using it as an excuse to get away from Linux? Well with virtualization software as it is and Wine's ever increasing compatibility with it, I don't see PS as being a major reason(if I remember correctly, the movie Sinbad was done entirely with Linux stations running Wine for compatibility with PS).