Adobe Releases Cross-Operating System Runtime

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."

Comments

Wrapper

[dreamchaser]

So in other words it's a wrapper for existing technologies? It could be useful I suppose, but I'm thinking it's being hyped up already by Adobe. Abstraction of the underlying technolgies is good in some cases, but I can just see the horrid things people will do with this. Flash alone is bad enough as it is the way it's often implemented.

Re:Wrapper

[namityadav]

I will take notice of this technology (or wrapping of technologies) when Adobe gets their own cash-cows (Read Photoshop et al) run on this platform. That is perhaps the only way Linux is going to get these Adobe applications running natively. Going by the number of people who use "Photoshop" as a reason not to switch to Linux, I think this will be huge.

Re:Wrapper

[Anonymous Coward]

People who say they need photoshop are just looking for something to complain about.

I don't need Photoshop (although I use it near-professionally, editing tens of thousands of photos). The GIMP has 95% of the functionality I use.

However, I can't stand using the GIMP. It has near zero usability. It doesn't allow any efficient workflow. Focus is perpetually in the wrong window, important functionality isn't accessible with the keyboard, options reset to default near randomly, it (the windows version, at least) doesn't allow for drag-and-dropping files into it (I suspect/hope if I dropped them just so on a non-discoverable sub window they might open, but I haven't discovered which one this would be yet). Basically, where Photoshop allows me to use my time fully to edit photographs, with the GIMP the process takes three times as long (no exaggeration), and the overwhelming majority of that extra time is spent struggling with the user interface. And yes, I've put in two solid days trying to learn it and adjust my thinking to it. Photoshop is beautifully crafted right down to the tiniest little detail. All user interface conventions carry over beautifully (once you discover one ctrl+[tool key] combo, you won't have to think about what the same combo does with all the other tools). Focus is always right where you want it. Everything Just Works.

Until the GIMP begins to think about at least considering the possibility of paying attention at that level, using it is just not an option. The important thing with software is getting things done, and that's just not happening with the GIMP.

And so, Photoshop is one of two programs keeping me on Windows fulltime. (The other one is foobar2000.)

Ria....gulp...a?

[monkeyboythom]

From the site:

Adobe said Apollo will make the development and use of rich Internet applications (RIAs) -- Web applications that have the interactivity of desktop apps -- quicker and easier. RIAs can offer more interactivity than is usually available via the Web. The San Jose, California company said upcoming versions of Apollo will run on Linux, integrate PDF, provide deeper Ajax support, extend support for mobile technologies, and enable media assets to be dragged and dropped directly into Apollo apps.

RIAs? So basically, you want me to not only have a wrapper agent on my system but also a network and system app layer that will have direct access to other remote like objects? Hmmm, gee, has anyone told Citrix this?

So this won't fly in an Corporate Enterprise environment and for home use...well, does anyone want mySpace resource hogging your whole system and not just your browser's use of your resources? Uhm, no thanks.

Re:Translation...

[x2A]

That's the end-user license agreement. That's not to say that there aren't or won't be other available licenses, such as licenses for OEMs to install it on embedded devices, available upon negotiation.

Re:java?

[Zonk (troll)]

From the description it seems like an alternative Mozilla's XUL except that it ties in Flash and probably opens up a way for a BSA audit (see my other post).

Re:Could be very useful

[MaggieL]

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.

Then they can tell Adobe, because Apollo doesn't run on Linux.

Re:Could be very useful

[riceboy50]

I took their willingness to work with the Mozilla folks, and the already released Linux player as an indication that we may see a FreeBSD version. If not officially, perhaps some work by projects like this will suffice.

Why?

[nurb432]

Dont we have enough of these things already? How about lets all work on making one better, then just adding another to the pile?

Re:I beg to differ

[drinkypoo]

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

The interesting thing is that there is basically no backwards compatibility of anything beyond basic document display. For example, we have a fill-in form created in Acrobat 8 Pro. If you open it and fill it out in an earlier version, it seems to be filled in fine. You can close it, reopen it, and view its contents. But then I mailed that file (yes, I'm sure it was the right one) to the purchasing department and when they opened it in Acrobat 8 Pro, it was not filled in.

Incidentally, I have Adobe CS2 on a powermac to my right and it has been filled with the least reliable software I've had come out of Adobe yet. Illustrator and Indesign regularly crash. Photoshop is just slower than ever before.

They've also broken many elements of usability. For example in illustrator, things snap to the point from which you drag, not from other edges. As such I am forced to do a lot of things in InDesign just to have them come out in a reasonable period of time; but now I have to jump back and forth between illustrator tweaking graphics, and indesign to put them in a document, instead of just doing it all in illustrator.

Not to mention general stupidity - I had to buy a $75 plugin for InDesign just to be able to define my own text boxes on master pages and have text flow through them, as opposed to one big master text frame for the whole layout. What? This is such an obvious feature. This is the only efficient way to autonumber tickets, for example; In my case I use it to make numbered backstage passes, and to make numbered coupons for in-house use (cheaper to just laser print than to have them printed.)

You can actually open a pdf and do with it whatever you like. Move text, change single letters, add stuff, copy elements, whatever.

Yes and no. You can't copy graphical elements out of the PDF; you need Illustrator for that. But Illustrator doesn't work with embedded fonts, so you have to load a PDF, print it with all fonts converted to outlines, and then import THAT. Why won't the PDF import in illustrator just use Acrobat to do the import if it's installed, so you can have full PDF display/import capability? Oh yeah, because Adobe is lame.

Also, a lot of the time I find that Acrobat has turned a line of text into several disjointed lines of text which happen to have the same vertical level on the page. Sometimes this happens in the middle of a word, sometimes between words, but it happens an awful lot. I think it will do it any time you change a font, but it happens randomly as well. This text is simply not reasonably editable in acrobat.

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).

InDesign does not have autonumbering of elements, such as figures. You must get a plugin for this. InDesign does not autoflow through multiple master text frames; you can't in fact have multiples. You need a plugin for this. InDesign is missing more obvious functionality than I can even describe in one comment.

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."

No, what I'm going to say is that it's particularly pathetic that even Adobe can't get PDF right, since they invented it. Although to be fair, it's actually a bastardization of PostScript, which they also invented. And for which they charge exorbitant licensing fees, or used to.

It might be that their software us

Re:Translation...

[IAmGarethAdams]

Technically correct, but I've met some of the Apollo developers and the team are predominantly former Macromedia employees. Flex and Apollo are both originally Macromedia ideas. Adobe have (so far) done little to change how existing Macromedia projects continue, the main work has been on sharing resources and working on complementary products

Re:Linux Support is coming

[Skylinux]

If you would have bothered to check their Website you would have found this on the FAQ page:

http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/Apollo:develo perfaq#Does_Apollo_support_Linux
Does Apollo support Linux
Apollo 1.0 will not be available on Linux. We plan to release Linux support shortly after the 1.0. release.
While we had originally planned to support Linux in the 1.0 timeframe, we have had to wait on the core Flash Player's support for Linux to be finalized.

I might give it a try for my Computer Store Work Order Tracking program.