“Having completed its acquisition of Macromedia on December 3, 2005, Adobe is the fifth largest software company in the world… [and] Adobe’s vision is grand. CEO Bruce Chizen hopes that Adobe will provide the interface for any device with a screen — ‘from a refrigerator to an automobile to a video game to a computer to a mobile phone.’ Such ambitions put Adobe squarely in the sights of Microsoft, which currently dominates desktop software development… Knowledge@Wharton recently met with Bruce Chizen for an interview.”
Knowledge@Wharton: Let’s start with the basic question: What was the primary motivation behind the acquisition of Macromedia?
Chizen: Flash.
Knowledge@Wharton: That simple?
Chizen: The combination of [Acrobat’s] PDF [file format] and the Adobe Reader with Flash’s SWF [file format] and the Flash Player enables us to create an “engagement platform.” Think of it as a layer or a vehicle in which anybody can present information that could be engaged with in an interactive, compelling, reliable, relatively secure way — across all kinds of devices, all kinds of operating systems.
Knowledge@Wharton: This obviously brings up certain competitive issues. Microsoft’s Windows Presentation Foundation has similar ambitions, and Microsoft is talking of “Presentation Foundation Everywhere.” They may offer this platform not only in the Windows environment, but on the Macintosh and possibly others as well. Are we going to see head-on competition [between Adobe and Microsoft] to establish the platform for the next generation of web and application development?
Chizen:Microsoft’s attempt with Windows Vista is a “1.0” attempt. What they end up delivering, when they end up delivering, and how portable it really is across operating systems, are still unknown. They are supposed to ship Windows Vista the end of this year. Avalon and Metro, or what’s now the XML Paper specification — which has become the Windows Presentation Foundation — is an intriguing concept. It’s great that they have recognized what we have done and have tried to imitate it.
Looking forward, Chizen told Knowledge@Wharton, “we want to be able to begin to integrate the Studio products, especially Dreamweaver and Flash authoring, with products like Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign. The Creative Suite with Studio — we want to see more integration there, making our customers’ lives easier, more productive, more efficient.”
Knowledge@Wharton: Are you dedicated to cross-platform?
Chizen: Apple is still critical.
Knowledge@Wharton: To some extent, Apple’s continued strength plays to your advantage. If it’s a single platform world, much of the advantage that you bring isn’t there.
Chizen: I agree. Microsoft could control the whole workflow. Fortunately, it’s not just Apple. It’s Apple on the desktop side, but it’s also folks like SAP, Sun and EMC and others on the infrastructure side. Because if it was just a Microsoft world, there is no room for Adobe. But people don’t want to be locked into a certain workflow — whether it’s a desktop workflow or an IT workflow. They don’t want to be locked into any one workflow. Microsoft works well if you own their servers and their desktop and their handhelds. Then they have a great story. It begins to fall apart when you add in a Java-based server, a Linux desktop or a Mac desktop and so on. That’s where Adobe comes into play.
Full article with much more here.
Advertisements:
• MacBook Pro. The first Mac notebook built upon Intel Core Duo with iLife ’06, Front Row and built-in iSight. Starting at $1999. Free shipping.
• iMac. Twice as amazing — Intel Core Duo, iLife ’06, Front Row media experience, Apple Remote, built-in iSight. Starting at $1299. Free shipping.
• iMac and MacBook Pro owners: Apple USB Modem. Easily connect to the Internet using dial-up service. Only $49.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Adobe: no native Intel Mac support until 2007; Photoshop could be 14 months away – February 01, 2006
Report: Adobe to take on Apple’s Aperture with new ‘LightRoom’ application for Mac OS X – January 06, 2006
Should Apple buy Adobe as leverage against Microsoft? – December 16, 2005
What will users lose as Adobe swallows Macromedia? – April 19, 2005
Adobe to acquire Macromedia in $3.4 billion stock deal – April 18, 2005
Look how fast InDesign came up on the established standard Quark. It got Quarks attention. They now have a Universal Binary whereas InDesign doesn’t. Adobe is a bloated company who really would like to be Windows only. We REALLY need a competitor to Photoshop and now. It needs to take advantage of Core Image and Quartz. And it needs to be fast. Unfortunately, stupid software patents will make this almost impossible.
On the server side, Apple really needs to make Spotlight work on a network. Then the opportunity would be there for a Laserfiche competitor.
could you say that again, with the coherency dialed up a bit?
Been said many times.
Maybe it is a bad/dumb idea.
Apple should buy Adobe.
Why not. I am getting bored and that would make life more interesting.
Paraplegic kittens think that Adobe must go down.
Never, NEVER underestimate the killing potential of a paraplegic kitten.
Looking forward to Adobe bringing the smack down on Microsoft and Windows with a truly seamless cross-platform solution.
“Without a doubt, Photoshop is the only graphics application that is universally used, but many of it’s users only use it for photographic work. If Apple were to build on it’s achievements with iPhoto and Aperture, then it could develop an application that would suit most photographer’s requirements.”
This statement reflects an extremely narrow vision of the graphic arts. Only a very small percentage of the work being done by Photoshop professionals worldwide is concerned with photographic images. For better or worse, Photoshop has never had a serious competitor in its entire history, nor is there a worthy competitor on the horizon. Perhaps Photoshop would have developed faster and further if this were not the case, but right now the world of digital graphics would be poorer indeed without Photoshop.
Wasn’t the original founder of Adobe come for Xerox and was Apple friendly?
Now this new guy seems pro windows and couldn’t really care about Apple.
>”Without a doubt, Photoshop is the only graphics >application that is universally used, but many of it’s >users only use it for photographic work. If Apple were to >build on it’s achievements with iPhoto and Aperture, then >it could develop an application that would suit most
>photographer’s requirements.”
>This statement reflects an extremely narrow vision of the
>graphic arts. Only a very small percentage of the work
>being done by Photoshop professionals worldwide is
>concerned with photographic images. For better or worse,
>Photoshop has never had a serious competitor in its entire
>history, nor is there a worthy competitor on the horizon.
>Perhaps Photoshop would have developed faster and further
>if this were not the case, but right now the world of
>digital graphics would be poorer indeed without Photoshop.
you are both sowing yourselves into hell. Serious Graphics are not done with Photoshop any more than Serious Work is done with Microsoft Office.
Ever hear of CinePaint? Free Software developed by film / animation industry for touching up High-Def frames. Photoshop engine cannot handle nex-gen (HD) imaging.
At the time Apple purchased Final Cut from Macromedia….they bought something else and I wonder if it was X-Res which was a Photoshop clone…sorta. It used proxy images to actually do the work then you later rendered the image when you were done, it was faster. It was basically non-destructive editing of the image/file….very much in the same way Aperture works and Final Cut as well. I still have my copy for System 7.6.
X-Res from Macromedia
Very interesting!
alansky – “This statement reflects an extremely narrow vision of the graphic arts. Only a very small percentage of the work being done by Photoshop professionals worldwide is concerned with photographic images. “
That is precisely why I made that proviso.
By targeting a specific, but large group of users, it’s possible to come up with a solution that is better for them. Apple can then use that success as a launch pad for future developments. The chances of Apple creating a successful, entire replacement for Photoshop at it’s first attempt would be poor, but the chances of making a great job of satisfying photographers are excellent, particularly when you take into account the fact that Apple has already had some success in that area.
There are huge numbers of photographers around the world and I think it’s fair to say that most of them struggle to use even a tiny proportion of the features within Photoshop. If Apple were to develop an alternative, it could be hugely successful.
I hope that Apple doesn’t overlook the graphic arts either. Now that Adobe also own Freehand, there is less competition for Illustrator. I’d be delighted if Apple were to fill the vacuum by offering a drawing application that was comparable to Freehand, but that’s another story and I don’t think that it’s likely to happen very soon.
Why, when I open PS CS, that I still see that old OS 9 spinning clock.
To me, that says that Adobe doesn’t have a plan or their act together for the future, which is now.
BTW, ever used any of the image-editing tools in Preview? Look harder…it does alot more that just preview PDF’s Acrobat still stinks.
The trend is small companies creating software that does a specific task very well and releases it for public consumption at a reasonable price. Adobe and Macromedia are both dinosaurs. Chizen doesn’t know is asshole from a hole in the ground.
The computing community at large need to get behind these up-and-comers, and say goodbye to the software that takes over your entire computing experience, e.g. Creative Suite and MX Suite.
And Open Source software is making waves. How is it that GIMP can have a binary version out faster than Adobe can release PhotoShop to its millions of users who require a binary version if they plan to upgrade their Macs? Too much politics and red tape in tech.
2¢
“For better or worse, Photoshop has never had a serious competitor in its entire history …”
Letraset ColourStudio was way ahead of Adobe Photoshop 13 to 17 years ago. They lost to Adobe on price ($995.00 vs $1995.00), not on features, colour management or usability.
” “For better or worse, Photoshop has never had a serious competitor in its entire history …”
Letraset ColourStudio was way ahead of Adobe Photoshop 13 to 17 years ago. They lost to Adobe on price ($995.00 vs $1995.00), not on features, colour management or usability.”
In the early/mid ’90s, Quark also had a PS competitor, or at least a beta version that received limited release. According to one person, it had some features that beat similar ones in the current version of PS.
Of course, Quark screwed things up. The apps wasn’t theirs. It was actually developed by a Japanese firm. Quark management insulted their Japanese partners, so they nixed the deal and buried the program.
Quark appears (and I really emphasize “appears”) to be paying attention to their customers these days. They ought to get on their hands and knees, and go beg forgiveness of their former partners to give them another chance.
damn do I miss Freehand. There’s no way I’m gonna use Illustrator fulltime. Fuck Adobe.
I love Adobe products.
I actually find the help system/tutorials/wizards in their software the most USEFUL compared to almost any other software, including Apple’s.
And hasn’t Intel just released new compilers for OS X on Intel which are much more highly optimised than what’s already out there? Maybe this is what Adobe has really been waiting for to get their apps UB’d.
Corel is far better than PS
…and ascii art is better than corel or photoshop
Wasn’t the original founder of Adobe come for Xerox and was Apple friendly?
I worked at Adobe when the original founders, John Warnock and Chuck Geschke, ran the place. There were 300 employees at the time and a Mac on every desk, right next to our Sun workstations.
Apple and Adobe were like two peas in a pod back then, blazing the digital frontier. Steve Jobs gave frequent informal talks at Adobe.
Times have changed. Bruce Chizen is a bean counter from the Wharton School of Finance and must thus embrace mediocrity, which is the ruling principle of bean counters everywhere. Afterall, to sell the most beans, one must appeal to the lowest common denominator. Bill Gates also understands this fundamental truth.
As a graphic arts professional, I would be sorry to see Photoshop go; but Adobe lost its way as a truly innovative company a long time ago.