“A major product refresh cycle is under way at Adobe Systems, and Wall Street is optimistic that it will provide significant growth for the company,” Patrick Seitz reports for Investor’s Business Daily.
“Adobe plans to release Creative Suite 3, the next version of its popular collection of graphic design applications, in the first half of 2007,” Seitz reports. “‘As far as the next product cycle, everything seems to be lining up,’ said Martin Pyykkonen, an analyst with Global Crown Capital.”
“Adobe is now integrating into its own products the products it got from its December acquisition of Macromedia. These products include Flash, for delivering multimedia content online, and Dreamweaver, for interactive Web design. For instance, Acrobat 8 contains Macromedia’s Breeze software for Web conferencing. Creative Suite 3 also will contain former Macromedia products,” Seitz reports.
“There’s a pent-up demand for CS3 among creative professionals who use Apple Computer’s Macintosh PCs, he says. CS3 is the first version of the product suite to run on Apple’s new Macs using Intel chips,” Seitz reports. “About 20% of Adobe’s total revenue comes from the Macintosh platform, MacMillan says. The rest comes from software for Microsoft’s Windows PC operating system. But the Mac share could be about 40% for the creative solution segment of Adobe’s business, he says. The company’s creative solution business unit accounted for 56% of Adobe sales through Sept. 1. Adobe’s knowledge worker solution unit, which includes Acrobat, was the second largest contributor, making up 26% of sales.”
“Pyykkonen predicts that Adobe will release CS3 on May 1… Creative Suite 2 came out in April 2005. The Creative Suite bundles products — such as Photoshop, Illustrator, Acrobat and InDesign — popular with graphic artists,” Seitz reports.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Apple, two birds, one stone: Buy Adobe and rewrite the apps properly with Xcode while discontinuing future Windows versions. (Hey, we can dream, can’t we?)
Related articles:
How long must we wait for Adobe to produce Universal applications for Apple’s Intel-powered Macs? – August 21, 2006
Adobe CS3 sneak peek shown on Apple MacBook Pro as Universal Binary application – May 25, 2006
Cringely: Apple must replace Microsoft Office, buy Adobe Systems for attack on Microsoft to succeed – April 28, 2006
Adobe CEO: Universal version of Photoshop due in spring 2007 – April 21, 2006
Adobe software engineer explains why Photoshop for Intel-based Macs is taking so long – March 24, 2006
Should Apple buy Adobe as leverage against Microsoft? – December 16, 2005
Apple really should to buy Adobe and reverse the lack of good Adobe software to the Windows world.
For example: make Flash player run slower in Windows for once. I mean, Flash player is even faster, emulated in Parallels with half the processing speed and 1/4th the RAM, than natively in OS X. That’s just bad.
‘popular with graphic artists’ … you meant ‘required’
Adobe sucks.
It is really great that one can do web development coding.
As for Photoshop, I really wish Apple released a Photoshop killer, but for no Gimp will do…
MAY!!??
That’s still 8 MONTHS!!! I’ve defended Adobe for a long time now over its slow progress in bring native CS apps to the Mac, but this is ridiculous. Almost another year before I can get CS out of Rosetta emulation??? I’m glad analysts are happy, because I’m pissed!
I thought it was over 40% Sales were to Mac users
I was going to upgrade to Adobe CS3, but I have decided to get Freeway 4 Pro and I paid for Graphic Converter too. GC does what I need it to do quite well.
Okay, so that means…let’s see, 17 months after the first Intel Macs were announced before we get any Universal Adobe products (still not sure if the new Acrobat is Universal or not).
Wonder what they’ll show at MacWorld SF in January. “We still don’t have a Universal Creative Suite…but just look at what you can do when you install Windows on your Mac…”
Crud…
Lessee…
I have a G5 Dual, that is now a year old. I have InDesign CS 2, Photoshop 7, Illustrator 10, Acrobat 6, and Dreamweaver MX. Maybe I’ll upgrade to the whole Creative Suite when CS3 comes out.
Whatever, it is obvious that you don’t need the Creative Suite apps, else you’d have ’em.
James, I have Graphic Converter and Photoshop. I need both, as do most creative professionals.
Spark, Adobe released CS2 just before Apple announced the Intel Macs. Explain to me why the normal 18-24 month product cycle isn’t good enough. Some of us prefer to not upgrade constantly.
Veronica, the sales breakdowns in the article were by Unit not by Platform.
With Aperture, my need for Photoshop is much reduced. And hopefully with future versions of Aperture that will go down further.
So I will be sticking with PS2 and I’ll be happy to live with the slower performance for the occasional use.
Adobe has had a shedload of cash from me over the yeas and mostly I don’t feel the improvements they offered warranted it.
So what happen to
F
R
E
E
H
A
N
D
?
?
?
Can anyone out there please buy this software over?
Thank God at least Macromedia was not bought by M$.
Or else they will eventualy stop producing Apple version…
Please, Apple, please buy Adobe.
I *really* hope Adobe releases Audition for OS X.
Anybody heard of linform? It does 90% of what illustrator can do and its £79 and there is a demo, it recently won the Apple design award for best software.
http://www.freeverse.com/lineform/
There is also a photoshop clone called Pixel. Again try the demo.
http://www.kanzelsberger.com/pixel/?page_id=12
The CS suite is just insanely bloated now, cut the fat by trying these programs.
Well, I guess on that day the Mac Pro will truly be the performance equivalent of yesterday’s Dell PC.
No wonder Apple’s having to keep the price down on those units.
indeed, wtf is Adobe’s plans for Freehand? Even though I work as much in Illustrator as I do in FH, there are just too many things that you just cannot do properly (or within a decent timeframe) in AI.
BTW, how come there are about 10 new 3D modelers and 5 new compositing, tracking, grading – apps released every year – but no good plain 2D vector or graphic apps, say? I don’t mean some crap shareware toys – I mean truly professional stuff. Should there be one really good alternative to illustrator or Photoshop on OSX/UB now – that company would get rich pretty quickly. I mean, look at Adobe’s Apps. Does anyone else feel like Photoshop is heading the M$ Word route?
Maybe we should set up an award for developers; €100K for the best Photoshop and/or Illustrator killer running natively on OSX/Intel. Adobe would shit their pants. IMHO, that would be worth a couple of hundred bucks alone.
Apple buying Adobe sounds really Zune
Haha, that’s a good idea.
Let’s advertise ‘Zune’ as something that’s really stupid.
“You’re Zune man”, “That sounds really Zune” etc.
By the time CS3 comes out, humans will have evolved into some sort of fish. I have a strange thing under my skin at my elbow, could be a dormant fin?
Turtle, there’s so much Zune coming out of your mouth I’m gonna Zune myself!
Yes Tommy Boy, it is true that I don’t need it because I pay a professional designer that does use CS2. In fact, I’ve been working with that designer for years and he did a lot of work for my company with Aldus PageMaker and Adobe Photoshop when those apps were state of the art.
My point is, the quality of Adobe’s offerings has been declining and will continue to decline as they bloat their apps and bloat as a company as well after the buyout of Macromedia. It is not healthy to have a company control so many important apps for the Mac community.
Obviously, their code base is huge and has some serious technical difficulties to be ported to Xcode and become a full nice Cocoa app. Funny thing is, the only really NEW app coming out of Adobe (and that only happened after Apple released Aperture…), Lightroom, has 40% of it wriiten in an obscure scripting language called Lua!!! A desktop app that has 40% of it wriiten in a scripting language is way telling of the Adobe development system, at least, that’s what I get from this.
The only thing I would find worse than the current situation is if Apple really did buy Adobe as some folks and MDN suggest. Appart from the joke side of it, like screwing Windows user after a few months, it does not make any sense. Apple can develop an image editor and an illustration program, it even has code in house to do this, it wouldn’t need to really start from scratch.
Daring Fireball has nice takes on Adobe here:
http://daringfireball.net/2006/10/brand_new
http://daringfireball.net/2005/04/adobe_translation
About Lightroom and Lua:
http://jfaughnan.blogspot.com/2006/10/new-world-lua-brazil-and-adobe.html
http://www.sqlabs.net/blog/2006/01/adobe-lightroom-and-lua.html
And finally, an Adobe enginner gives some clues about the real situtaion at the company techwise:
http://blogs.adobe.com/scottbyer/2006/03/macintosh_and_t.html
My Minions,
Apple will not buy Adobe. Look for my Apple to eventually create its own set of professional software apps. to compete with Adobe.
Adobe is pure evil. There is a reason why they have not switched over to Universal yet…Adobe was created by Lucifer’s half-brother’s roommate’s sister, twice removed. So it is, by its very roots, evil.
Suffer the Adobe stranglehold that you must endure, but rest easy…I am working on it.
Yeah, dream of buying a very profitable software company, kill 60-80% of their revenue. Brilliant. Apple shareholders would love that.
I knew when I finally switched to InDesign from Quark that I was playing with fire. I feared that Adobe would basically become the MS of the graphic arts software world. Based on all of the above, my worst nightmares appear to have come true.
Spark, Adobe released CS2 just before Apple announced the Intel Macs. Explain to me why the normal 18-24 month product cycle isn’t good enough. Some of us prefer to not upgrade constantly.
The reason, Tommy Boy, that 18-24 months is not good enough in this case is because of the complete change in the Mac architecture of course. This is not a typical product cycle. The CS2 that I purchased is crippled on my current state-of-Apple’s-art Macs. Apple has completed a complete hardware transition. Its Pro machines have moved to Intel. All those Intel Mac users, and there are a lot of us, are having to contend with the drag of Rosetta emulation. While amazing in its capability, it is still a step backwards in performance.
Adobe’s early and primary success is largely due to Apple and the Mac embracing PostScript and ushering in the “Desktop Publishing” revolution. Mac users still account for a dissproportionate share of Adobe’s profits. So, under the circumstances I think it is a real slap in the face from Adobe that that they consider a “normal” cycle as adequate. It isn’t. Their Apple customers have special circumstance and needs during this particular cycle and there is no evidence that they’ve lifted a finger to accomodate us. I’ve been a big time Adobe customer for almost 20 years, so if I want to complain about them, I think I’ve earned the right.
Before you buy new computers do a little research.
Will my main production apps run on it?
If not, don’t upgrade your computer until the software has upgraded.
Computing 101.
evan, sounds like a brilliant idea. but i’m not sure 100.000€ would be enough to attract truly great devs. would also be funny to have it support all apples core image functions etc. you can bet that adobe will still not have core image included in CS3. anyway, i would donate 200€ for such a cause.
Adoobie has forgotten who made them rich. Same with AOL.
Spark, the issue here is that much of what makes up CS2, specifically in Photoshop, is *not* easy for Adobe to port over. Adobe was looking at a huge investment of time and resources to do the port.
The could’ve released CS2 for Intel Macs, but it still would’ve been very late and expensive to develop (either charge angry Mac users, or eat a large expense).
This would’ve also pushed out the release time for CS3…at least on the Mac side. Again, would they delay the Windows release for parity at the expense of revenue, or piss off Mac users that CS3 was Windows only for several months?
The other aspect of this is the question of how many people are really being affected. For those like me who upgraded from a G4 to Intel, CS2 is still faster on the new machines.
For someone not buying high-end, it’s simply not a factor. It really would only be a production issue for those going from the PowerMac G5 to the Mac Pro, which was just released. Even then, those that need the maximum speed of CS2, while affected, represent a portion of the customer base and can either live with the speed difference or delay upgrading hardware for a few months.
Can’t wait for Adobe to wring some more cash out of me for their hamstrung apps and interface element shuffling that’s usually called a ‘feature’.
I used to be a heavy Adobe user with over a dozen paid licenses, now I only maintain one app, Photoshop.
I feel raped and violated by Adobe. They flat out ruined GoLive. And how about all the software they gleefully charged me for and then discontinued with no further support. Or how about their Craptacular anti-pirate system, gee’s give me a dongle anyday over this phone-in bullshite.
Lord how I wish Apple would do a great Pshop competitor, I could finally abandon the software named after a dirt clod.
MacSlut…
If you’ve seen my posts in the past, I have made your same argument and have been in Adobe’s corner in these previous discussions about CS development. The reality is that in a business situation such as mine continual hardware acquisition can’t be avoided. During the course of this year and obviously into the future, new Mac purchases have had and will have Intel inside. I know re-coding PhotoShop is a big job. I just think that a company with the resources of Adobe could have put a little more hustle into the effort. Gee…who’s just about the only other major Mac software supplier that doesn’t have Universal version? It’s Microsoft, that great pillar we love so much. But unlike Photoshop and InDesign, Word and Excel run fine in Rosetta. May of 2007 is EIGHT MORE months away. Eight months following the introduction of the Intel Mac Pro. My contention is that Adobe could have made it happen if they had any shred of respect for their Mac constituants. I will still buy Adobe products, but I will certainly be open to other competitor’s offerings more than I once was.
“By the time CS3 comes out, humans will have evolved into some sort of fish. I have a strange thing under my skin at my elbow, could be a dormant fin?”
By the time CS3 comes out the Appe Mac will have evolved into a Windows Vista PC…
“The CS2 that I purchased is crippled on my current state-of-Apple’s-art Macs.”
Your state of the art Mac supports full native Photoshop today – Under Windows.
Hey French! What’s with all those Windows freaks at Mac sites?!?
“Hey French! What’s with all those Windows freaks at Mac sites?!?”
It’s because the Mac is now a Windows PC. What bit of Boot Camp didn’t you get?
The Mac was always a Personal Computer…
Even a Winodws user knows a graphic designer working on a Mac will not install Windows to run graphic apps…
It must be really lonely at the Windows sites, eh?
PS:: As for Boot Camp, actually I got zero bits from it since I run a G5 -:)
“Even a Winodws user knows a graphic designer working on a Mac will not install Windows to run graphic apps…”
Unless he can’t get the native Mac ones. How long do you want to wait?
“The Mac was always a Personal Computer”
The words were Windows PC. I guess the Mac OS always had “Windows”, just not Windows.
The Mac has now evolved to the point where it’s a Windows PC. The only final step will be for Steve to start selling Vista preinstalled on new Macs.
Just as the Core processors provided the ideological break that let Mac users finally accept that Intel processors are better (Despite the fact that the Core processors were evolutionary not revolutionary in terms of performance), Vista will allow Steve to make that same break for Mac OS. As with Intel, once Steve says it’s good, the faithful will follow.
The Mac has now evolved to the point where it’s a Windows PC. The only final step will be for Steve to start selling Vista preinstalled on new Macs.
Keep dreaming…
“Keep dreaming…”
Two years or so ago I’m sure you would have said the switch to Intel processors and industry standard PC architecture was a dream.
Apple have no philosophical problems selling the bulk of the iPods they sell for use with Windows. I doubt that they’ll have a problem selling the bulk of the Macs they sell for use with Windows also.
Apple sells hardware mostly and is in the process of morphing from an exclusive computer company to a media/electronics one.
You buy a new Apple machine now and you have an Intel pc. So what?
Wanna install Windows XP on it? Go for it. Wanna dual boot? Fine.
The only trouble I find is that you seem to believe that 25 million Mac OS users will jump ship just because a Mac has an Intel chip inside and can run both systems.
I have been using Mac OS since the System 7 days, why would I change now? There is no reason for doing so, nothing that I really need from the Windows camp. I believe this to be the situation for the majority of the present Mac hardware users.
If believing otherwise makes you feel somewhat smart or superior or bad, well, just do it, anything that makes you feel good, really.
“If believing otherwise makes you feel somewhat smart or superior or bad, well, just do it, anything that makes you feel good, really.”
No, my point is that there are two ways to solve the “Photoshop is not native” problem on your Intel Mac.
1) Sit around and bitch about how Adobe has not created a universal version.
2) Load Windows and the fast Intel version.
If you chose 1) then that’s a conscious choice to stay with Mac OS X, but use a slower version than you machine can actually run today. So if you’re happy with your choice of 1), you should stop whining about how Adobe hasn’t brought out fast native software for your new Mac. They have. Just not under Mac OS X.
My second point is, like it or not, the Mac hardware has evolved to now be a standard Intel PC, and that Apple, if they see the demand, will likely ship Vista pre-loaded on Macs. iPod became a runaway success once it supported Windows. If it stayed a Mac only thing, it’d be down there with 2% share of the MP3 market.
Just as the Intel switch was sacrilege to many, so too will be Vista pre-loading. But that won’t stop it happening if the dollars lead that way.
But as you can see people will re-align and just like they now yell about how great Intel is (while a year or two ago totally trashing Intel) They will yell about how great Vista is (Despite trashing it today).
No, my point is that there are two ways to solve the “Photoshop is not native” problem on your Intel Mac.
1) Sit around and bitch about how Adobe has not created a universal version.
2) Load Windows and the fast Intel version.
If you chose 1) then that’s a conscious choice to stay with Mac OS X, but use a slower version than you machine can actually run today. So if you’re happy with your choice of 1), you should stop whining about how Adobe hasn’t brought out fast native software for your new Mac. They have. Just not under Mac OS X.
Why is this whinning and not asking for customer support?
So, you work with Adobe apps for 12 years, since the System days, buy Adobe PHotoshop 3.0 in 1994 and then every upgrade they release, and when you ask them to release an Universal app, that’s senseless whinning?
No sane designer would change platforms for Photoshop… If I’m a Mac user, I want a Mac app, it’s ridiculous to tell me to get Windows to run an app and go against all my user experience and workflow and invested money on my PREFERRED plataform.
Just as the Intel switch was sacrilege to many, so too will be Vista pre-loading. But that won’t stop it happening if the dollars lead that way.
But as you can see people will re-align and just like they now yell about how great Intel is (while a year or two ago totally trashing Intel) They will yell about how great Vista is (Despite trashing it today).
People realigned because the chip is a much more low level concept. In practical terms, new Mac hardware runs faster than the PowerPC generation, so most people are happy.
I believe the PowerPC archictecture has a great future ahead, problem is Apple is not that an important client for IBM. But make no mistake, Steve is keeping development of both architectures inside Apple, who knows what processor will be running on a Mac 10 years from now?
Now, believing that a current Mac OS X user will realign to Windows Vista, that I don’t buy.
You don’t use OS X, do you?
“Why is this whinning and not asking for customer support?”
Read the posts, most of them are whiny posts, not requests for customer support.
“No sane designer would change platforms for Photoshop… “
I’ll bet if all Mac OS X Photoshop development stopped, they’d follow Photoshop to Windows.
“PREFERRED plataform.”
So you prefer the slow platform. Fine by me. Stick with it but stop whining.
“I believe the PowerPC architecture has a great future ahead, problem is Apple is not that an important client for IBM.”
Problem is IBM’s choosing not to develop products which can compete in the desktop/laptop space. Basically because Intel and AMD have beaten them badly in price, performance, power consumption benchmarks.
Now with Mac OS X on Intel, they probably see less chance that Apple would ever switch back.
I suspect the architecture will live on in embedded controllers and IBM Servers for a while, but will probably never make it back into the PC space.
“Now, believing that a current Mac OS X user will realign to Windows Vista, that I don’t buy.”
I didn’t exactly say that. I said that Apple will probably offer preloaded Vista. And given that most of the world uses Windows rather than OS X, that could be a very popular option.
For many Vista will be pretty enough that they have even less reason to consider OS X, or once Steve blesses Vista, others will finally have a reason to abandon Mac OS X without loss of face.
I can here the lines now “Well Vista really stole all the good ideas from Mac OS X, so it’s really like the next version of Mac OS X actually, and Steve says it’s good, and he was right about the Intel switch, so that’s why I changed…”