Analyst expects Adobe Creative Suite 3 release on May 1, 2007

“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

42 Comments

  1. 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

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.