View Full Version : Adobe now "pc preferred"

03-25-2003, 11:22 PM
What's up with Adobe?

Adobe now says they prefer people to use PCs. They've put up their "PC preferred" webpage:

The URL says it all........"pcpreferred"

There is another thread about this in the General Discussion section of Newtek's forums, but I thought it was worth a Mac perspective.

Adobe has dredged up that old story from Digital Media Net, putting Windows boxes against Macs. Many people considered the tests to be very biased, using older versions of Adobe software that didn't take advantage of dual processors. Adobe could have done its own new test, but instead decided to rehash that old one again.

The question is not so much the test figures. We've seen all that before last year, and it was discussed on this forum last year.

The big issue is, why did Adobe do it? They knew it would be inflammatory. Adobe had previously been either pro-Mac or platform agnostic. Then comes this attack from nowhere.

The only explanation I can think of is that there has been a serious souring of relations between Adobe and Apple.

Since Steve Jobs' return to Apple, Adobe has been uneasy. There was the issue about Apple reverse engineering Adobe's PDF to incorporate into the Quartz graphic engine. Apple didn't pay any royalties to Adobe. Then came Final Cut Pro, the Premiere killer. There are rumors that Adobe has stopped development of Premiere for the Mac. Then there's Apple's Shake. If Apple reduced the price, Shake could seriously impact on the sales of After Effects.

Now with Adobe's latest attempt to spit on Apple, we can only assume that things are not rosy between the two companies.

03-25-2003, 11:38 PM
I've always been a huge adobe fan, but your right in saying that Final Cut Pro has dug into Adobe a bit.

I really hope that Apple invests some time into making a Shake Express, for Prosumers.

But I've always found that the Apple alternatives to everything are always like the competiting product done right.

I wonder what an Apple take on Photoshop would be?

Perhaps a jazzed up version of the GIMP?

Who knows.

03-26-2003, 12:21 AM
Jobs pisses up somebody's leg and who pays for it? Us Mac loyalists. I don't think Adobe has too much to worry about from Shake though, I just looked-up the price....YIKES!!!! Not going to be in too many freelancers budgets I'd bet. I'd be looking for a K'd version on Limewire or Corracho B4 I'd try saving up that many pennies.

03-26-2003, 01:41 AM
Apple should piss emoff by buying Quark and macomedia.

03-26-2003, 04:46 AM
I think Microsoft is going to make a strike and buy Macromedia. MS wants control of Flash.

Adobe is the mainstay of the Mac. If Adobe pulled everything off the Mac, the platform would probably die.

Not that Adobe would do that. The company can't act on spite, even if the executives wanted to. But I think we'll see Premiere disappear.

With this latest action, Adobe is rattling its saber.

Darth Mole
03-26-2003, 04:54 AM
One current story is that Apple has withheld some of the core AltiVec code from Adobe so it can't optimise its new DVD creation app, Encore.

Apple could be playing a dangerous game here. Remove Adobe's products from Apple's hardware and you remove some of the major reasons for buying a Mac.

03-26-2003, 06:36 AM
Originally posted by Darth Mole
and you remove some of the major reasons for buying a Mac.

Still got Mac OS X heh ;)

Like Beamtracer said I very much doubt that Adobe will pull all there products from the Mac platform at this time but _some_ may drop by the way side. Adobe has merely gotten into bed with Dell and are keen to make it worth there while.

03-26-2003, 09:01 AM
Here's some other pieces of info & rumors regarding the Adobe/Apple relationship...

1) Adobe is quite unhappy about competing with FinalCutPro. I'm sure they are even more unhappy about FinalCutExpress, which is directed squarely at Premiere. The rumors about Adobe ceasing Premiere development for the Mac are true. 6.5 is the last Mac version.

2) Adobe Photoshop Album? Not on the Mac. There was no way Adobe would even contemplate competing with iPhoto.

3) Here's the kicker. The one application that the Mac could not live without is Photoshop. Apple does not like being at the mercy of Adobe, even with the relationship on decent terms.

Anyone remember a NeXT-era Photoshop competitor called Tiffany? It's a OS X only photo manipulation app very similar to Photoshop. It's owner, Caffeine Software, has now "ceased operations". Keep in mind that this company survived as a NeXT only company with a very tiny marketbase, and now that their marketbase is 100x bigger, they "cease operations"?

Here's where speculation comes in: Apple includes Caffeine Softwares free "PixelNHance" utility with all their Macs now, so there clearly is a relationship between the two companies. Anyone curious as to whether or not the creator of Tiffany and PixelNHance is now working at 1 Infinite Loop? And if so, do you suppose he would be working on some sort of Photo Manipulation software, either as an addition to iPhoto or a completely seperate pro tool?

We'll see if that pans out or not....

03-26-2003, 02:04 PM
Originally posted by Beamtracer
The big issue is, why did Adobe do it? They knew it would be inflammatory. Adobe had previously been either pro-Mac or platform agnostic. Then comes this attack from nowhere.

I think they're playing the wrong card, here... You can't get much more childish or bush-league than to use Jerry Springer-style tactics like this...alienate your partners and some of your staunch customers just because you have poopy pants over something that was or was not done!?

IMO, they ought better spend their energy improving their products, thereby MAKING them more competitive rather than on these public tantrums.

for my part, I am looking eagerly to alternatives.


03-26-2003, 06:07 PM
It was just plain in appropriate for Adobe to post that 'pc preferred' comparison.

I think that anyone who understands the Mac-vs-PC issue would read this a just plain meanness on Adobe's part.

Why, for example, did they play to the whole Megahertz thing? Was it because they realize that Joe Average will be lured by it? Why not two machines closer in MHz? How much RAM in each? Video cards?

Why did they elect not to talk about other factors which influence productivity, like stability, color issues, font issues, virus issues.

It was just a bare-a** hostile jab for a software vendor to take sides, especially in a public forum, and to do so in so obviously a biased way.

Behavior like this has a tendancy to bite the inflictor in the a**

Shame on adobe


03-26-2003, 06:27 PM
Adobe knows full well that the test results aren't fair. That's why they chose to rehash that old story from last year, rather than perform new tests on new machines.

Why did Adobe do it?

They must feel so angry towards Apple that they are basically sending a message out to Mac users that they'd prefer you to be using a Windows PC.

It might have the opposite effect to what Adobe wants. It might result in Mac users keeping their Macs, but dropping Adobe.

03-26-2003, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by Beamtracer
It might have the opposite effect to what Adobe wants. It might result in Mac users keeping their Macs, but dropping Adobe.

Well, it's having that effect on me.


03-26-2003, 07:58 PM
Apart from Final Cut Pro Vs Premiere, Shake Vs After Effects, there's another one that might be upsetting Adobe... iWorks.

iWorks Vs Acrobat. iWorks is something that hasn't been released yet, but will be the replacement for the current Appleworks word processor and spreadsheet.

Currently, anyone using OS X can create a PDF document from any other document, without using any external application. However you can't load up multiple single-paged PDF documents and join them together as one.

iWorks will be able to do that. Why would you need to buy Acrobat when you can use iWorks to format multipage PDFs? Note: the current Appleworks can only import a PDF as an image file.

But it goes further. Many people feel that Adobe Illustrator could be used as a page layout program, except for the fact that it only deals with a single page. Illustrator can't load and save multipage documents. Many people buy Adobe InDesign to be able to do this.

However, soon you'll be able to create each page of your document in Illustrator, then bundle them together in iWorks, producing a multipage PDF document for printing. Bypass InDesign.

Gui Lo
03-26-2003, 11:16 PM
Although I use a PC mainly, I was trained on a Mac.

Of course adobe is targeting potential buyers more than existing ones and that must surely decrease their market, leaving it open for others to take.

Their loss.

A serious contender would be Photogenics for OSX... when it is available.


03-27-2003, 04:49 AM
Say, Beam;

How do either Gimp or MacFilmGimp figure as Photoshop replacements?

I know you've touted MFG's bit depth (why it's suitable for film) but can it stand in well for print work - despite maybe not having all the toys Photoshop has?


03-27-2003, 09:49 AM
So an interesting take on the "PC Preferred" issue, which throws the problem right back at Adobe -- it's their own fault that the PC is better, based on performance comparisons between single and dual processor mac models:

03-27-2003, 10:29 AM
Thnx for that excellent link mlinde


That was a shocker, I never realised AE was so poorly written for the Mac.

Like David suggests I wish more companies, Newtek included, would provide better SMP (Symetric Multi Processing) support. Now you cant argue about the CPU usage from LightWave when its rendering (Although Altivec optimization may be another argument) but it would definately be better if LightWave was able to take advantage of SMP during normal 'workflow.' Whether it be LScripts in modeler or animation playback in Layout the CPU use for each application will not exceed 100% (200% being the maximum on a Dual PPC system). Due to this limitation excellent plugins such as G2 are also restricted to 1 CPU which ultimately wastes time which the plugin could be saving.

Macintosh games also suffer from lack of or 'bad' SMP coding. Quake 3 Arena is about the only game at the moment which deserves to and can with pride announce that it is SMP enabled. The SMP support for Medal of Honour is an absolute joke using just 120% if I recall correctly. Elite Force SMP isn't to shabby but it causes OpenGL errors and I doubt Aspyr will do anything to correct this issue since Elite Force 2 is approaching fast.

03-27-2003, 10:39 AM
if you want a real shocker, invest the time to find someone running LW on a PC, and see the difference "Hardware optimization" makes for yourself, i could not belive it.....there are also some interesting comments here:http://www.macintouch.com/index.shtml
towards the bottom

03-27-2003, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by mlinde
So an interesting take on the "PC Preferred" issue, which throws the problem right back at Adobe -- it's their own fault that the PC is better, based on performance comparisons between single and dual processor mac models:

After reading the article for which you provided the link. I'm more honked off at Adobe than ever...

I'm sure that what the author of this article talks about isn't a mystery to Adobe...underscores that they CHOSE to air their bile and bias just for meanness


03-27-2003, 02:56 PM
Adobe has shot itself in the foot.

Adobe thinks it can piss on top of Mac users from a great height, and we'll all just smile and pay for our next upgrade.

Shake is a much higher-end compositing system than Adobe After Effects, and much more expensive too.

However, if you're using After Effects professionally, when it comes to doing chroma-keys you really need to add a keying plug-in like Primatte or Ultimatte.

The price of After Effects + Primatte together is getting up into the range of Shake anyway. Shake comes with Primatte included.

03-27-2003, 03:14 PM
And while we're at it, we might as well post a web-site detailing the snotty tech support you get with Adobe, and the many everyday annoying troubles with Illustrator 10.

uh-oh...that would be dirty pool...

03-27-2003, 03:23 PM
There is some strong speculation that at NAB, Apple might release a new, lower priced version of Shake that will go head to head with After Effects Production Bundle. This would explain Adobe going anti-Apple in their video strategy.

Apple would be crazy not to lower the price of Shake. Right now it's probably used by less than 500 or so users, due to it's prohibitive price ($4950 for the Mac, $9900 for the PC version which is EOLifed). If Apple drops the price to $1200-1500, it puts in directly in competition with AE and Combustion.

Remember - WebObjects was a $5000 piece of software when Apple first bought NeXT. A year later, it was around $1500, and then it dropped to $699, where it is now.

03-27-2003, 03:27 PM
feels wierd to be ahead of the curve for once... I've been saying for months that developers just arent doing the job, and blamig others, when their product is sub-par.

so whats the lesson here?

possibly, that developers should be careful b4 saying that the hardware is poor.


cross platform companies displaying bias, risk becoming single platform companies

03-27-2003, 07:18 PM

do you have a link that talks about iWorks and its capabilities?