Adobe, Linux Support, and the Linux Foundation.

[gai.ra.III]

While generally I've only lurked the Adobe forums I've finally worked up guts to post this. I also know that about every 1-2 months this question is asked but I think it deserves a another go around.

My premises is this:

Adobe joined the Linux Foundation in 2008 for a focus on Linux for Web 2.0  Applications like Adobe® Flash® Player and Adobe AIR™. Currently Adobe holds a silver membership status with the Linux Foundation. So why in the world do they not have any Creative Cloud Programs available in Linux without the need for WINE and other such workarounds. I think it's a sucky move to support the Linux Foundation and use Linux in the back-end while not doing anything to support actual Linux users who have for at least a decade requested Adobe desktop products on Linux. Sure it's going to take a lot of manpower, financial resources, etc. But to truly support Linux and the Linux Foundation I think it's necessary that y'all do make things like Photoshop and Lightroom available for the Linux desktop. In any regards the wider Linux community would most likely help with testing and debugging programs. We're used to it.

[mytaxsite]

You guys are missing the point.  Adobe can't make products for an OS on which it can't control its legitimate licenses.  On Windows, licenses are stored in "Windows Registry" and so Adobe can control how its products are installed and in what numbers.  In Linux this is just not possible because of its Open Source model.  Anybody can download the source code for Linux distro and modify it to suit their purpose and so the security feature of an operating system is lost.

Products can only survive if they are developed continuously and free products don't survive because developers can't afford to keep them going.  I don't see any free desktop products coming out with any new features while Adobe products and Microsoft products are evolving all the time and people are willing to pay for them.

Wordpress (a free product) has survived because of "Automattic" a profit making company;  Drupal has survived because of "Acquia";  Joomla is struggling because nobody controls it and so its patches are all over the place because anybody can change them as they feel in its official distribution.  With WP and Drupal, nobody can change anything without the approval of the owners.  suggestions are always welcomed and contributions are always welcomed but official changes cannot take place without proper approval.  With Linux this is not the case and so it has become an academic exercise for hobbyists and enthusiasts.

[mytaxsite]

it is without doubt that Apple and Microsoft are influencing Adobe to

not support Linux.

Adobe is completely independent influenced by its stock holders NOT

Microsoft. Adobe can only provide software which it can control

remotely. In Windows and Apple Mac, they have inbuilt security features

and licenses can be controlled; In Linux this is not possible. In the

bad old days, we had DOD and Windows 3.1 on which there was no control

mechanism and people were copying and distribution software all over the

place. Linux hasn't improved at all as far as its security features are

concerned for the developers of software applications. Adobe needs this

security before it can spend time just to talk about it, never mind to

plan for it in a board meeting.

[filmographie]

I sympathize with your distress. We work in both Mac (Yosemite) & Windows (Windows 7 Pro) environments networked with a Samba server (Linux) and notice very little real difference other than the annoying stuff like using Control-C to copy in Windows vs Command-C to copy in Mac.Windows machines do seem easier to use in a mixed Windows/Mac/Linux networking environment than Macs.

As for new desktop computers - don't waste your money on a new machine. Right now there are many 5 year old 12 core workstations flooding the market. Typical is a Dell Precision T5500 with 24 gig RAM, 2x6 core Xeon processors and an NVidia Quadro/CUDA graphics card for under $1,000. This is adequate to edit in Premiere Pro CC2015 in HD1080 working with AVCHD files.

That is certainly cheaper than a brand new Mac Pro and in the same horsepower range.

As for CC for Linux - the major stumbling block for Adobe has always been percentage of market share.That may change in the near future since Citrix and VMware have recently decided to deploy virtual Linux desktops as a standard user option. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/07/linux_on_the_desktop_is_so_hot_theres_now_a_fight_over_it/

[jonbwgm]

mytaxsite.co.uk‌ um, no, we're not asking for an open source version of Adobe.  They can sell subscriptions and control access just like they do now, whether it's on Windows, OSX, or Linux.  Sure, most software on Linux is open source, but there's no restrictions preventing someone from making and selling a program that runs on linux, and in fact many do.  And there's no reason that the open source nature of Linux would allow end users to circumvent the licensing model any easier than they would be able to with the existing OS's.

[Xeon64]

It has nothing to do with control. The same people who would modify Linux to get around licensing are the same people who would modify the software from Adobe to get around the licensing. A pirate is a pirate regardless of the OS. Adobe on Linux is not a licensing issue.

[Gnurpf]

mytaxsite.co.uk wrote:

You guys are missing the point.  Adobe can't make products for an OS on which it can't control its legitimate licenses.  On Windows, licenses are stored in "Windows Registry" and so Adobe can control how its products are installed and in what numbers.  In Linux this is just not possible because of its Open Source model.  Anybody can download the source code for Linux distro and modify it to suit their purpose and so the security feature of an operating system is lost.

This doesn't make sense in any way. There is a number of software out there in price leagues way higher than Adobe CC which are licensed via flexlm or rlm servers that in most cases are running on linux machines already, even if the workstations are using Windows or MacOS. I don't see them having problems control their legitimate licenses.

So once again: I am waiting for Adobe CC on linux, where is it?

[andy_bob_newton]

I agree, open source adobe is not what we are asking. lots of companies have paid versions of software running on Linux and some sites even show linux users willing to pay more than windows users. we are yet to see one legitimate reason not to that can hold up against just 5 seconds of logical reasoning. We are still waiting...

[filmographie]

Where have you people been hiding the past few years? Serious authentication is tied up with the hardware serial number of the computer processor, the mac address of the ethernet adapters, the user's IP address, etc.

Adobe uses their cloud service to authenticate each copy of CC. Have you tried installing your CC on a third computer? It requires you to log out of one of the first two copies in order to work on the third computer.

Several high end compositing (Nuke & Fusion) packages have been running under Linux for years.

I've still got a parallel port dongle for After Effects, but Adobe long ago figured out how to supply products without dongles. My copy of Fusion (which has been running under Linux using Wine in a fully supported version for over 5 years) also first came with a dongle. So what? There are other ways.

[andy_bob_newton]

‌creative cloud and other Adobe apps are not supported on Linux (though some can be run in wine). Adobe has yet to offer any reason why this is (some of their responses seem like they don't even know what Linux is), and are ignoring thousands of requests for it. if you're looking for photoshop on Linux, the closest I've found is pixeluvo which after a little use feels almost identical. If you want the other apps, try blender, nuke, blackmagic fusion (either in wine or wait for the next version), maya, gimp, Inkscape, kdenlive, light works, darktable, krita and ardour

[Brian Boyko]

Howdy, just wanted to add another anecdotal piece of information to this thread. I'm a filmmaker that uses Premiere Pro and I'm also a software developer.  I use a Windows host (for Adobe) and a Linux guest (where I do 90% of my work.) The reason for this is because I need to run Premiere Pro on "real" (not VM) hardware to get the best performance out of it.

What I suppose I have to say is this: the reason that Adobe should consider Linux is because the longer that Adobe doesn't support Linux apps, there will continue to be vocal users who will be looking for alternatives that will, which creates an incentive for developers to create software that achieves technological parity with Adobe software.  

The stronger the incentive to develop Adobe-equivilant solutions, the *sooner* the day will come when Adobe's creative suite is no longer the technological leader, but instead, another commodity product among many equivalent choices.  The point of supporting Linux - from a strategic, Adobe-based perspective, is not to capture new marketshare but to maintain market dominance over a longer period of time.  That day when Adobe products are commodity products? That day *will* come, but the longer you maintain market dominance now, the more cash-on-hand you have to weather the storm and spend time developing the next "killer app" so that you can once again achieve market dominance in an area.

To me, this is a no-brainer from a strategic perspective. 

[Marclar_Seobhan]

Here is a simple answer that cannot be given by any official user on this thread. This is a powerful synergy with vested interests that sit far above Adobe itself.

Adobe is not hurt if you take your business elsewhere, because you won't. You will have to buy into expensive Windows or Mac products that are designated as a commercial platform for this. That's about it. No matter how many millions of votes you put in, it will remain this way. With discontinued wine support you will not have a choice, but to buy into a Windows or Mac license.

[andy_bob_newton]

TThe problem is not that we won't but that for some things we can't. we have alternatives for some of the suite and some software that works difderntly to achieve similar results but the continued Lack of support is meaning that some of are trying harder to find these alternative and so developers are working hard to make them. Here's a list of what I've used from Adobe: audition, premiere, Photoshop, dreamweaver, after effects and flash. I haven't used audition in over a year because I now prefer ardour which runs perfectly on Linux. I ‌use kdenlive instead of premiere now in about 60% of my videos and there's also lightworks which my friend uses and says is pretty good. I now use pixeluvo instead of of photoshop (I don't think I even have ps installed anymore apart from one laptop that isn't even used for anything but sennheisers wsm software). I prefer code view anyway in dream weaver so I've replaced it with bluefish and manage sites with filezilla. I don't do flash development anymore at all so that's gone. My entire time in windows is installing windows updates, edit one or two of my weeks videos in premiere (one of which may soon move to kdenlive in Linux anyway), add the 2d motion graphics in after effects to one of the videos then reboot into Linux for literally everything else I do. If Adobe cc were on Linux I'd move my video production entirely back to premiere and after effects because I love the workflow but at this moment I'm considering buying the Linux releases of davinci resolve and fusion 8 when its released, meaning my cc subscription is pointless and then cancelled. I've even been looking at blender to take some of the load (on a side note, it just runs faster in Linux and using Linux instead of windows when I was testing a CPU render cut 1/5 on the render time and gpu renders were about 10% faster even on my underpowered temporary GPU)

[Gnurpf]

I just want to clarify, correct me if I am wrong:

To be exact, there is no Linux Version of the Davinci Resolve Software. You can only buy it in conjunction with the Resolve Control Panel as the normal dongles only work on MacOS and Windows, at least referring to Blackmagic. And even if that's not true the only way to install Resolve on Linux is to use Blackmagic's own CentOS distribution where it is integrated into. Which is a pain-in-the ass from an administrative point of view having to reinstall the OS for only installing one application.

If there was an easy way to use Resolve on Linux, I would have left Adobe for good a long time ago. I am primarily a Nuke user and I am considering using Nuke Studio for all editorial purposes. Unfortunately, it is still very buggy in some regards, especially when taking the price point into account.

[andy_bob_newton]

you're pretty much right there I'm afraid. the linux version will only run on the custom version version of centOS that comes with the control surface, which is a real pain, but at least it can run on linux. some of the people have even suggested that adobe do the same which would be slightly less annoying since it would just be an OS that comes pre loaded with the entire CC which I know would still be a pain but at least it would be something

[Gnurpf]

But there is still the other issue if the linux version actually runs with the MacOS/Windows-Dongles. Have you checked that? And even if it does now, it isn't said that future versions will as, officially, it is not supported.

[appastair]

@andy_bob_newton good post regarding alternatives. I was educated on the monopoly-holding software packages for modelling, animation and video editing but the inconvenience of virtualising/dual-booting/WINE'ing the commercial de factos had me perservere with the open source alternatives which I now prefer. GIMP, Inkscape, kdenlive sometimes in conjunction with the mind-bending Blender for live multi-cam cuts for a Premiere/After Effects-like pairing.  

Adobe's reasoning seems to be based on the platform usage/share of 0% for their products with Linux although I'm sure that I'm not alone in being a lost sale/subscription. They're not that silly though - this is political because everyone knows it does not take  alot to port something from MacOS to Linux. 

[andy_bob_newton]

‌tthey claim as there default copy and paste response that not enough people are on Linux and willing to pay for the software on Linux but we all know this simply isnt true because there are dozens of forum posts and petitions, some with thousands of supporters. Most of these people are either current subscribers looking for something on Linux and probably considering alternatives (people who pay Adobe now but will stop unless Linuxsupport is given) or people who only use Linux and want to buy Adobe cc but can't because of lack of Linux support (people Adobe could be getting money from but are choosing not to). I'm in the first category but can confirm that thousands in both categories are willing to pay for cc if it is available and better than the alternatives. Much of the software in cc is (for now) preferable to the alternatives for most people and the workflows across the suite is important for some but while cc is unavailable to us, the alternatives are getting better and so some are sacrificing the workflows between software and switching to the alternatives like the ones I've mentioned. As soon as I get time to learn more about blender, that might take away the last few reasons to justify cc at all and then I'm gone from cc. At which point I'll start to suggest we do the same at the organisation I work at since we are currently using Mac pros for video editing in cc but they are aging and going to die soon so im considering much more powerful linux workstations to replace them since our audio guys already use Linux in everything from our live mixer to our recording rig to ediying and I'm on both teams, and enjoy working on the Linux systems much more. most of the team I work with also have their own subscriptions for taking work home and personal projects, only two of them are faithful to Mac and all the others prefer performance for money factor and Linux can't be beaten there but on Mac and PC creative cloud is the best offering I've tried. So if the organisation moves to blender, kdenlive and pixeluvo which it may soon do, many of the team personal systems will too. So even for a comparatively small team like the ones I'm working with, that's hundreds of perhaps thousands of pounds lost through cancelled subscriptions coming soon through lack of Linux support Just from one organisation. If cc comes to Linux, there won't be any more losses from me or the teams I work with and the audio guys might even return to cc. Besides being persuaded by Apple and or Microsoft not to, there is no reason not to release cc for Linux.

[filmographie]

You might consider where the software for some of these products was originally developed as a clue to the present state of affairs.

ILM/Lucasfilm/Pixar (I remember when they all shared a few buildings in San Rafael) was forced to create many of the tools for animated film production themselves and several of their early employees transferred their expertise to the commercial world. Bay area companies like Macromedia, Adobe, Red Giant, Apple and many others that were eventually bought out were the beneficiaries of that expertise.

In the south, companies like Digital Domain initially developed what became Nuke as an in-house tool so they could affordably employ hundreds of Linux workstations at a time to perform specialized tasks like masking and compositing for vfx. Nuke eventually was sold off in Digital Domain's bankruptcy.Note that Nuke has always been Linux native due to its original design criteria.

Blender started as a Dutch crowdsourcing project that became totally open source in the process of development. It is the most successful of many crowdfunded attempts in a similar vein. (Over the years I've put money into several of these that fizzled out before they became viable.)

Trying to trace the threads of today's tools is a complex and sometimes frustrating process. For example: After Effects incorporates source code that was originally developed by Automasker - an Israeli company, the Cult Effects plugins developed by a Swedish company and several other products from third partymergers & acquisitions.

[andy_bob_newton]

‌while tthis was interesting to read and does say why the different software started on the OSs they did and why nuke has always been Linux native, there are still no reasons that I can see for not having adobes cc to be on Linux such as needing specific characteristics of of OS. I know it's extremely possible that libraries were used originally that were OS specific but the fact that there are both windows and Mac versions mean that either those libraries have been replaced with adobes own or that there are now cross platform versions of those libraries. If those libraries are already availbe now then Adobe has no reason not to use them so can release their software for Linux when they choose to and if thday are only using adobes own libraries then surely it's a matter of just repackaging into .deb or .rpm and letting the customers have what they want. Either way it is not that difficult to create and while testing would take time, it would not be an impossibly huge task, perhaps they could even just test it to a point then release a beta version and get users to finish the testing and even that would satisfy most of the people here until a full version would be released

[Weder Clay]

A year ago, approximately, I went back to Windows and signed the Creative Cloud. With absolute certainty if there was a native version, I come back to Linux.

In short, I am a customer, who pays the monthly fee, expressing the desire to have the Creative Cloud running on Linux. The same desire of many others like me.

We know that Adobe is not obligated to develop such compatibility, but we have the right to express our wishes as to what we pay.

[Branden]

Which tools are you using?

[filmographie]

I'd just like to say that I've invested a great deal of time learning how to use Adobe products over the years and am able to immediately get results when I use them - whether on Windows or OS-X. I can move from one environment to another with no loss of time (we have both platforms - as well as Linux) and it is fairly easy to migrate from one software release to another.

When I try to use a tool like GIMP or Blender it takes a LOT of TIME (for me) to get any work done. This is primarily because I haven't taken the time to learn that tool - not because the tool isn't capable of doing the work. The same can be said for using Media Composer, FCP or other editing tools I haven't needed to use very much because I've been mostly working with Premiere for many years. This is why very few Avid editors are willing to switch to FCP or Premiere Pro. You'd have to start learning all 3 editing tools at once to be comfortable switching back & forth - and that is what new college graduates are trained to do.

In a production environment time lost in trying to learn a new tool is money down the drain. That is why I stick with Linux for my servers - I don't have to struggle with the usual Microsoft "what did you call it this time and where did you put it?" crap whenever a new version comes out. So I already know the Linux environment and several varieties of GUIs as well as command line tools. It would be very nice to be able to use the Adobe CC tools if I'm on my Linux workstation without having to keep another workstation handy.

[tiernanx]

Just wanted to chime in. Like many, the only thing holding me back from permanently switching to Ubuntu is the lack of Adobe products which I must use professionally

I believe there would be a much larger Linux market share if just a few more software suites were available. Valve has helped improve the Linux ecosystem tremendously by encouraging Linux game development. All we need now are Adobe products.

[Yannik_Pipek]

I would switch to Linux if the where just some more complex programs like the CC Cloud and Cinema 4D for it. Sadly emulating it doesn't work all that well if you are starting to work with plugins so it is currently not an option for me to work with Linux.
But I agree it is definitely needed for Adobe to support Linux! Also it shouldn't be that much more work considering that they support Apples OS.

[Yannik_Pipek]

Yes we sadly had to notice that!