It's not surprising Linux popularity should be increasing, given that people aren't liking what Microsoft is doing. Windows 8 adoption numbers are dismal. Whether Microsoft still has the talent to make the next one a resounding success... We shall see.
It's kind of a chicken and egg problem for Linux. Popularity has to grow before commercial entities take notice, and in order for popularity to grow more commercial entities have to take notice. So it's the right thing to do to petition Adobe to look into it. I just wouldn't hold my breath for results just yet.
But hey, slow and steady wins the race, right? Even back in the 1970s people said that Unix would end up being the one system that prevailed.
It's becoming extremely evident that all development community is fully embracing the philosophy of "code once, code everywhere". It simply calls for maintaining a single codebase for an application that then compiles that app to the proper binaries for distribution. Why do I mention this? Because if Adobe was concerned in being in the forefront of best development practices, they would already be practicing this.
They, and every other software company for that matter, will need to adopt this type of thinking, or risk eventually disappearing into the tech abyss for having too high an overhead, while concurrently being too slow getting releases back to market.
And while we are talking about Adobe's "interests", I think it's important to point out the weird dependent-but-destructive relationship they foster with Apple. If there were any backdoor deals or handshakes, it was for Mac to keep exclusivity and label of being the only "Unix creative workstation". Apple's creative end-user base depends on this and they've held a fiscal interest in Adobe since the mid 80s(going all the way back to PostScript).
Either Sketch, MacAffiinty, Macaw or one of the other countless Mac alternatives will wake up and realize the potential market Linux has to offer or a new player will emerge. Only time will tell, but it seems hopeless to think Adobe will deter from whatever it's internal gameplan dedicates.
I'd expect to see Photoshop, Illustrator and a few other apps ported to the Web; before I ever see them ported to Linux(which is an insane amount of work compared to just a Linux port).
I think even the reputation of Macs being for more creative types is evaporating.
It took an eternity for creative software giant Autodesk to make Mac versions of one or two popular products (and they were lousy).
Everyone I see with a Mac these days is sat in a cafe on Facebook.
The only thing worse than Mac users that should have bought a Chromebook sat on Facebook all day are Linux users on here.
EDIT: Full-fledged (kinda Unix like) Linux distro's squarely aimed at creative types have been available for a while now too, like ArtistX etc, but I know that distro is overkill as everything open source and "creative" is pre-installed upfront.
Oh will you look at that, it seems Google is picking up developing design software, and whaddya know, they have Linux support. Bye bye Adobe. It might not be the same as Photoshop, but that's just a matter of time
Bye bye Adobe. It might not be the same as Photoshop, but that's just a matter of time
Sorry, but if you know anything at all about developing software, re-developing all the functionality that is in Photoshop then trying to catch up with all that's been developed by Adobe since, then trying to change the creative culture to adopt the replacement is a tall order indeed. If you doubt this, I need only point out that it hasn't happened yet, and Photoshop's been out there a long time.
And seriously, though people for some reason seem to dislike Adobe on General Principles, does anyone like Google any better? Remember that while in many ways software quality has declined in modern times, Google could be considered the mother of the concept. I can remember when a "search" was actually a rigorous process that could be trusted to find anything and everything. And let's not even talk about who tracks your every move online without your knowledge, and who puts ads on your screen...
I can tell you that Google-authored software will never be my first choice.
The irony of me calling out that they'll port to a webapp before porting to Linux, and @uvii Google name-drop: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/09/adobe-brings-streaming-photoshop-to-chrome-os/ --- I've tried the Google web designer in Linux. It's geared towards rich media(read ad-banners) web developers. Like @Noel said Google isn't any better, but they do have a different approach to software/hardware roll out then most: release way before a viable version is ready, let early-adopters sort through the mess with them and then they roll out a decent product. It would take them a long time to achieve something that competes with Adobe, I think that's ultimately why they struck the deal.
Here's a quote from an article on the upcoming support for chromeOS:
[It] can be accessed from any Chrome browser (Windows only) or Chromebook and does not require a full download and install
Notice how they intentionally highlight how it will only be available through chrome browsers on Windows! If you're already developing a web solution through the chrome browser, why the hell is it so complicated to open up that option to Linux users as well? I don't get it. I truly don't.
Yes, I was exaggerating a little before, and Google Web Designer isn't Photoshop and won't be anytime soon. But I'll jump on the first wagon that will supply a decent alternative (not an open-source one that just looks like a copy-cat. I mean professional software developed by a large company). Unlike Adobe, Google seems to actually give a s*** about us.
Adobe is not a living human it dose not love, hate, like or dislike. Adobe is manage by humans their management job is to make money. They are not going to make a huge investment developing an other Unix version of Photoshop for Linux in particular if there is not a good business case that shows profits. Making a Linux PS make as much sense as you giving me all your have.
It's not a huge investment. If you know some of the basics of low-level programming and c++ the port would be relatively easy.
The decision is a strategic one, that could have indirect results on their fiscal earnings. Adobe's close knit relationship with Apple and MS conflicts w them bringing it to Linux. That's why I'm positive Google made them some type of offer that was attractive enough for them to negate their strategy.
It's not a huge investment. If you know some of the basics of low-level programming and c++ the port would be relatively easy.
The decision is a strategic one, that could have indirect results on their fiscal earnings. Adobe's close knit relationship with Apple and MS conflicts w them bringing it to Linux. That's why I'm positive Google made them some type of offer that was attractive enough for them to negate their strategy.
What corporation do you run how can state that its not a huge investment to develop and support a product like PS for Linux. What is your background. If there was a good profit to be had why would Adobe not want to do it? What Adobe doesn't want earnings. The port would only be an line item. There would be many other line items. training, support, marketing. Its not just code.
Where are you numbers your forecast if you have them give them to Adobe show them there is a good reason.
The Google thing Photoshop Streaming does not sound like PS on the device it rings of PS on a remote server.
In partnership with Google, Adobe is proud to introduce Project Photoshop Streaming, a new technology beta. Initially, this beta will be available exclusively to select North America based Adobe education customers with a paid Creative Cloud membership.
Project Photoshop Streaming enables selected participants to access Photoshop on Chromebooks. Applications delivered via streaming are easy to access and easy to manage. Even better, streaming apps work directly with files in Google Drive, so no need to download and re-upload files - just edit directly in the cloud.
Project Photoshop Streaming includes:
Creative tools: Streaming access to Photoshop with other products coming soon
Access from any Windows device with a Chrome browser or from a Chromebook
Learning tools: Access to Adobe Education Exchange learning content and an in-app Learning panel called 'Learn Now'
Project Photoshop Streaming Feedback and Forum support
Well you answered my question in terms of low-level programming and c++ knowledge. They already have a fully running Unix version that works under X11, take the cocoa out of it and im sure that port could be done in relatively short period. Additionally most CC Win 32 bit apps run in Linux on Wine(but there's bugs from proprietary windows libs/drivers). I wouldn't be surprised if Adobe had past developers make ports in their off time and their sources available on internal company servers.
If you understand programming, you can then understand that this isn't technically difficult or would need a massive team to complete. I'm a newb to c++ programming but grasp the basics and have had discussions with devs that have ported similar GPU intense apps(team of only 1 or 2 people usually) and they did it relatively quickly.
---
In regards to your "training, support, marketing", let me just roll my eyes. I've been a paying member of adobe products for years and they prove time and again that those things are little or no importance to them. (People have no idea how to even cancel a CC subscription).
I look at it like this, if porting the app is easy to do; then what's the hold up? Adobe was funded with seed money from Apple and was forced to port to Windows because of the huge base of consumers. They couldn't ignore them like Linux users and I'm confident that port was way more difficult than the port to Linux would be.
These companies all have strategic alliances, and I think them porting to Linux is a huge conflict of interest in terms of threatening Apple's claims of being "the only Unix Creative Workstation".
I'm a professional programmer that went to school for Public Relations. After being in and out of numerous corporate working environments, I can tell you this decision is not based on finances, technical difficultly and most likely done to keep good relationships with Apple and Windows.
If you want to believe this was done on a rational level, then you are entitled to that opinion. I'll continue to lean more the notion that shareholder and corporate partner objections is what is blocking this.
So you know good reasons not to do it. Good on you. Knowing all what would you do your Adobe. Will Photoshop streaming fly on Linux would that be what you as a linux user would want a monthly payment a an online server requirement no offline editing.
"They already have a fully running Unix version that works under X11, take the cocoa out of it and im sure that port could be done in relatively short period."
"If you understand programming, you can then understand that this isn't technically difficult or would need a massive team to complete."
You just disqualified yourself from discussing the difficulty of such a port. But at least you provided a hearty laugh for people who actually understand application development.
I'm a newb to c++ programming but grasp the basics
and
Been writing Photoshop since 1996.
then to me, as a C++ ignoramus, it would seem fairly clear who I would trust to be more qualified to judge the difficulties inherent in the task being discussed.
It's not a huge investment. If you know some of the basics of low-level programming and c++ the port would be relatively easy.
The decision is a strategic one, that could have indirect results on their fiscal earnings. Adobe's close knit relationship with Apple and MS conflicts w them bringing it to Linux. That's why I'm positive Google made them some type of offer that was attractive enough for them to negate their strategy.
What corporation do you run how can state that its not a huge investment to develop and support a product like PS for Linux. What is your background. If there was a good profit to be had why would Adobe not want to do it? What Adobe doesn't want earnings. The port would only be an line item. There would be many other line items. training, support, marketing. Its not just code.
Where are you numbers your forecast if you have them give them to Adobe show them there is a good reason.
The Google thing Photoshop Streaming does not sound like PS on the device it rings of PS on a remote server.
In partnership with Google, Adobe is proud to introduce Project Photoshop Streaming, a new technology beta. Initially, this beta will be available exclusively to select North America based Adobe education customers with a paid Creative Cloud membership.
Project Photoshop Streaming enables selected participants to access Photoshop on Chromebooks. Applications delivered via streaming are easy to access and easy to manage. Even better, streaming apps work directly with files in Google Drive, so no need to download and re-upload files - just edit directly in the cloud.
Project Photoshop Streaming includes:
Creative tools: Streaming access to Photoshop with other products coming soon
Access from any Windows device with a Chrome browser or from a Chromebook
Learning tools: Access to Adobe Education Exchange learning content and an in-app Learning panel called 'Learn Now'
Project Photoshop Streaming Feedback and Forum support
It all sounds incredible. But if you're working on porting Photoshop for ChromeOS (which is really a Linux based OS), why not open it up for all Linux users? I don't get it. There's nothing technical here, because we're not talking about a low-level native version (I won't pretend to be an expert C++ developer, I realize it might not be simple), we're talking about a remote version.
The announcement makes sure to emphasize how it will work from the chrome browser but only from windows. Companies can be made out of many people, and I can't say they all unanimously "hate Linux users", but there's definitely something going on here, because I can't explain it in any other way.
It all sounds incredible. But if you're working on porting Photoshop for ChromeOS (which is really a Linux based OS), why not open it up for all Linux users? I don't get it. There's nothing technical here, because we're not talking about a low-level native version (I won't pretend to be an expert C++ developer, I realize it might not be simple), we're talking about a remote version.
The announcement makes sure to emphasize how it will work from the chrome browser but only from windows. Companies can be made out of many people, and I can't say they all unanimously "hate Linux users", but there's definitely something going on here, because I can't explain it in any other way.
And if you read about Chromebooks they do not have the power to run Photoshop. What was announce announces was a test program of a web based Photoshop Streaming not Photoshop on a Chromebook. For all you know the servers may be running Windows.
My question is - why not open up the streaming photoshop (even the beta version) to Linux users too? It doesn't matter what the servers are running! And even if it did - the fact that it should be able to run from chrome browser or from ChromeOS (which, again, IS aLinux OS Itself!!) means there are no technical reasons why it shouldn't be available to all Linux users.
If Photoshop Streaming Fly and become real perhaps they will. How many Linux user you know are willing to pay Adobe a monthly fee to use an online Photoshop? A Creative Cloud Subscription is required to use Photoshop Streaming.
If Photoshop Streaming Fly and become real perhaps they will. How many Linux user you know are willing to pay Adobe a monthly fee to use an online Photoshop? A Creative Cloud Subscription is required to use Photoshop Streaming.
And we're back to the condescending and completely wrong assumption that all Linux users are non-paying pirates.
OF COURSE IT'S A PAID SUBSCRIPTION, why do you feel the need to explain this? Because I'm a Unix user so I think everything should be for free? Come on, that's completely misunderstanding the community that makes Unix-users (who are, if anything, more prone to waste more money on computer hardware and whathaveyou, because most of them are developers).
How many Linux users you ask? 100%. all of them. Or at least all those who work with Adobe products and keep a dual-boot windows just for that. Photoshop for linux would be a blessing for web-developers everywhere.
I would've submitted myself for the beta testing of Photoshop Streaming myself if I it was open to people outside the US.
And we're back to the condescending and completely wrong assumption that all Linux users are non-paying pirates.
That may be your impression of Linux users it not mine. Users use the OS that is right for them its their right choice.
My two point are Photoshop Streaming is not Photoshop running on Chromebooks. Chromebooks are network devices the Photoshop application is in the cloud not in the Chronebook. The Chromebook is more or less ad display hooked to the network. Without the network Photoshop Streaming does not function.
My other point is Adobe is a corporation they are in business to make money. If there is a business forecast that shows they would increase their bottom line that Adobe management would fund its development. Funding Photoshop Streaming shows Adobe Management believes there may be profits to be had. Its also only a trial at this stage.
When people Choose to use a Mac they know they are committing to the Mac Culture same for Linux and windows users. There are a lot of users that use more the one OS for they have a need or reasons like the need an application that is not available for their preferred OS. There are some new emerging culture in the mobile world iOS, Android, RT. There are also good things that do not survive PALM, Blackberry, betamax, 8track tape change is normal.
And we're back to the condescending and completely wrong assumption that all Linux users are non-paying pirates.
That may be your impression of Linux users it not mine. Users use the OS that is right for them its their right choice.
My two point are Photoshop Streaming is not Photoshop running on Chromebooks. Chromebooks are network devices the Photoshop application is in the cloud not in the Chronebook. The Chromebook is more or less ad display hooked to the network. Without the network Photoshop Streaming does not function.
My other point is Adobe is a corporation they are in business to make money. If there is a business forecast that shows they would increase their bottom line that Adobe management would fund its development. Funding Photoshop Streaming shows Adobe Management believes there may be profits to be had. Its also only a trial at this stage.
When people Choose to use a Mac they know they are committing to the Mac Culture same for Linux and windows users. There are a lot of users that use more the one OS for they have a need or reasons like the need an application that is not available for their preferred OS. There are some new emerging culture in the mobile world iOS, Android, RT. There are also good things that do not survive PALM, Blackberry, betamax, 8track tape change is normal.
That's my impression of how you talk to the Unix users here.
I understand the network based concept of Photoshop Streaming. I don't understand why this option will not be available for Unix users as well (the announcement makes a point to only mention ChromeOS and specifically chrome on Windows).
I don't think Adobe has any noble intentions other than making money. Mypoint is that Ubuntu might be a profitable market. emphasis on might. I don't claim to know, but I don't buy that it isn't either just because you say so with no basis. I think this issue didn't garner enough attention as it should, and I will appreciate it if someone from Adobe would take it under consideration. that's all.
The basis is that Adobe isn't pursuing that market.
Quite often individuals believe they can think of things that others haven't thought of. Occasionally that's true, but c'mon, in today's connected world do you really think no one in the big corporation has ever considered Linux? In the end the opinions of a few geeks don't matter; what matters are the studies done and business plans created.
This probably doesn't need saying, but... In case you haven't noticed, Adobe DOES have quite a few bright people.
666
Replies
AdChoices
