I agree. And for a related example, you might see how many apps have been ported to iOS but not Android. I suspect Android users who would like access to Adobe apps may outnumber Linux users.
@SomeGuyInTheLaptop you've received some pretty definintive responses from the previous post yet you post a new thread again. Please refer to the answer given on the previous post.
Using this chart from Staista — which gives us Internet users by OS rather OS users, but it's the best I could find — and accepting ProDesignTools estimate that 30 million people have paid for Creative Cloud subscriptions, and 'guessing' that they all use Photoshop, we can do the math and estimate that If Adobe did code Photoshop for Linux, another 3.25 people would pay for it.
...and retired former Adobe Principal Scientist Dov Isaacs said, "If it makes no business sense, then such versions are simply not going to be produced."
Also, there is already some history about this. Some years ago, Corel, once a major competitor to Adobe, released the CorelDRAW Graphics Suite for Linux. Corel had a chance to gain market share in the Linux market for commercial graphics suites, maybe beating Adobe in that market.
But, CorelDRAW Graphics Suite for Linux was not successful, and was quickly cancelled. Apparently there was not a significant Linux market for major commercial graphics suites, and no one else has tried since then. The popular commercial graphics suite by Affinity (Photo, Designer, Publisher) is also not available for Linux; their platforms are macOS, Windows, and iPad OS.
The situation is changing, personal security that comes with non MS software is rising in importance for many people, and Linux itself is improving. I suggest you search Amazon for Linux and you'll find loads of hardware products now, including mini computers which support Linux.
Moreover Adobe have mistakenly lost a segment of their former client base, those people who are not regular users of Photoshop so can't justify the significant monthly cost of the entire suite. This group have obviously shifted to free products but could be enticed back with the Linux compatibility offering. It's big enough for Blender to offer this.
Linux doesn't have to rule the world in order to be appropriate for certain focused applications. Adobe CC is a niche product, not something that everyone is likely to run on a multi-purpose computer. The machine on which I run CC doesn't have any other purpose. It exists for me to edit photos for my business.
And for God's Sake, it bluescreens about twice a day with a very unhelpful Windows error. I'd pay extra to be rid of Windows.
And no, Apple is out of the question. I made the switch to Windows in order to build a machine to my specifications, something extremely difficult with Apple's closed architecture.
Also keep in mind that if Adobe does port an application like Photoshop to Linux, it is unlikely to be ported as a simple standalone application like GIMP. It will probably be tightly connected with all of the cloud services that the Windows and Mac versions are now inextricably tied to. It would very likely be a cloud-based installer that also installs numerous networked components to support those Creative Cloud services, such as Adobe Fonts (which are fully cloud-based), Cloud Documents, Creative Cloud Libraries, maybe Lightroom Photos (in the cloud), Share for Review, and other Creative Cloud services. And they might need to develop and install a framework to allow the Adobe Color Engine to provide a proper layer for color management (I’m not sure if Linux has the same quality of OS-level color management that Windows and macOS have).
I only bring this up because a number of Windows and macOS users have already posted in this Community with questions about the number of non-optional Creative Cloud processes that are installed even with just one application, listed in OS process managers along with their RAM and CPU footprints, set to persistently run as background processes, and some maintaining their own network connections back to their cloud services. Many people use Linux because of a strong desire to maintain more manual control over their system configurations, but any Creative Cloud apps that become available on Linux would probably also not let the user control or permanently disable any of those networked Creative Cloud background processes.
And again, if a Linux market is viable, it should be relatively easy to convince a smaller company like Affinity that they would see a nice first mover advantage over Adobe on Linux if they would just port their apps, and that might show Adobe that they should do Linux too. But nobody seems to be pursuing that opportunity, except Corel who actually tried it, and then gave up.
I’m personally not opposed to Linux ports at all, I sincerely hope you get them…I’m just sayin' 🙂
The Adobe has developer with skils to code outstanding functionality in their software. It's not market share it's what library and the stack Software can be easy migrate to Linux with existed code base. It's just to much work to make Fedora or Ubuntu Version.Why?
For Linux we have now only reasonable "Portal API" is system agnostic.
For 2D is skia.
For 3D opengl on Linux we can use messa.
For Gnome we have developer platform guide.
For KDE we have developer platform guide too.
For packages there is Deb (Ubunt) and RPM (Fedora) format.
Universal package :package: on Linux: Flatpak, Snap, Appimages.
There is one solution that could work out of the box.
Compile the whole software against wine library.
In such way - there is possibility to incorporate the wine source library. Less work more effect. Ouput will be binary compatibilities with Linux target :direct_hit:
On Visual studio Linux output with wine source instruction look like that:
To create a Linux binary using Visual Studio and the Wine source library for an existing codebase, you can follow these steps: 1. **Install Visual Studio and Wine**: - Ensure Visual Studio is installed on your Windows machine. - Obtain the Wine source library, which allows Windows applications to run on Linux. 2. **Install Visual C++ for Linux Development in Visual Studio**: - In Visual Studio, go to Tools -> Get Tools and Features. - Install the “Visual C++ for Linux Development” extension. 3. **Open Your Existing Project in Visual Studio**: - Open your existing codebase in Visual Studio. 4. **Configure Project for Linux Target**: - Right-click on your project in the Solution Explorer. - Go to Properties -> Configuration Properties. - Set the target system to Linux. Specify the connection information for a Linux machine or VM where the compilation will occur. 5. **Integrate Wine Library**: - Include the Wine headers and link against the Wine libraries in your project settings. - Ensure compatibility with the target Linux system. 6. **Modify Code for Linux Compatibility (if necessary)**: - Review and modify your code to ensure it is compatible with Linux and the Wine environment. This might include conditional compilation, different API calls, etc. 7. **Build the Project**: - Compile the project in Visual Studio. It uses the connected Linux machine or VM for the compilation process. 8. **Testing on Linux**: - Test the compiled binary on a Linux environment to ensure it works correctly with Wine. 9. **Debug and Optimize**: - Use Visual Studio's remote debugging features to debug any issues on the Linux machine. 10. **Deploy the Linux Binary**: - Once you're satisfied with the testing, you can deploy the Linux binary. Keep in mind that the performance and compatibility of your application can vary significantly depending on how well Wine supports the specific Windows APIs your application uses. Extensive testing in the target environment is crucial to ensure functionality.
In the past Microsoft has an offline os without any data collecting which runs on everything.
Now we have a data cloud collector os full of advertisement, which will go completely in the cloud in the near future. At 2025 many working systems will be electronic waste, or you have to pay.
Adobe has not to support all Linux distributions. They should concentrate on one LTS distribution like Ubuntu 22.04. which Linux they will support is totally equal for me. But I want to leave Microsoft. But I can't because of Microsoft big brother Adobe.
How big are the performance lost of running Adobe cloud in wine?
Never heard that it will work. Is it possible to see a video howi have to install and how it perform?
My understanding is that earlier versions of Photoshop and Lightroom will work in Wine, but the current versions (Adobe CC) will not. I've read that there's no way to make it work in Wine and perhaps that was deliberate.
I agree with you, any version of Linux will do. The fact that Linux is fragmented is a spurious argument. It doesn't matter. Whatever version of Linux Adobe would port to, we would come to them.
Again, Adobe CC is a niche product. Arguing that it needs to only support the most popular operating systems (osx and windows) is specious, as the REASON we professional photographers are ON osx or windows is BECAUSE that's where Adobe CC runs. Adobe has cause and effect reversed.
My Adobe CC machine is essentially a console. I don't do anything else with it. And as such, it doesn't matter how general-purpose the OS is.
I really don't understand why this dicussion keeps rolling on and on, repeating itself over and over, when the answer has been so clearly stated by Adobe officials, again over and over.
Photoshop for Linux will happen the day it makes business sense to do so. Until that day, it will not happen.
There isn't anything else to say. That's the one and only answer.
Nope. This is not true it's false. More OS like Fedora or Ubuntu it's expand as whole of Portfolio of product. Is rather question how hard would be target :direct_hit: Linux and if would be even harder to maintenance that production Version of this linux build target :direct_hit: If after setup Software chained to Linux output - will be effortless to maintain that already would Adobe has that product. As was said before - they has supper taletned people on board - so it's only tech issue of library and compile stack.Why? Ideal situation will be changes/fix/maintain occure version to version on main codebase and output target set Linux do not make additional Linux related bug.
Of course it is true. If Adobe thought it was financially worth doing they would do it.
As evidenced by the comments from staff - to date they do not. Remember business sense means , porting, maintaining, compatibility with the future roadmap, training developers and support staff, integration with other Adobe products...etc The most important of all is Return on Investment, without that, there is no business case.
Business sense and technical difficulty are not the same thing.
Yep. There is web standards ( like WebGL, WebAssembly, etc) and AI and it's push out old aproche to make applications in FOSS and Commercial licence that is now not Tightly stich to only that or this OS.
I wish you guys would stop blowing-up my mailbox with this rediculous fantasy. Adobe won't port to Linux because Linux users won't stand for this overbearing, subscription-based collection of bloatware taking over their entire system. If the alternative tools already available for Linux aren't good enough they will gladly devote a Windows PC or Mac to Adobe to keep this crapware off their Linux box.
684
Replies
AdChoices