Hope you will pardon my ignorance. What is Tiger? Didn’t we just get PS CS? I have a Power Mac G4 1.25 with 1 1/2 G RAM, running OS 10.2.8. Printers, scanners and PS CS all working well. What else do I need (or want)?
Until you discover that there are G5s running 10.3.4 (Panther), as opposed to your G4 which is running Jaguar, and that OS 10.4 (Tiger) is about to spring upon you in early 2005.
Ann, where are you getting this information? It seems like a bit of a stretch to me.
Or maybe you are just phrasing it wrong. I would guess that a greater percentage of Windows copies of Photoshop are pirated, hence the reason for activation only on the Windows side, but I don’t see how you get away with saying that there are more legit users on Macs.
Not arguing, just wondering where you are getting those numbers.
Thank you Rene and Ann for your prompt replies. I just may just help ol’ Steve out again in 2005 and until then I can just coast along. My Dad always said: "When ignorance is bliss, it is folly to be wise." He is probably right, but that does not mean that I have to take his advice.
And the fact that Adobe found it necessary to implement Activation for Windows users only (which must cause Adobe a lot of extra aggravation and expense), somehow underlines that those vibes are correct?!
Jonathan, All the professional retouchers I know use the Mac (few not exclusively) and I thought that photographers use mostly PCs. Last year’s RIT survey proved me wrong:
"The majority of LEGITIMATE (meaning that they have legally purchased and registered versions) Photoshop users are running Macs."
That statement appears to say that you believe that the majority of all legit users of Photoshop are running on Mac, even though a VERY small percentage of all computers in the world are on Mac (lets go with a generous figure of 10%).
I don’t know… I guess I find that hard to believe, especially taking into account things like corporate piracy, casual copying, etc. I would say that there are more pirated copies on Windows than on Mac, but to say that there are more legit copies on Mac? I would want to see the numbers on that, even though it wouldn’t surprise me too much. I just think that gap between the number of Macs and the number of PCs is too wide.
I’m not going to argue that the use of Macs is prevalent in the graphic arts, (interesting link, btw…) but I was speaking of the total number of all computer users.
Does Adobe publish a list of what is the more popular version of Photoshop? I’ve been looking all over the corporate section of the website, and can’t find anything.
The vast majority of all of those PC’s are used primarily for MS Office functions (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, eMail and web-surfing.
Once you whittle it down to the number of PCs which are used by imaging professionals (who are the ones that would be prepared to actually invest in BUYING Adobe software) — the proportions change.
Jonathan, Photoshop is professional software. Most amateurs use simpler graphic solutions, both on the Mac and PC. (unless they’re pirates or hackers like Ann suggests)
ALL, versions of Photoshop on windows are pirated, being that Photoshop was developed for, and on, and by – Macs. I also suspect that ALL squawking about Ann’s instinctive and correct observation is coming from windows users.
PS: we don’t need to produce proof of these claims because all Mac owners already know that they are true without needing proof.
I won’t argue with that, (edit: actually, I would argue with Ken’s statement, but I won’t. – and yes, I am a PC user, and yes, all my copies of Photoshop are legit.) I just wanted to see some numbers for sales of Mac vs PC copies of Photoshop. I can’t seem to find that anywhere.
My theory is the overwhelming majority of PCs will make up for that difference caused by Macs being used primarily for professional graphics applications.
Adobe wouldn’t publish their sales numbers because (I suspect) they don’t want Apple to become too confident : ) …. and I think that the frequent changes in the Mac OS prevented Adobe from trying Activation.
Wow, with the Tiger sneak preview I see a whole bunch of crap I’ll never use.. but hey.. my 12 year old neice may like it. Wonder if they’ll bring back the polka dot Mac? What a joke. You can really tell when Apple doesn’t know what they should do with an OS.. they add a bunch of bells and whistles for kids and compeltely ignore working environments.
Now I thought an Adobe employee came along here a year or two ago and said that the percentage of Photoshop business as far as Adobe saw was about 60% PC and 40% Mac. Maybe I got the numbers wrong or in the wrong order.
From what I saw, it would be nice with the core image. Anything that makes things go/do better is all right in my book. By the time MS launches Longhorn, OS X (XI?) will be so far ahead that MS will never catch up.
I just worry about the System Requirements. Some of that stuff looks pretty heavy. I doubt that my little 733 G4 can handle it like a G5 or dual G4. Anyone wanna donate money to me so I can get the low-end dual G5? 😉
I’ve heard stories that some of the pirated (Kazaa) software that WIN users download often have something "nasty" included. Then they wonder if it really was worth getting it for "free"
I imagine that those Adobe-User figures reflected the complete range of Adobe’s software and would include Adobe/Acrobat Reader which, because it must be on just about every computer out there (!), would skew the numbers somewhat.
There are also several programs which are made only for the Windows platform because rival software has already seized the Mac-users market.
Ken, I was about to ask if you were on crack or something after that "pirates & cursing" post. Never mind. 😉
What Graham posted was what I kind of was looking for, even though it’s pretty approximated.
I’m sure I’ll eventually switch over to a Mac at some point, but switching is a large pain for the moment. Core Image is pretty cool, for sure; but I have a feeling a lot of it will be used to "pretty up" the interface for Tiger and future versions, and not a lot of functionality-based improvements.
Jonathan, no crack, no drugs. What I was referring to is what causes windows users to curse, in my opinion anyway, is the complexity of the system-level commands and editing of registries etc, that has to go on as a matter of course for the professional who uses windows, hence, cursing. This element is missing from the life of a Mac user, hence, no cursing.
I tied this in with the remark that much of professional-level software on windows machines might very well be pirated.
Whenever you hear about the relative market share of Windoze vs. Mac, keep in mind that a hugely sizable percentage of Windoze machines are procured rather than bought by the end user, i. e. the purchasing decision is made by a Procurement or IT department at a corporation or government agency, small or large, or by a school board. Don’t lose sight of the fact that Windows boxes are used in offices both in the private and in the government sectors for the most menial of tasks, like word processing, email and data retrieving, not creative uses. (That’s how I and a couple of hundred other folks use the Windoze machines at my day job.)
When individual end users want to run Photoshop or other graphic applications, they favor the Mac by a wide margin.
On the other hand, more than a few Windows users have been known to admit in private that the main reason they bought a Windows box was that they had access to one or more Windows applications without having to pay for them.
Windows users are more likely to run Jasc Paintshop Pro rather than Photoshop. If pertinent sales figures were released by Jasc and Adobe, I suspect this would be confirmed.
For all of these reasons, personally I do not doubt the assertion that there are more legitimate users of Photoshop running Macs than Intel or AMD machines.
Numbers have never impressed me. Millions followed Hitler, they were all wrong. As has been pointed out before, a Ferrari is not judged by the market share it represents in the automotive world.
"Numbers have never impressed me. Millions followed Hitler, they were all wrong. As has been pointed out before, a Ferrari is not judged by the market share it represents in the automotive world."
Some of the better words that have ever been posted in these forums.
Jonathan, no crack, no drugs. What I was referring to is what causes windows users to curse, in my opinion anyway, is the complexity of the system-level commands and editing of registries etc, that has to go on as a matter of course for the professional who uses windows, hence, cursing. This element is missing from the life of a Mac user, hence, no cursing.
I tied this in with the remark that much of professional-level software on windows machines might very well be pirated.
I brought the two together as a pun.
Hope that clarifies the remark,
Ken
Does no-one at adobeforums.com know how to use their "return" key?
When photoshop takes advantage of Apple’s core image, say goodbye to any kind of mac – pc comparisons until Microsoft can get something that offloads the work to the graphics card as well.
This is what we have been waiting for. Real Time photoshop work, with Real Time effects adjustment, All NON Distructive. Go check Steve Jobs WWDC Keynote video, at www.apple.com for some amazing image and video manipulation. All Real Time built into OS X 10.4!
I was just starting to get used to people saying Windows could do graphics. Yeah, now they can do it… They will just have to wait for things to render!
I doubt very much if they will comment on it, but my thoughts:
1) In terms of improving their product and its overall performance characteristics, this seems like a no-brainer for Adobe. The real unknown is the quality of those algorithms and whether or not they’re up to snuff for professional use. Supposedly they can rewrite many of their existing filters and effects for OS X with *RDF warning* a relatively small amount of developer effort, and at the same time bring them into the realm of real-time editing. They can also develop *new* filters, effects and functions in a much shorter timeframe I imagine *end RDF warning*
2) I doubt very much if the next version of the creative suite will feature any such enhancements, unless said suite is delayed until 2005. Adobe’s development cycle and the planning that surrounds it is likely their biggest priority, and by that I mean, they’re not going to deviate from it to integrate a brand new set of OS technologies if they’re already well underway (no reason to think they’re not).
Tiger probably won’t see the light of day until next Spring at the earliest so that sort throws the timelines out of sync (perhaps).
3) Adobe does not have enough dependance upon Apple customers to warrant making their Mac version "much better" than the Windows version. That would most likely only serve to piss their Windows customers off, which is not a good idea any way you slice it. Furthermore, I really doubt unit sales are going to suffer on the Mac side if they decide not to use Core Image for whatever reason. Hell, maybe they feel their non-real-time algorithms are better than the ones Apple is using for Core Image. Stranger things have happened.
4) Steve said he would "love to see it" happen, and I’m sure somewhere, there were a bunch of Adobe engineers and product managers chuckling to themselves as he said it. Not a Stev-iocentric universe we’re living in, evidently.
Since Adobe made the decision to call the new versions of all these programs CS, I think they’re going to have to drop the silly CS in the next version. Or are they going for CS 2?
Since the CS upgrade was offered to Photoshop users only, it’s not far fetched to think that there are more owners of legitimate copies of Photoshop than any of the other applications.
Yah… maybe. I personally don’t want to get into the whole piracy and licensing argument. This thread has been dragged OT already in that regard, so maybe someone should post another in the Lounge or something to debate legitimate PS marketshare, etc.
Anyway, the more I think about this and read up on Apple’s literature from WWDC and elsewhere, the more it seems it might be completely reasonable to expect some elements of CoreImage to be supported in selected parts of Photoshop… but I’m neither on their beta team nor an expert on CI so I’d certainly like to hear from anyone at Adobe who can comment in a very general way on the applicability of CI to Photoshop going forward.
Jon, don’t be too concerned by Ann’s (self censored) statements. For instance, the only beta versions of CS that leaked were Apple ones. Did we say on what is called here "the dark side (the windows forums)" that all mac users are not able to read and understand a non-disclosure agreement? No.
From her statements, one could think Ann likes to believe that she’s part of an elite because she uses a Mac…
There is no doubt that, since there are way more windows users than Mac ones, there are more pirated versions of Photoshop in the windows community. Is that a reason to blame the users of legal windows versions?
The cliveage of the Photoshop forums was maybe done to avoid flamewars, like "my apple is better than your pear…" but it lead to have two segmented groups (I almost typed "clique"), with a few occasional cross-posters…
Personnaly, I think that it’d be nice to have those core image functions in Photoshop, but it will be available only for a small part of the Apple users…(not everyone is using the latest hardware) and Dan pointed out that the non-real time algorythms might be better than the new ones. And also remember that the key point of Photoshop is its stability. Would you trade stability for speed?
Re apple vs pc piracy…i wouldnt read anything into why pc’s are protected and macs not…its just that adobe felt that an off the shelf solution was the best route, and apple have updated their OS in several major leaps which could have caused real problems for an OSx based protection system. Its a pointless manouver anyway because anyone taking the time to pirate PS would probably stumble still be successful because adobe chose to believe the macrovision sales rubbish and obviously didnt realise that every macrovision product has been deeply comprimised since inception.
I doubt we’ll see the core features developed as they will cause a mac/pc inbalance and be a small % of mac users. Perhaps a plugin, but as the PS team dont exactly knock out plugins like they used to these days I wouldnt hold my breath.
That post of mine earlier was before watching the keynote and based only on the preview Apple had on their site at the time. It didn’t really mention the core features that I saw. After listening to the keynote, yes I see great benefits once developers start taking advantage of the core image/video/audio. So.. in 6 months to a year maybe. 🙂
Yes, but many more millions didn’t follow Hitler, were they wrong too?
Pierre:
I think that it’d be nice to have those core image functions in Photoshop, but it will be available only for a small part of the Apple users
By the time Adobe released a Core-Image featured Photoshop, I think it might be available to a reasonable number of professional, Photoshop, users. The graphics card requirements are all available as standard in the current range of Macs. But imagine in the future having to choose which graphics card to use. I mean, nowadays, all cards have sufficent 2D performance to keep window scrolling and palette toggling smooth and fast. But some cards would be very much faster than others at accelerating the Core Image functions.
Scott has a point. My impression is that Tiger is not such an appealing upgrade to consumers that Panther was. But on reflection I will use Dashboard simply for the calculator function (I’d like a calculator that is hidden, but instantly available, and yet not visible in the Dock). I’m pretty sure that I will use the Automator, because AppleScript is something I’ve wanted to exploit more at but never had/made the time. I would want to try out the Spotlight feature just to see if it does change the way I use my Mac.
Steve Jobs did claim 150 new features (a similar number to Panther as I recall), and let’s say 10 of those I might actually use. I’ve seen 3 so far, so I’m hoping that there are 7 other features of Tiger that were not announced at the WWDC that will persuade me that it will be a worthwhile upgrade.
Spotlight has some huge implications for photographic studios that have thousands of images floating around on different machines and drives. What I hope is that they can make it Network- and/or Rendezvous-aware so that you can search for an image or file on another machine’s hard drive and not just local drives.
Automater seems to me to be a big push to make AppleScript like functionality accessible to the average user. Definitely a consumer feature. Wondering if it can only tap into Apple’s collection of apps or whether you can use it in conjunction with Photoshop or MS Word for example. Probably not.
Dashboard is I think, is designed to appeal to business users (which of course would include a lot of people here). Quick way to get their daily information before they head to work, to lunch, etc. I’m a little nervous though that these are all of the major new features (including the others shown at WWDC).
In Jobs parlance… "150+ new features" includes things like a glassy menubar and inclusion of spotlight into System Preferences, even though I’d consider all the aspects of spotlight to be one feature and not several.
I work for a publishing company and we have approximately 50 photographers nation wide who supply images shot digitally. Only 2 use PC’s and another did buy a 2.8Ghz P4 laptop and is very disappointed in the performance compared to his buddies G4PB 1.5. that said he know has a PBG4 and I can tell you from talking to more than half of these photographers they make it clear that their frinds in the business use Macs exclusively in studio and on the road.
but many more millions didn’t follow Hitler, were they wrong too?
While the intent of your post is disingenuous –and I’m sure you know it– it still does nothing to disprove my opinion of the weight to be given to numbers: none.
Of all the millions that were in a position to follow or not follow Hitler, the overwhelming majority did. People outside his sphere of influence and those with no knowledge of him don’t count. If you count the billions of people who don’t have a computer or even access to one on this planet, then Microsoft’s numbers are also a minority.
But 10.4 isn’t scheduled to be released until mid 2005- so when is the Tiger/G5 optimized PS/CS going to make its’ debut? I’m pretty much committed to staying in the "legacy software mode" until the new CS arrives but don’t want to wait forever…. Especially now that I have taken delivery of a G5 2.0 DP (last Mac purchased- Nov. 1995 7500/10 and still running strong)!
But 10.4 isn’t scheduled to be released until mid 2005- so when is the Tiger/G5 optimized PS/CS going to make its’ debut? I’m pretty much committed to staying in the "legacy software mode" until the new CS arrives but don’t want to wait forever…. Especially now that I have taken delivery of a G5 2.0 DP (last Mac purchased- Nov. 1995 7500/100 and still running strong)!
I have a friend (toxic old wintel weenie) who runs a PeeCee box and is actually proud of his vast collection of pirated software (that usually doesn’t work too well) and other copyrighted materials. I guess the Windoze crowd figures since all their stuff is so hard to use producing mediocre results that they have a right to steal it. Maybe they have a point- I wouldn’t pay for the crap myself!
How about Ocelot or Leopard. Or Lynx? It’s even got an x in it!
Apparently Tiger will be the last one for a while. Someone at Apple said that one major release per year or so wasn’t "sustainable". I hope that means more effort will be applied to maintenance releases.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t adobe release PS6 or 7 for windows before releasing for the mac? I recall it being the first time that happened. Must be someone on the PC using it legitimately. Or Adobe is aggressively pursuing PC market.
For what it’s worth, the photographer I use for all my shoots uses a PC laptop when we’re on a shoot but runs all the final photos/retouching through a mac. Since camera’s, lenses, etc. are the larger expenses for him, he was waiting for X to reach some level of maturity before upgrading hw/sw. I think he still runs 6 or 7 (whichever is the latest for 9) on a G4 running OS9, which makes sense since of the hundreds of shots he takes, the client might buy 25.
Going off on a steep tangent here but this is a good a place as any to vent – my biggest problem with clients who buy photography nowadays that we shoot digitally is they don’t want to pay for "chromes" – the final images they’ve chosen that the photographer color corrects and supplies on CD in hi-res. They also think they own the raw shots where they never thought that when they looked at contact sheets. In one instance where client contracted for ownership of raw shots, I gave them copies of the CD the photographer gave me. They called and demanded that I color correct and convert all images to hi-res cmyk. They were all RGB jpgs as all raw shots are. Got into a big tussle over that. Ended up doing conversion but no correction just to get rid of them. Same deal with digital files. Client threatened to sue me when they requested art of all work I’ve done and I remitted press quality PDFs. They wanted editable files which I never, ever surrender. I try to explain that they don’t own the process but they don’t get it. The suit died because all my contracts explicitly state that I own all editable files created by my company. PITA!
Maybe what Chris is trying to say is, if Adobe stands to make more money from integrating Core Image functionality (or any other new technology) into Photoshop (or any other app), they will do it. Otherwise not… no matter how much it might improve some aspect of a given application? Close?
I hadn’t read that because I stopped reading that post in the middle of the first paragraph.
RAW image files can NEVER be JPEGs, and JPEGs can NEVER be RAW files. Maybe Richard meant that he had turned over RGB JPEGs derived from his RAW files, which are always in RGB mode.
Oh no, not another operating system. Can’t Jobs take an extended vacation or do something different! And what will they call the ones after tiger?
Obviously you don’t follow too closely on events and news. Apple and Jobs are developing OSX rapidly over the last 3 years to get it up to speed and accepatable by those who even still swear by OS9 or some other OS’s out there.
Tiger will be out first half of 2005 (as opposed to August 04 as many expected). Apple has Tiger (even Panther) pretty much where it ought to be and no other OS has been developed this fast with such awesome improvements (I’m sure Adobe engineers will agree). Once Tiger is out I think it’s been officially stated that Apple will slow down the pace on OS upgrades (not updates) and not have one as regularly now that they have OSX well positioned.
Basically it’s not another system, it’s OSX with continous vast improvements. I think I’m just tired of people moaning.
Any issues I’ve read of people having with Panther have generally been personal minor peeves.
Personally as long as it’s not Xp or OS9 I’m happy, and my workflow has been 99.9% smooth ever since Jag.
or do something different!
you mean like iPods, FCP, Motion, liquid cooled G5’s, Airport Express blah, blah, blah…? Apple is the only Tech company that regularly offers different SW/HW. Is that different enough?
Fell asleep there. I used the term raw generically. To me, unedited/unretouched files presented on CD by photographers are raw. I forget that raw is a specific format these days.
I hadn’t read that because I stopped reading that post in the middle of the first paragraph. RAW image files can NEVER be JPEGs, and JPEGs can NEVER be RAW files. Maybe Richard meant that he had turned over RGB JPEGs derived from his RAW files, which are always in RGB mode.
Still haven’t mastered that Return key, have you Ramon?
Yes, I’ve done on two different computers. Both had 10.3.9, one already had PSE3 and I upgraded the OS to 10.4, no problem. The other didn’t have PSE3, an iMac G5. I installed PSE3 after upgrading the OS and again, no problem to report. All is running smoothly so far. I didn’t run extensive testing, I installed, loaded an image, applied a few filters, saved it.
