![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 04:44:11 GMT, John Steinberg
wrote: Chris, you've asserted on at least two different occasions, and on two very different threads, that Adobe ports the Win version of PS to Mac. Davoud has provided compelling evidence by an actual named PS developer that this is false. My friend says primary development is performed on Windows platforms, and then ported. Frankly, I find it much more likely that the software is developed on one platform - any platform- than that is developed independently on two. I don't find the comments relayed by Davoud compelling, but I've no problem if you do. I note for the record that you or your friend's story has now evolved to include PS8. You never previously mentioned v.8 anywhere and at any time, and if you have, I'd be delighted to be corrected. Evolved? Shall I quote my much earlier post? "I've got a good friend at Adobe. Since V5 they stopped developing PS on Macs, but do all the development in Windows and then port it. The word is that they are losing money on PS for the Mac. They've abandoned Premier with the current version, and are looking to stop supporting Illustrator and PS. She thinks V8 will be the final version they do for that platform. We'll see. Supposedly, Apple is working on their own image editor." Moreover, I've read both of Adobe's and Apple's annual reports for many years, and at no time and in no place has there ever been any documentation to support your contention that some kind of Apple/Adobe deal was ever cut. On the contrary, as I've repeatedly stated, and you've blithely ignored, based upon Adobe's own financials, they derive signficant revenue via their Apple offerings. Cutting a deal to continue to do so makes no sense whatsoever from any reasonable perspective. I don't know more details than I gave. But I can well imagine that a deal need not be purely financial, or show up in an annual report. (BTW, I own a nice chunk of Adobe stock, so I read those reports, too.) Significant revenue is not the same as significant profit. Those "significant" revenues may be considerably offset by significant development and support costs. Having personally seen how many print houses are bailing on Apple hardware, I can easily believe that Adobe sees the writing on the wall and only sees the profits in supporting the Mac continuing to decrease (or perhaps the losses increase). Please, don't accuse me of predicting anything here! I'm only saying that I find this as believable a scenario as anything you or Davoud is painting. Now please, let's just let this drop and get back to stargazing! I already said that once before, but I'm reluctant to let it go when the suggestion is that I'm blatantly lying. You and Davoud and anyone else are welcome to put as little or as much confidence as you want in my source, but please don't make it personal. I was just passing on a bit of inside rumor, nothing more. _________________________________________________ Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chris L Peterson:
Now please, let's just let this drop and get back to stargazing! It is to laugh! By all means, get back to stargazing! I really don't mean to be unkind, but the post that started this discussion was clearly labeled as being on-topic -- for Mac users only. You are not a Mac user -- "Have seen a Mac" and "Have used a Mac" are not the same as "Am a Mac user." The information in the original article could not possibly have been of use to you, so I have no idea why you left stargazing to join this thread in the first place. Davoud -- usenet *at* davidillig dawt com |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chris L Peterson wrote in message . ..
My friend says primary development is performed on Windows platforms, and then ported. Frankly, I find it much more likely that the software is developed on one platform - any platform- than that is developed independently on two. I don't find the comments relayed by Davoud compelling, but I've no problem if you do. Your friend didn't paint you a complete picture of the development process at Adobe. They moved to Metrowerks Codewarrior on the Mac when the switch to PowerPC came down the pike in the mid-'90s, and in recent years, Codewarrior has had feature parity on both the Mac and the PC, providing one development environment for both platforms. This allows builds for either platform to be concurrent... there's no "porting" beyond tweaking each build for Mac or for PC. IIRC, programmers not involved with platform-specific features (UI and Velocity Engine tweaks) are given a PC rather than a Mac, due to Dell cutting a better deal for desktop machines. Testers are given more than one of both. Development of Adobe product is done on Codewarrior, which doesn't much care if you're running a Mac or a PC, and code created on one is easily compiled on the other. Some PC-only products are developed soley on Windows boxes, but the non-Windows specific parts of those priducts could be developed on Macs running Code Warrior if Apple wins the bid next upgrade cycle. If Adobe decided to port Image Ready or start supporting After Effects for the Mac again, they could do it without a lot of trouble. As Apple is worth better than 45% of Adobe's revenue, and also provides fatter profit margins (fewer huge retailers like Best Buy they need to give deep discounts to) and guaranteed regular upgrade sales (the professional nature of the Mac design market), Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign ain't going nowhere. InDesign in particular... it's adoption is being driven by Mac pros sick of waiting for Quark to get on the ball. Now, as to the rumor that Photoshop 8 is going to be the last to support MacOS, this is probably true. It's been rumored to be the last version of Photoshop to support MacOS Classic. Mac OS X will run Photoshop 9, no worries. Part of the problem with rumors... they can only paint a small part of the picture, and not everything will be dead on the money. You've got to know the industry and how it works to piece the puzzle together, and corroborate, corroborate, corroborate. ~ Matt Gabriel, Mad Poet |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 06:51:35 -0400, Davoud wrote:
I really don't mean to be unkind, but the post that started this discussion was clearly labeled as being on-topic -- for Mac users only. You are not a Mac user -- "Have seen a Mac" and "Have used a Mac" are not the same as "Am a Mac user." The information in the original article could not possibly have been of use to you, so I have no idea why you left stargazing to join this thread in the first place. I use lots of computers. The fact that for most of my work I prefer the Windows/PC platform doesn't mean I don't use or know something about others. On my network I also have a Mac and a Linux box, because I need to support both at times. I'm a registered Apple developer. Right now I'm running Panther and I had a nice visit with some Apple developers a couple of months ago when I came across a real nasty file dialog bug in it (this is a beta, of course). The information in the article was very interesting. I have designed a sophisticated telescope control system/DSC. It integrates very well with TheSky (Windows) and with any ASCOM compliant planetarium software. I'd also like to provide at least some support for people using Macs, so any references to Mac based astronomical software are useful. There were some apps there that I wasn't familiar with. Excuse me for responding to the original post (where I said that the Mac was a good platform for scientific imagers- an on-topic post from a Mac user IMO). Perhaps the thread should have been labeled "for Mac lovers only". _________________________________________________ Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Davoud:
You are not a Mac user -- "Have seen a Mac" and "Have used a Mac" are not the same as "Am a Mac user." The information in the original article could not possibly have been of use to you, so I have no idea why you left stargazing to join this thread in the first place. Chris L Peterson: The fact that for most of my work I prefer the Windows/PC platform doesn't mean I don't use or know something about others. On my network I also have a Mac and a Linux box, because I need to support both at times. I'm a registered Apple developer. Right now I'm running Panther and I had a nice visit with some Apple developers a couple of months ago when I came across a real nasty file dialog bug in it (this is a beta, of course). As I said, you are not a Mac user. "...also have a Mac," "...I'm running Panther" and "...had a nice visit with some Apple developers" still do not a Mac user make. So now, in addition to wondering why you joined this thread in the first place, I'm wondering why you are still here! Davoud -- usenet *at* davidillig dawt com |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Davoud wrote:
As I said, you are not a Mac user. "...also have a Mac," "...I'm running Panther" and "...had a nice visit with some Apple developers" still do not a Mac user make. So now, in addition to wondering why you joined this thread in the first place, I'm wondering why you are still here! Criminies. I don't think we should have to start justifying why we post to threads. Chris posted an opinion coming from someone who is at least plausibly informed. If that opinion turns out to be unsubstantiated, then let's just quash the opinion, not the messenger. I don't see how Chris was trying to start any trouble, just as I don't think that someone pointing out that Red Hat 10 will not be putting out RH10 is trying to start any trouble. (Just CMA, if you know what I mean and I think you do. g) You left out that Chris is a registered Apple developer. Don't those count as Mac users? On SAA, we say that if people call themselves amateur astronomers, that's what they are. This isn't a computer user's group, and if someone says they're a Mac user for the purposes of discussion, then I'll give them that. Brian Tung The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/ Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/ The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/ My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Brian Tung wrote:
You left out that Chris is a registered Apple developer. Don't those count as Mac users? Only if the use Mac's. A registered Apple II developer who never use Macs would certainly not be a Mac user.... Many (most) Mac owners seem to be unaware of the pre-Mac computers from Apple. In comp.sys.apple2 there are regularly popping up people asking some Mac question.... -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se WWW: http://www.stjarnhimlen.se/ http://home.tiscali.se/pausch/ |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
John Steinberg wrote:
Mr. Schlyter, you are in violation of Godwin's Law here. Do you have any idea what the penalty for same is? I *recall* that historically, Godwin's law is descriptive, not prescriptive. That is, it tells you what happens (or at least, is likely to happen) when that particular subject is brought up, not what you should do. I'm not at all sure about that, so I'd appreciate any confirmation or denial, with citations. ![]() Of course, it gets used nowadays prescriptively, so I guess it could go either way. Brian Tung The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/ Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/ The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/ My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|